Create a custom practice set
Pick category, difficulty, number of questions, and time limit. Start instantly with your own quiz.
Generate QuizHard Level – GK Questions
Free practice for SSC, UPSC, Banking & Railway exams. No login required.
In SR Bommai v. Union of India (1994), the Supreme Court held that ______ is part of the basic structure of the Constitution and State action promoting one religion over others violates constitutional secularism.
- Federalism
- Secularism
- Socialism
- Democracy
Answer: Secularism
SR Bommai (1994): Besides federalism, SC held secularism is part of basic structure. Secularism means: (a) State has no religion, (b) Equal respect for all religions, (c) No discrimination based on religion, (d) Religion and politics separated. State action promoting one religion violates secularism; can be ground for judicial review of Presidential proclamation under Article 356. Foundation of Indian secularism jurisprudence.
In Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992), the Supreme Court upheld reservation for OBCs but introduced which concept to exclude advanced sections within OBCs?
- Poverty line
- Creamy layer
- Income ceiling
- Educational qualification
Answer: Creamy layer
Indra Sawhney (Mandal Case, 1992): 9-judge bench upheld 27% reservation for OBCs but: (a) Excluded 'creamy layer' (advanced sections) within OBCs, (b) Capped total reservation at 50% (with exceptions), (c) Held reservation not applicable to promotions (later amended by 77th/85th Amendments). Landmark judgment balancing social justice with merit; foundation of OBC reservation jurisprudence.
In Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (2015), the Supreme Court struck down the 99th Constitutional Amendment establishing NJAC holding that which principle is part of basic structure?
- Parliamentary supremacy
- Judicial independence
- Executive accountability
- Federal balance
Answer: Judicial independence
NJAC Judgment (2015): 4:1 majority struck down 99th Amendment and NJAC Act. Held: (a) Collegium system (judges appointing judges) is part of basic structure, (b) Executive participation in appointments threatens judicial independence, (c) Primacy of judiciary in appointments essential for separation of powers. Controversial judgment; debate on judicial appointments reform continues.
In S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981), the Supreme Court relaxed the rule of ______ to allow public-spirited persons to file petitions for enforcement of rights of disadvantaged groups, pioneering Public Interest Litigation in India.
- stare decisis
- locus standi
- natural justice
- separation of powers
Answer: locus standi
S.P. Gupta (First Judges Case, 1981): SC relaxed locus standi (personal injury requirement), allowing any citizen/public-spirited organization to file petition for enforcement of rights of persons unable to approach court due to poverty, ignorance, or social disadvantage. Transformed judicial role from dispute resolution to social justice delivery; foundation of PIL jurisprudence in India.
In SR Bommai v. Union of India (1994), the Supreme Court held that imposition of President's Rule under Article 356 is subject to judicial review and emphasized which principle as part of basic structure?
- Parliamentary sovereignty
- Federalism
- Separation of powers
- Directive Principles supremacy
Answer: Federalism
SR Bommai (1994): 9-judge bench held: (a) Federalism is part of basic structure, (b) Presidential satisfaction under Article 356 subject to judicial review, (c) Floor test is primary method to test majority, (d) State Assembly dissolution not automatic; can be revived if proclamation invalidated. Curbed arbitrary use of Article 356; landmark judgment protecting State autonomy within federal framework.
In Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980), the Supreme Court struck down parts of the 42nd Amendment holding that ______ and ______ are complementary and neither has primacy over the other.
- Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles
- Union, States
- Executive, Legislature
- Centre, Judiciary
Answer: Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles
Minerva Mills (1980): SC struck down parts of 42nd Amendment that gave primacy to DPSP over FRs and excluded judicial review of amendments. Held: (a) Balance between FRs (Part III) and DPSP (Part IV) is basic structure, (b) Judicial review is part of basic structure, (c) Limited amending power is basic structure. Reinforced Kesavananda doctrine; cornerstone of constitutional jurisprudence.
In Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017), a 9-judge bench of the Supreme Court unanimously held that right to privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21.
- True
- False
Answer: True
Puttaswamy case (2017): 9-judge bench unanimously held right to privacy is intrinsic to life and liberty under Article 21; also part of freedoms under Article 19 and equality under Article 14. Overruled M.P. Sharma (1954) and Kharak Singh (1962) which held privacy not a fundamental right. Foundation for subsequent judgments on Aadhaar, decriminalization of homosexuality, reproductive rights.
In which landmark case did the Supreme Court propound the 'Basic Structure Doctrine' limiting Parliament's amending power?
- Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967)
- Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)
- Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980)
- Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975)
Answer: Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)
Kesavananda Bharati (1973): 13-judge bench held Parliament can amend any part of Constitution but cannot alter its 'basic structure'. Basic features include: supremacy of Constitution, republican/democratic form, secularism, federalism, separation of powers, judicial review, rule of law, individual dignity. Landmark judgment balancing parliamentary sovereignty with constitutional supremacy; foundation of Indian constitutionalism.
In the Puttaswamy case (2017), the Supreme Court held that the Right to Privacy is an intrinsic part of Article 21 and also part of the freedoms guaranteed by Part III.
- True
- False
Answer: True
In Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017), a nine-judge bench unanimously held that Right to Privacy is: (1) An intrinsic part of Article 21 (life and personal liberty), (2) Part of freedoms under Part III (e.g., Article 19), (3) A natural right inherent in human dignity. This judgment has profound implications for data protection, surveillance, and personal autonomy.
Under Article 252, Parliament can legislate on a State List subject if:
- Rajya Sabha passes a resolution by simple majority
- Two or more State Legislatures pass resolutions requesting such law
- President issues a proclamation of emergency
- Supreme Court directs Parliament to legislate
Answer: Two or more State Legislatures pass resolutions requesting such law
Article 252 enables 'cooperative federalism': if two or more State Legislatures pass resolutions requesting Parliament to legislate on a State List subject, Parliament can make a law applicable to those States (and others that adopt it later). Examples: Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974; Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976.
In the Nabam Rebia case (2016), the Supreme Court held that a Governor cannot:
- Summon the House without ministerial advice
- Withhold assent to a Money Bill
- Appoint the Chief Minister
- D
Answer: Summon the House without ministerial advice
In Nabam Rebia v. Deputy Speaker, Arunachal Pradesh (2016), the Supreme Court held that the Governor cannot summon, prorogue, or dissolve the State Assembly at their discretion when the Council of Ministers enjoys majority support. Such powers must be exercised on ministerial advice, except in rare situations of constitutional breakdown. This curbed arbitrary use of gubernatorial powers.
In the Rajendra Singh Rana case (2007), the Supreme Court held that the Speaker must decide disqualification petitions under the Tenth Schedule within a ______ timeframe.
Answer: reasonable
In Rajendra Singh Rana v. Swami Prasad Maurya (2007), the Supreme Court held that while the Tenth Schedule doesn't specify a time limit, the Speaker must decide disqualification petitions within a 'reasonable timeframe' to prevent political uncertainty. Delayed decisions can be challenged for violating constitutional morality, though courts avoid dictating exact timelines to respect legislative autonomy.
Article ______ provides for grants-in-aid to States in need of assistance, as determined by Parliament.
Answer: 275
Article 275 empowers Parliament to make grants-in-aid to States that are in need of financial assistance, particularly for welfare of Scheduled Tribes or development of backward areas. These grants are charged on the Consolidated Fund of India (not voted). The Finance Commission recommends the principles for such grants under Article 280.
In the Navtej Singh Johar case (2018), the Supreme Court decriminalized homosexuality by reading down Section 377 IPC, citing violation of Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21.
- True
- False
Answer: True
In Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018), a five-judge bench unanimously held that Section 377 IPC (criminalizing 'carnal intercourse against the order of nature') violated: Article 14 (equality), Article 15 (non-discrimination), Article 19 (freedom of expression), and Article 21 (privacy, dignity, autonomy). This landmark judgment affirmed LGBTQ+ rights as Fundamental Rights.
Under Article 200, when a Bill passed by a State Legislature is presented to the Governor, he/she can:
- Give assent
- Withhold assent
- Reserve the Bill for President's consideration
- All of the above
Answer: All of the above
Article 200 gives the Governor three options on State Bills: (1) Give assent (Bill becomes law), (2) Withhold assent (Bill fails), (3) Reserve for President's consideration (mandatory for certain Bills affecting High Court, compulsory for Bills derogating from High Court powers). The Governor can also return a Bill (not Money Bill) for reconsideration, but must assent if re-passed.
In the S.R. Bommai v. Union of India case (1994), the Supreme Court laid down guidelines regarding:
- Appointment of Governors
- Imposition of President's Rule under Article 356
- Reservation in promotions
- Judicial appointments
Answer: Imposition of President's Rule under Article 356
The landmark S.R. Bommai case (1994) established strict guidelines for imposing President's Rule under Article 356: (1) Floor test is the primary method to test majority, (2) Presidential proclamation is subject to judicial review, (3) State Assembly can only be dissolved after Parliament approves the proclamation, (4) Secularism is part of basic structure. This curbed arbitrary use of Article 356.
The decision on disqualification of a member under the Tenth Schedule is taken by the ______ of the House, whose decision is subject to judicial review as held in ______ case.
Answer: Speaker/Chairman, Kihoto Hollohan
Paragraph 6 of the Tenth Schedule empowers the Speaker/Chairman of the House to decide on disqualification petitions. In Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992), the Supreme Court upheld the Speaker's role but made their decision subject to judicial review on grounds of mala fides, perversity, or violation of constitutional mandates. This balances legislative autonomy with constitutional supremacy.
Article ______ of the Constitution mandates that no tax shall be levied or collected except by authority of law.
Answer: 265
Article 265 establishes the principle of 'no taxation without law'. It states: 'No tax shall be levied or collected except by authority of law.' This ensures that taxation requires legislative sanction, protecting citizens from arbitrary executive taxation. It applies to both Union and State taxes.
In the Kesavananda Bharati case, the Supreme Court held that Fundamental Rights can be amended by Parliament but not if it violates the 'basic structure' of the Constitution.
- True
- False
Answer: True
The Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) judgment established the 'Basic Structure Doctrine'. While Parliament can amend Fundamental Rights under Article 368, it cannot destroy or alter the Constitution's basic structure (e.g., supremacy of Constitution, secularism, federalism, judicial review, free and fair elections). This doctrine has been used to strike down several amendments.
Which Article provides special provisions for the State of Jammu and Kashmir before the abrogation of Article 370 in 2019?
- Article 370
- Article 371
- Article 371A
- Article 356
Answer: Article 370
Article 370 granted special autonomous status to Jammu and Kashmir, allowing it to have its own Constitution, flag, and autonomy over all matters except defense, foreign affairs, finance, and communications. It was abrogated on August 5, 2019, via Presidential Order and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, bifurcating the state into two Union Territories.