MCQ – GK Questions

Proportionality test (evolved through Puttaswamy, Anuradha Bhasin cases): Four-step analysis: (a) Legitimate aim: Action must pursue valid public interest, (b) Rational connection: Means must be suitable to achieve aim, (c) Necessity: No less restrictive alternative available, (d) Balancing: Benefits must outweigh harm to rights. Applied to: internet shutdowns, privacy restrictions, reservation policies. Ensures administrative actions respect fundamental rights while pursuing public goals.

Ultra vires (Latin: 'beyond powers'): Core principle of administrative law that executive actions must be within legal authority granted by statute or Constitution. If action exceeds authority, courts can declare it void. Ensures rule of law: executive cannot act arbitrarily; must have legal basis for decisions affecting citizens' rights. Foundation of judicial review of administrative action in India.

Constitutional polity and current affairs relationship: (a) Constitution as framework: Provides enduring principles (federalism, rights, democracy, rule of law) that guide response to contemporary challenges (digital age, climate change, identity politics, economic transformation), (b) Dynamic interaction: Current affairs test constitutional provisions; judicial interpretation, legislative amendment, executive action adapt framework while preserving core values (basic structure doctrine), (c) Continuity amid change: Constitution enables evolution without revolution; amendments, interpretations, practices update governance while maintaining democratic legitimacy, (d) Citizen role: Public discourse, elections, civil society engagement ensure constitutional evolution reflects popular will within rights-respecting boundaries. Illustrates Indian constitutionalism as living tradition: rooted in foundational values, responsive to contemporary needs, shaped by democratic participation. Essential for UPSC Mains conceptual understanding.

Post-Electoral Bonds judgment reforms debate: (a) Current law (Section 29B, R.P. Act): Donations above ₹20,000 must be disclosed to ECI, (b) Proposed enhancements: (i) Lower disclosure threshold for greater transparency, (ii) Real-time online disclosure portal, (iii) Stricter penalties for non-compliance, (iv) Safeguards for small donors (privacy protection), (c) Balance sought: Transparency (voters' right to know) vs privacy (donor safety, especially for small contributors), (d) Challenge: Preventing quid pro quo while encouraging political participation. Illustrates ongoing evolution of electoral integrity framework through judicial-legislative dialogue.

NITI Aayog's cooperative federalism model: (a) Governing Council: PM + all CMs + UT Lt. Governors - platform for Centre-State policy dialogue, (b) Functions: (i) Bottom-up planning (States propose priorities), (ii) Best practices sharing, (iii) Competitive federalism rankings (e.g., Health Index, School Education Quality Index), (iv) Policy innovation labs, (c) Contrast with Planning Commission: Top-down plan formulation, resource allocation via formula. Challenges: NITI Aayog lacks constitutional/statutory status, funding authority; influence depends on persuasion, not allocation power. Illustrates evolution of Centre-State coordination mechanisms in Indian federalism.

Recent amendments trajectory: (a) 103rd (2019): EWS reservation - economic criteria for forward castes, (b) 104th (2019): Extended SC/ST legislative reservation, omitted Anglo-Indian nomination, (c) 105th (2021): Restored States' power to identify OBCs for State-level reservations, (d) 106th (2023): 33% women's reservation in legislatures. Pattern: Expanding inclusive representation while balancing competing claims (merit vs reservation, gender vs caste, economic vs social criteria). Reflects Constitution's adaptive capacity to address evolving social justice demands within democratic framework.

Inter-State Water Disputes (Amendment) Act, 2019: Key reforms: (a) Single permanent tribunal replaces multiple ad-hoc tribunals, (b) Fixed timelines: Inquiry completion within 4.5 years, award within 1 year of inquiry report, (c) Award final and binding, with implementation monitoring mechanism, (d) Dispute Resolution Committee for pre-litigation resolution. Addresses delays in existing system (e.g., Cauvery dispute took decades). Challenges: Technical complexity of water sharing, political sensitivities, enforcement of awards. Illustrates ongoing evolution of federal dispute resolution mechanisms.

Constitutional Morality applications: (a) Navtej Singh Johar (2018): Struck down Section 377 IPC (consensual same-sex relations) - Constitutional Morality (dignity, autonomy) overrides social morality, (b) Joseph Shine (2018): Struck down adultery law (Section 497 IPC) - Gender equality, individual autonomy under Constitutional Morality override patriarchal social norms. Both judgments affirm: Constitutional values protect individual rights against majoritarian impulses; courts interpret Constitution as transformative document advancing substantive equality and dignity.

RTE Act implementation gaps: (a) Reimbursement delays: States often delay payments to private schools for EWS seats, leading to schools resisting admissions, (b) Documentation: Poor families struggle to provide income/residence certificates, (c) Quality concerns: EWS children face social discrimination, inadequate academic support, (d) Monitoring: Weak enforcement of non-discrimination provisions. Illustrates gap between rights on paper and realization on ground; requires coordinated action: awareness campaigns, streamlined processes, teacher training, social inclusion measures.

Davinder Singh case (2024): 7-judge Constitution Bench (6:1) overruled E.V. Chinnaiah (2004) which held States cannot sub-classify SCs as it would violate Article 14. New holding: (a) States can create sub-classifications within SC/ST reservations to ensure equitable distribution among more/less backward communities, (b) Classification must be based on quantifiable data showing backwardness, (c) Does not violate Article 14 if rational and based on intelligible differentia. Enables States to address intra-group inequalities; significant for affirmative action policy evolution.

ECI has recommended 'One Nation, One Election' (simultaneous elections) to reduce costs, policy paralysis, and populist measures. However, implementation requires: (a) Constitutional amendments (Articles 83, 172, 356), (b) Political consensus across parties, (c) Possible ratification by States if affecting federal provisions. Law Commission (2018) and ECI reports support feasibility study, but no legislation yet. Other options (EVMs, NOTA, candidate disclosure) already implemented via judicial directions/legislative amendments.

Recent constitutional developments (2020-2026): (a) Judicial interpretation: Puttaswamy (privacy), Navtej Singh Johar (LGBTQ+ rights), ADR (electoral bonds), Supriyo (same-sex marriage) - courts balancing rights with state interests, (b) Legislative amendments: 103rd-106th Amendments (reservation, women's representation), new criminal laws, data protection law - Parliament adapting framework to contemporary needs, (c) Executive action: Article 370 abrogation, demonetization, digital governance initiatives - testing limits of executive power, (d) Federal dynamics: GST Council functioning, Governor-State tensions, State OBC lists - evolving Centre-State relations. Overall trajectory: Constitution as living document, dynamically interpreted and amended to address digital age, identity politics, federal cooperation, rights expansion, while basic structure doctrine preserves core constitutional identity. Continuous dialogue among branches of government, civil society, and citizens shapes constitutional evolution.

Article 279A(9): GST Council decisions by 3/4th majority of weighted votes: (a) Union Government: 1/3 vote weight, (b) All State Governments collectively: 2/3 vote weight. Ensures neither Union nor States can dominate; requires consensus on GST rates, exemptions, thresholds. Exemplifies cooperative fiscal federalism: shared sovereignty in indirect taxation for 'One Nation, One Tax'. Practical challenges: Union-State disagreements on rates, compensation issues, need for continuous dialogue.

Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018): 5-judge bench unanimously struck down Section 377 IPC (criminalizing consensual same-sex relations). Held: (a) Constitutional Morality (constitutional values of liberty, equality, dignity) prevails over social morality (majoritarian views), (b) Sexual orientation intrinsic to personality; discrimination unconstitutional, (c) State cannot criminalize private consensual conduct between adults. Landmark judgment affirming inclusive constitutional values and protecting LGBTQ+ rights against majoritarian impulses.

Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (NJAC case, 2015): Reaffirmed Kesavananda Bharati (1973) basic structure doctrine. Held: (a) Judicial independence is part of basic structure, (b) 99th Amendment (NJAC) giving executive role in judicial appointments threatens independence, (c) Primacy of judiciary in appointments essential for separation of powers. Struck down NJAC, reinstated collegium system. Landmark application of basic structure to protect institutional integrity against constitutional amendment.

Post-Puttaswamy Aadhaar framework (2018 judgment + subsequent clarifications): Mandatory for: (a) Welfare schemes funded from Consolidated Fund of India (to prevent leakage), (b) PAN-Aadhaar linking for income tax purposes (to curb tax evasion), (c) Certain statutory requirements (e.g., Companies Act for directors). NOT mandatory for: (a) Bank accounts/mobile numbers (struck down), (b) School admissions (privacy concerns), (c) NEET/JEE exams (alternative ID allowed). Balances state interest in efficient welfare delivery with right to privacy.

Supriyo v. Union of India (October 2023): 5-judge Constitution Bench (3:2 on key issues) held: (a) No fundamental right to marry under Constitution (though marriage is protected under personal laws), (b) Recognition of same-sex marriage involves complex policy considerations (adoption, succession, maintenance) best left to Parliament, (c) However, affirmed rights of queer couples: protection from discrimination, right to cohabit, access to services without discrimination. Directed government to form committee to examine rights/entitlements of queer couples. Balances judicial restraint with rights protection.

Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (2015): 4:1 majority struck down 99th Amendment and NJAC Act. Held: (a) Collegium system (CJI + 4 senior-most SC judges for SC appointments; CJ of HC + 2 senior-most judges for HC appointments) 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 reform continues. Government and Collegium sometimes have differences on appointments, causing vacancies.

102nd Amendment (2018): Inserted Article 338B (National Commission for Backward Classes) and Article 342A (President notifies SEBC list for Central purposes). Supreme Court in Maratha Reservation case (2021) interpreted Article 342A as taking away States' power to identify OBCs. 105th Amendment (2021) clarified: (a) President notifies Central List, (b) States can maintain their own State Lists for State-level reservations. Restored federal balance in OBC identification, crucial for State-level affirmative action.

August 5, 2019: President issued Constitutional Order (C.O. 272) under Article 370(1) amending Article 367 to interpret 'Constituent Assembly of J&K' as 'Legislative Assembly of J&K'. Since J&K was under President's Rule, Governor's concurrence was taken as representative of State legislature. Then Presidential Order (C.O. 273) under Article 370(3) declared Article 370 inoperative. J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019 bifurcated State into two UTs. Supreme Court upheld abrogation in December 2023, directing restoration of Statehood and elections.