Create a custom practice set
Pick category, difficulty, number of questions, and time limit. Start instantly with your own quiz.
Generate QuizGK Questions
Filter by category, type, and difficulty. Reading is open for everyone.
Violation of which principle of natural justice can be a ground for issuing Certiorari?
- Audi alteram partem only
- Nemo judex in causa sua only
- Both audi alteram partem and nemo judex in causa sua
- Neither; natural justice not relevant for writs
Answer: Both audi alteram partem and nemo judex in causa sua
Natural justice principles: (a) Audi alteram partem (hear the other side: right to notice, hearing, cross-examination), (b) Nemo judex in causa sua (no one should be judge in own cause: rule against bias). Violation of either can be ground for Certiorari to quash order of judicial/quasi-judicial body. Ensures fair procedure in administrative/judicial decisions.
For Quo Warranto to lie, the office in question must be:
- Created by private contract
- Substantive and public in character
- Temporary or honorary
- Within private organization
Answer: Substantive and public in character
Quo Warranto conditions: (a) Office must be substantive (not mere employment/function), (b) Created by Constitution/statute, (c) Public in character (governmental function), (d) Person must assert claim to office, (e) Claim must be without legal authority. Not issued for: (a) Private offices, (b) Offices held at pleasure, (c) Mere declarations of right.
Habeas Corpus cannot be issued in which of the following situations?
- Detention by private individual
- Detention under preventive detention law with procedural compliance
- Detention by foreign government
- Detention of minor by parent
Answer: Detention under preventive detention law with procedural compliance
Habeas Corpus not issued if: (a) Detention is lawful (e.g., valid conviction, preventive detention with procedural safeguards under Article 22), (b) Proceeding is for contempt of court/legislature, (c) Detention by competent court. However, if preventive detention violates procedural safeguards (e.g., no communication of grounds, no advisory board), HC/SC can issue Habeas Corpus.
Mandamus cannot be issued to compel performance of which type of duty?
- Statutory duty
- Ministerial duty
- Discretionary duty
- Public duty
Answer: Discretionary duty
Mandamus compels performance of: (a) Statutory duty (imposed by law), (b) Ministerial duty (no discretion), (c) Public duty. Cannot compel: (a) Discretionary duty (court cannot dictate how discretion exercised, only that it be exercised fairly), (b) Private contracts, (c) Internal legislative proceedings. Respects separation of powers while ensuring accountability.
The Supreme Court may refuse to issue a writ under Article 32 if:
- The petitioner is not a citizen
- An adequate alternative remedy is available
- The violation is of a Directive Principle
- The respondent is a State Government
Answer: An adequate alternative remedy is available
Though Article 32 is a Fundamental Right, SC exercises discretion: may refuse writ if (a) adequate alternative remedy exists (e.g., statutory appeal), (b) petition is frivolous/mala fide, (c) suppression of facts, (d) delay/laches. However, for grave FR violations or where alternative remedy is illusory, SC entertains petition. Balances access to justice with judicial economy.
The Supreme Court can issue writs under Article 32 for enforcement of Fundamental Rights:
- Only within Delhi
- Only within the State where cause of action arises
- Throughout the territory of India
- Only against Union Government authorities
Answer: Throughout the territory of India
Article 32(2): Supreme Court's writ jurisdiction extends throughout India. High Court's jurisdiction under Article 226 is limited to: (a) territories within its State, OR (b) cause of action arising within its territories even if respondent resides outside. SC's nationwide jurisdiction ensures uniform FR protection across country.
The writ of Mandamus ('we command') can be issued against which of the following?
- Private individuals
- President of India
- Public official failing to perform statutory duty
- Legislature making laws
Answer: Public official failing to perform statutory duty
Mandamus: Issued by higher court to lower court/tribunal/public authority to perform public duty imposed by law. Cannot be issued against: (a) private individuals/bodies, (b) President/Governors (constitutional heads), (c) Legislature (law-making), (d) discretionary duties. Ensures executive accountability for statutory obligations.
Under which Article can a citizen directly approach the Supreme Court for enforcement of Fundamental Rights?
- Article 14
- Article 21
- Article 32
- Article 226
Answer: Article 32
Article 32(1): Right to move Supreme Court for enforcement of Fundamental Rights is itself a Fundamental Right. Dr. Ambedkar called it the 'heart and soul' of Constitution. SC can issue five writs: Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Certiorari, Quo Warranto. Makes FRs enforceable, not merely declaratory.
Which statement best captures the relationship between constitutional amendments and the basic structure doctrine in India?
- Parliament can amend any provision including basic structure
- Basic structure is fixed and no amendments are permitted
- Parliament can amend any provision but cannot destroy or alter the basic structure
- Only Supreme Court can initiate constitutional amendments
Answer: Parliament can amend any provision but cannot destroy or alter the basic structure
Indian constitutional amendment framework: (a) Parliament has wide power to amend Constitution under Article 368 (including Fundamental Rights), (b) But Kesavananda Bharati (1973) limits this power: cannot alter basic structure, (c) Supreme Court is final arbiter of what constitutes basic structure, (d) Balance enables constitutional evolution while protecting core democratic values. Unique model blending flexibility with permanence.
In SR Bommai case (1994), the Supreme Court reinforced that federalism is part of basic structure. Which principle did the Court emphasize regarding State autonomy?
- States can secede from Union
- Union cannot interfere in State matters even during Emergency
- State governments must enjoy constitutional protection against arbitrary dismissal
- Parliament cannot create new States
Answer: State governments must enjoy constitutional protection against arbitrary dismissal
SR Bommai v. Union of India (1994): Held federalism is basic structure; State governments have constitutional status; President's Rule under Article 356 subject to judicial review; floor test is primary method to test majority; State Assembly dissolution not automatic. Protects States from arbitrary Union interference while preserving Union's emergency powers for genuine breakdowns.
As of 2024, approximately how many Constitutional Amendment Acts have been passed by Parliament?
- Around 50
- Around 75
- Around 100
- Around 125
Answer: Around 100
As of 2024, over 105 Constitutional Amendment Acts have been enacted since 1950. First Amendment (1951) addressed land reforms and free speech restrictions; latest amendments address GST, EWS reservation, cooperative societies, etc. Reflects Constitution's flexibility to adapt to changing socio-economic-political needs while preserving core values.
In which case did the Supreme Court first hold that Fundamental Rights cannot be amended by Parliament?
- Shankari Prasad case (1951)
- Sajjan Singh case (1965)
- Golaknath case (1967)
- Kesavananda Bharati case (1973)
Answer: Golaknath case (1967)
Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967): 6:5 majority held: (a) Fundamental Rights are 'transcendental and immutable', (b) Parliament cannot amend Part III, (c) Article 368 only prescribes procedure, not power. Led to 24th Amendment (1971) affirming amending power. Kesavananda (1973) later moderated: Parliament can amend FRs but not destroy basic structure.
Which of the following has NOT been explicitly recognized by Supreme Court as part of the 'Basic Structure' of the Constitution?
- Judicial review
- Federalism
- Parliamentary form of government
- Right to Property as Fundamental Right
Answer: Right to Property as Fundamental Right
Supreme Court has recognized as basic structure: supremacy of Constitution, republican/democratic form, secularism, federalism, separation of powers, judicial review, rule of law, free/fair elections, parliamentary system, limited amending power, balance between FRs and DPSP, individual dignity. Right to Property was removed from FRs by 44th Amendment; now legal right under Article 300A, not basic structure.
The 86th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2002 made which right a Fundamental Right?
- Right to Information
- Right to Education
- Right to Privacy
- Right to Health
Answer: Right to Education
86th Amendment (2002): (a) Inserted Article 21A making free and compulsory education for children 6-14 years a Fundamental Right, (b) Modified Article 45 to focus on early childhood care (below 6 years), (c) Added Fundamental Duty under Article 51A(k) for parents/guardians to provide education opportunities. Operationalized by RTE Act, 2009.
The 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976 is often called the 'Mini-Constitution' because it:
- Added the most number of new Articles
- Made comprehensive changes to Preamble, Fundamental Duties, Directive Principles, and judicial powers
- Replaced the entire Constitution
- Was passed during National Emergency without debate
Answer: Made comprehensive changes to Preamble, Fundamental Duties, Directive Principles, and judicial powers
42nd Amendment (1976): Added 'Socialist', 'Secular', 'Integrity' to Preamble; inserted Fundamental Duties (Part IVA); expanded DPSP; curtailed judicial review; gave Parliament unlimited amending power (later struck down in Minerva Mills). Enacted during 1975-77 Emergency; many provisions diluted by 43rd/44th Amendments post-Emergency.
The 'Basic Structure Doctrine' limiting Parliament's amending power was propounded by the Supreme Court in which landmark case?
- Golaknath case (1967)
- Kesavananda Bharati case (1973)
- Minerva Mills case (1980)
- Waman Rao case (1981)
Answer: Kesavananda Bharati case (1973)
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (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.
Under Article 368, most Constitutional Amendments require special majority in Parliament. What does 'special majority' mean?
- Simple majority of members present and voting
- Majority of total membership and 2/3 of members present and voting
- Unanimous approval of both Houses
- Approval by half of State Legislatures only
Answer: Majority of total membership and 2/3 of members present and voting
Article 368(2): Special majority = (a) majority of total membership of each House, AND (b) 2/3 of members present and voting. This ensures broad consensus for constitutional changes. Some amendments additionally require ratification by half of State Legislatures (federal provisions).
Which statement best describes the constitutional philosophy behind Emergency provisions in India?
- Enable permanent centralization of power during crises
- Balance national unity and security with federal autonomy and rights protection
- Allow executive to bypass Parliament in all matters
- Transfer all State powers to Union indefinitely
Answer: Balance national unity and security with federal autonomy and rights protection
Emergency provisions reflect constitutional balance: (a) Enable strong Union response to existential threats (war, financial collapse, State breakdown), (b) But include safeguards: written Cabinet advice, Parliamentary approval, judicial review (SR Bommai), non-suspendable rights (Articles 20-21), time limits. Designed for temporary crisis management, not permanent authoritarianism. 44th Amendment strengthened this balance post-1975 experience.
Laws made by Parliament on State List subjects during National Emergency under Article 250 cease to operate ______ after the Emergency ceases.
- immediately
- after 3 months
- after 6 months
- after 1 year
Answer: after 6 months
Article 250(2): Laws made by Parliament on State List during Emergency cease to have effect 6 months after Emergency ends, except for things done/omitted before expiry. Allows transitional period for States to resume legislative competence while preventing permanent Union encroachment on State powers post-Emergency.
Which Fundamental Right cannot be suspended even during National Emergency?
- Article 14 (Equality)
- Article 19 (Freedoms)
- Article 21 (Life and Personal Liberty)
- Article 32 (Constitutional Remedies)
Answer: Article 21 (Life and Personal Liberty)
Article 359(1A), inserted by 44th Amendment: Presidential order suspending FR enforcement cannot apply to Articles 20 (protection in conviction) and 21 (life & personal liberty). These core rights remain enforceable even during Emergency. Article 19 freedoms are automatically suspended during Emergency on war/external aggression grounds (Article 358).