Create a custom practice set
Pick category, difficulty, number of questions, and time limit. Start instantly with your own quiz.
Generate QuizPolity – Hard Level – GK Questions
Free practice for SSC, UPSC, Banking & Railway exams. No login required.
Under traditional rule, only the person whose Fundamental Right is violated can file a writ petition under Article 32.
- True
- False
Answer: False
Traditional rule required personal injury (locus standi). However, Supreme Court relaxed this through Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in S.P. Gupta case (1981): Any public-spirited person can file petition for enforcement of rights of disadvantaged groups who cannot approach court themselves. Democratized access to justice while preventing frivolous litigation through judicial safeguards.
The writ of Prohibition is issued after a lower court has passed an order, while Certiorari is issued before the order to prevent excess of jurisdiction.
- True
- False
Answer: False
Key distinction: (a) Prohibition is PREVENTIVE - issued while proceedings are pending, before order, to prevent lower court/tribunal from exceeding jurisdiction, (b) Certiorari is CURATIVE - issued after order is passed, to quash order made without/ excess of jurisdiction. Both available under Articles 32 & 226 against judicial/quasi-judicial bodies.
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.
The Supreme Court has held that while Parliament can amend the Constitution, it cannot alter the ______ of the Constitution which includes democracy, secularism, federalism, and judicial review.
- text
- spirit
- basic structure
- preamble
Answer: basic structure
Kesavananda Bharati (1973) and subsequent cases: Parliament's amending power under Article 368 is limited by basic structure doctrine. Basic structure includes: supremacy of Constitution, republican/democratic form, secularism, federalism, separation of powers, judicial review, rule of law, free/fair elections, individual dignity. Ensures Constitution's core identity survives political changes.
Constitutional Amendments generally have prospective effect unless expressly provided otherwise, and cannot validate actions that were unconstitutional when done.
- True
- False
Answer: True
General principle: Constitutional amendments operate prospectively unless text expressly provides retrospective effect. Cannot validate actions that were unconstitutional when performed (ex post facto validation limited). However, amendments can change law for future cases and sometimes cure procedural defects. Balance between legal certainty and constitutional adaptability.
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.
The Basic Structure Doctrine establishes that Parliament's amending power under Article 368 is limited, not absolute, making Indian constitutionalism a blend of parliamentary sovereignty and constitutional supremacy.
- True
- False
Answer: True
Kesavananda Bharati (1973) established: (a) Parliament has wide amending power under Article 368, (b) But cannot destroy/alter basic structure of Constitution, (c) Supreme Court is final arbiter of what constitutes basic structure. This balances: parliamentary democracy (elected representatives amend Constitution) with constitutional supremacy (core values protected from transient majorities). Unique Indian model.
The Supreme Court struck down the 99th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2014 (establishing NJAC for judicial appointments) holding that judicial independence and primacy of judiciary in appointments is part of basic structure.
- True
- False
Answer: True
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 (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 reform continues.
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.
Some constitutional provisions can be amended by simple majority of Parliament outside Article 368 procedure, such as admission of new States or abolition of Legislative Councils.
- True
- False
Answer: True
Article 368(2) proviso: Certain provisions amendable by simple majority (not special majority): (a) Admission/formation of States (Articles 2-3), (b) Citizenship (Part II), (c) Fifth/Sixth Schedule administration, (d) Legislative Councils creation/abolition (Article 169), (e) Salaries/allowances of constitutional functionaries. These are 'constitutional but not under Article 368' amendments.
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 24th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1971 was enacted to overcome the Supreme Court's judgment in ______ case (1967), which held Parliament cannot amend Fundamental Rights.
- Golaknath
- Kesavananda Bharati
- Minerva Mills
- Indira Gandhi
Answer: Golaknath
Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967): SC held Parliament cannot amend Fundamental Rights (Part III). 24th Amendment (1971) added clause to Article 13 clarifying 'law' does not include constitutional amendment under Article 368, and added clause to Article 368 affirming Parliament's amending power including FRs. Set stage for Kesavananda Bharati compromise.
The Supreme Court held in Minerva Mills case (1980) that judicial review is part of the basic structure and cannot be abrogated by constitutional amendment.
- True
- False
Answer: True
Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980): SC struck down parts of 42nd Amendment that sought to exclude judicial review of constitutional amendments. Held: judicial review is part of basic structure; Parliament cannot destroy it. Also held balance between Fundamental Rights (Part III) and Directive Principles (Part IV) is basic structure. Reinforced Kesavananda doctrine.
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.
Amendments affecting federal provisions like election of President, extent of executive power, Supreme Court/High Courts, distribution of legislative powers, representation of States in Parliament, or Article 368 itself require ratification by legislatures of not less than ______ of States.
- one-third
- one-half
- two-thirds
- three-fourths
Answer: one-half
Article 368(2) proviso: Amendments affecting federal structure require ratification by legislatures of not less than half of States (by simple majority). Protects States' interests by ensuring Union cannot unilaterally alter federal balance. Examples: 7th Amendment (State reorganisation), 73rd/74th Amendments (local government).
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.
Article 358 automatically suspends Article 19 freedoms during National Emergency on grounds of war or external aggression, but not during armed rebellion.
- True
- False
Answer: True
Article 358: Article 19 freedoms (speech, assembly, etc.) automatically suspended only when Emergency is proclaimed on grounds of war/external aggression (not armed rebellion). Suspension lasts for Emergency duration; laws made during suspension remain valid even after revival of Article 19. Article 359 requires Presidential order to suspend other FRs enforcement.
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).
President's Rule under Article 356 can remain in force for a maximum period of ______ years, subject to Parliamentary approval every 6 months and Election Commission certification after one year.
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
Answer: 3
Article 356(5), inserted by 44th Amendment: Maximum duration of President's Rule is 3 years. Extensions beyond 1 year require: (a) National Emergency in India or that State, AND (b) Election Commission certification that elections cannot be held. Prevents indefinite suspension of State democracy; ensures return to normalcy.