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.
During a National Emergency under Article 352, the federal structure of the Constitution automatically converts into a unitary one without any formal amendment.
- True
- False
Answer: True
Article 353(b): During National Emergency, Union executive power extends to giving directions to any State on 'manner of exercise' of its executive power. Article 250: Parliament can legislate on State List. Combined effect: State autonomy temporarily suspended; Centre assumes unitary control. Restored post-Emergency. Designed for crisis management, not permanent centralization.
The Governor acts solely as the constitutional head of the State and has no role as an agent of the Union Government.
- True
- False
Answer: False
Governor has dual role: (a) Constitutional head of State executive (Article 153-167), (b) Agent of Union for reporting State affairs to President (Article 356). This duality can create tension: Sarkaria Commission recommended Governors act impartially, not as Union agents; appointed after consulting State CM; not removed arbitrarily. Balances federal autonomy with Union oversight.
Officers of All India Services like IAS and IPS are recruited by the Union but serve under the control of State Governments in State cadres.
- True
- False
Answer: True
Article 312: All India Services (IAS, IPS, IFoS) created by Parliament; recruited/trained by Union (UPSC); serve in State cadres under State control for day-to-day administration. Disciplinary control shared: State initiates proceedings, but major penalties require Union consultation. Balances national standards with State administrative autonomy; key feature of Indian federalism.
Under Article 249, Rajya Sabha can enable Parliament to legislate on a State List subject by passing a resolution with simple majority.
- True
- False
Answer: False
Article 249: Rajya Sabha can pass resolution by SPECIAL majority (2/3 of members present and voting) declaring it expedient in national interest that Parliament should legislate on State List subject. Resolution valid for 1 year, renewable. Enables Union legislation on State subjects without Emergency, respecting federal flexibility while ensuring national interest.
The Supreme Court can issue advisory opinions under Article 143 in response to Presidential reference, and such opinions have the same binding force as writ judgments under Article 32.
- True
- False
Answer: False
Article 143: President may refer questions of law/fact of public importance to SC for advisory opinion. However, advisory opinion is NOT binding on President or government; it's consultative. Writ judgments under Article 32 are binding and enforceable. Advisory jurisdiction complements but does not replace writ jurisdiction; serves different constitutional purposes.
The Supreme Court has evolved the concept of 'continuing mandamus' to monitor implementation of its directions in public interest cases over time.
- True
- False
Answer: True
Continuing mandamus: SC/HC keeps writ petition pending and issues periodic directions to executive agencies to ensure compliance with court orders in PIL cases (e.g., environmental protection, police reforms, prison conditions). Enables judicial monitoring of executive action without usurping executive function. Innovative tool for effective rights enforcement.
The principle of res judicata applies to writ petitions under Article 32, barring re-litigation of same issue between same parties.
- True
- False
Answer: True
Supreme Court has held (Daryao case, 1961): Res judicata applies to Article 32 petitions. If HC has decided writ petition on merits under Article 226, same petition cannot be filed in SC under Article 32 on same grounds. Exceptions: (a) Fresh grounds, (b) Change in law, (c) Continuing wrong. Balances finality of litigation with access to justice.
The right to move Supreme Court under Article 32 for enforcement of Fundamental Rights is itself a Fundamental Right.
- True
- False
Answer: True
Article 32(1): 'The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the rights conferred by this Part is guaranteed.' Dr. Ambedkar: 'If I was asked to name any particular article in this Constitution as the most important... I could not refer to any other article except this one.' Makes FRs justiciable and enforceable.
Writs under Article 32 can be issued against private individuals or bodies performing public functions.
- True
- False
Answer: True
Traditional view: Writs only against 'State' under Article 12. Expanded view (Pradeep Kumar Biswas case, 2002): Writs can issue against private bodies if: (a) Function is public in nature, (b) Body is financially/functionally controlled by State, (c) Instrumentality/agency of State. Ensures FR protection against privatized public functions.
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.
Under Article 226, High Courts can issue writs only for enforcement of Fundamental Rights, similar to Supreme Court under Article 32.
- True
- False
Answer: False
Article 226: High Courts can issue writs for: (a) enforcement of Fundamental Rights (like SC under Article 32), AND (b) 'for any other purpose' (enforcement of legal rights). Thus, HC's writ jurisdiction is wider substantively (FRs + legal rights) though territorially limited to State. SC's writ jurisdiction is nationwide but limited to FRs.
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.
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.
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.
The 91st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2003 limits the size of Council of Ministers at Union and State levels to 15% of legislative house strength and bars defectors from being appointed ministers.
- True
- False
Answer: True
91st Amendment (2003): (a) Article 75(1A): Union Council max 15% of Lok Sabha strength (min 12), (b) Article 164(1A): Same limit for State Councils, (c) Article 75(1B)/164(1B): Defectors cannot be appointed ministers until re-elected or term ends. Curbs horse-trading, excessive ministerial berths, and political instability.
The 44th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1978 restored many democratic safeguards diluted by the 42nd Amendment and introduced protections against misuse of Emergency powers.
- True
- False
Answer: True
44th Amendment (1978): Key reforms: (a) 'Armed rebellion' replaces 'internal disturbance' for Emergency, (b) Written Cabinet advice mandatory, (c) Articles 20-21 non-suspendable, (d) Lok Sabha can revoke Emergency by simple majority, (e) Restored judicial review powers, (f) Right to Property made legal right (Article 300A). Post-Emergency correction to strengthen democracy.
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 President can withhold assent to a Constitutional Amendment Bill passed by Parliament.
- True
- False
Answer: False
Article 368(2): President 'shall give his assent' to Constitutional Amendment Bill duly passed by Parliament (and ratified by States if required). No discretionary power to withhold assent or return for reconsideration. Ensures that once Parliament (and States) approve amendment per procedure, it becomes law without executive veto.