Indian Polity and Constitution
Time limit: 0
Quiz-summary
0 of 5 questions completed
Questions:
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
Information
To attempt the Quiz, simply click on START Button.
You have already completed the quiz before. Hence you can not start it again.
Quiz is loading...
You must sign in or sign up to start the quiz.
You have to finish following quiz, to start this quiz:
Results
0 of 5 questions answered correctly
Your time:
Time has elapsed
You have reached 0 of 0 points, (0)
| Average score |
|
| Your score |
|
Categories
- GS Prelims 0%
Your result has been entered into leaderboard
![captcha]()
Loading
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Answered
- Review
-
Question 1 of 5
1. Question
2 pointsWith reference to the Leaders in Parliament of India, consider the following statements –
- The offices of the leader of the House and the leader of the Opposition are not mentioned in the Constitution of India.
- The office of ‘whip’ is mentioned neither in the Constituion of India nor in the Rules of the House nor in a Parliamentary Statues.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Correct
ANSWER: C
Explanation:- Though the offices of the leader of the House and the leader of the Opposition are not mentioned in the Constitution of India, they are mentioned in the Rules of the House and Parliamentary Statute respectively. So, statement 1 is correct.
- The office of ‘whip’, on the other hand, is mentioned neither in the Constitution of India nor in the Rules of the House nor in a Parliamentary Statute. It is based on the conventions of the parliamentary government. So, statement 2 is correct.
- Every political party, whether ruling or Opposition has its own whip in the Parliament. He is appointed by the political party to serve as an assistant floor leader. He is charged with the responsibility of ensuring the attendance of his party members in large numbers and securing their support in favour of or against a particular issue. He regulates and monitors their behaviour in the Parliament. The members are supposed to follow the directives given by the whip. Otherwise, disciplinary action can be taken.
Hence, option C is correct.
Incorrect
ANSWER: C
Explanation:- Though the offices of the leader of the House and the leader of the Opposition are not mentioned in the Constitution of India, they are mentioned in the Rules of the House and Parliamentary Statute respectively. So, statement 1 is correct.
- The office of ‘whip’, on the other hand, is mentioned neither in the Constitution of India nor in the Rules of the House nor in a Parliamentary Statute. It is based on the conventions of the parliamentary government. So, statement 2 is correct.
- Every political party, whether ruling or Opposition has its own whip in the Parliament. He is appointed by the political party to serve as an assistant floor leader. He is charged with the responsibility of ensuring the attendance of his party members in large numbers and securing their support in favour of or against a particular issue. He regulates and monitors their behaviour in the Parliament. The members are supposed to follow the directives given by the whip. Otherwise, disciplinary action can be taken.
Hence, option C is correct.
-
Question 2 of 5
2. Question
2 pointsWith reference to the Constitution of India, consider the following statements –
- The President can seek opinion of the Supreme Court on any dispute arising out of any pre-constitution treaty, agreement, covenant, engagement, sanad or other similar instrument.
- In the above case, the Supreme Court may tender or may refuse to tender its opinion to the President.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Correct
ANSWER: A
Explanation:
The Constitution (Article 143) authorises the president to seek the opinion of the Supreme Court in the two categories of matters:
- On any question of law or fact of public importance which has arisen or which is likely to arise.
- On any dispute arising out of any pre-constitution treaty, agreement, covenant, engagement, sanad or other similar instruments. So, statement 1 is correct.
- In the first case, the Supreme Court may tender or may refuse to tender its opinion to the president. But, in the second case, the Supreme Court ‘must’ tender its opinion to the president. So, statement 2 is incorrect.
- In both the cases, the opinion expressed by the Supreme Court is only advisory and not a judicial pronouncement. Hence, it is not binding on the president; he may follow or may not follow the opinion. However, it facilitates the government to have an authoritative legal opinion on a matter to be decided by it.
Hence, option A is correct.
Incorrect
ANSWER: A
Explanation:
The Constitution (Article 143) authorises the president to seek the opinion of the Supreme Court in the two categories of matters:
- On any question of law or fact of public importance which has arisen or which is likely to arise.
- On any dispute arising out of any pre-constitution treaty, agreement, covenant, engagement, sanad or other similar instruments. So, statement 1 is correct.
- In the first case, the Supreme Court may tender or may refuse to tender its opinion to the president. But, in the second case, the Supreme Court ‘must’ tender its opinion to the president. So, statement 2 is incorrect.
- In both the cases, the opinion expressed by the Supreme Court is only advisory and not a judicial pronouncement. Hence, it is not binding on the president; he may follow or may not follow the opinion. However, it facilitates the government to have an authoritative legal opinion on a matter to be decided by it.
Hence, option A is correct.
-
Question 3 of 5
3. Question
2 pointsWith reference to the Constitution of India, consider the following statements –
- The power of judicial review has been conferred by the Constitution of India only on the Supreme Court.
- The power of judicial review cannot be curtailed or excluded even by a constitutional amendment.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Correct
ANSWER: B
Explanation:
- In India, the Constitution itself confers the power of judicial review on the judiciary (both the Supreme Court as well as High Courts). So, statement 1 is incorrect.
- Further, the Supreme Court has declared the power of judicial review as a basic feature of the Constitution or an element of the basic structure of the Constitution. Hence, the power of judicial review cannot be curtailed or excluded even by a constitutional amendment. So, statement 2 is correct.
Hence, option B is correct.
Incorrect
ANSWER: B
Explanation:
- In India, the Constitution itself confers the power of judicial review on the judiciary (both the Supreme Court as well as High Courts). So, statement 1 is incorrect.
- Further, the Supreme Court has declared the power of judicial review as a basic feature of the Constitution or an element of the basic structure of the Constitution. Hence, the power of judicial review cannot be curtailed or excluded even by a constitutional amendment. So, statement 2 is correct.
Hence, option B is correct.
-
Question 4 of 5
4. Question
2 pointsWith reference to the Constitution of India, consider the following statements –
- The concept of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) originated and developed in the USA in the 1960s.
- PIL is absolutely necessary for maintaining the rule of law, furthering the cause of justice and accelerating the pace of realisation of the constitutional objectives.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Correct
ANSWER: C
Explanation:
- The concept of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) originated and developed in the USA in the 1960s.In the USA, it was designed to provide legal representation to previously unrepresented groups and interests. So, statement 1 is correct.
- PIL is absolutely necessary for maintaining the rule of law, furthering the cause of justice and accelerating the pace of realisation of the constitutional objectives. So, statement 2 is correct.
In other words, the real purposes of PIL are:
- vindication of the rule of law,
- facilitating effective access to justice to the socially and economically weaker sections of the society, and
- meaningful realisation of the fundamental rights.
Hence, option C is correct.
Incorrect
ANSWER: C
Explanation:
- The concept of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) originated and developed in the USA in the 1960s.In the USA, it was designed to provide legal representation to previously unrepresented groups and interests. So, statement 1 is correct.
- PIL is absolutely necessary for maintaining the rule of law, furthering the cause of justice and accelerating the pace of realisation of the constitutional objectives. So, statement 2 is correct.
In other words, the real purposes of PIL are:
- vindication of the rule of law,
- facilitating effective access to justice to the socially and economically weaker sections of the society, and
- meaningful realisation of the fundamental rights.
Hence, option C is correct.
-
Question 5 of 5
5. Question
2 pointsWith reference to the Constitution of India, consider the following statements –
- The aim to ensure equality before law and a legal system which promotes justice on the basis of equal opportunity to all is mentioned both in the Fundamental Rights as well as in DPSPs.
- In every State, a State Legal Services Authority and in every High Court, a High Court Legal Services Committee have been constituted.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Correct
ANSWER: C
Explanation:
- Article 39A of the Constitution of India provides for free legal aid to the poor and weaker sections of the society and ensures justice for all. Articles 14 and 22(1) of the Constitution also make it obligatory for the State to ensure equality before law and a legal system which promotes justice on the basis of equal opportunity to all. So, statement 1 is correct.
- In every State, a State Legal Services Authority and in every High Court, a High Court Legal Services Committee have been constituted. The District Legal Services Authorities, Taluk Legal Services Committees have been constituted in the Districts and most of the Taluks to give effect to the policies and directions of the NALSA and to provide free legal services to the people and conduct Lok Adalats in the State. So, statement 2 is correct.
Hence, option C is correct.
Incorrect
ANSWER: C
Explanation:
- Article 39A of the Constitution of India provides for free legal aid to the poor and weaker sections of the society and ensures justice for all. Articles 14 and 22(1) of the Constitution also make it obligatory for the State to ensure equality before law and a legal system which promotes justice on the basis of equal opportunity to all. So, statement 1 is correct.
- In every State, a State Legal Services Authority and in every High Court, a High Court Legal Services Committee have been constituted. The District Legal Services Authorities, Taluk Legal Services Committees have been constituted in the Districts and most of the Taluks to give effect to the policies and directions of the NALSA and to provide free legal services to the people and conduct Lok Adalats in the State. So, statement 2 is correct.
Hence, option C is correct.
Social Media