Day-687 | Daily MCQs | UPSC Prelims | POLITY

Answer: B
Explanation: The statements 3 & 4 are incorrect. Hence, the correct Option is B as the first two statements are correct.
Generally, specialised sector specific regulators have been created after the 1990s due to the emergence of market economy or LPG like SEBI, IRDA, TRDA, CCI, RERA, etc. These regulators are statutory in nature and have quasi-legislative, quasi-executive and quasi-judicial powers as they can make rules, execute them and adjudicate them.
But their tenure, appointment and removal are not uniform.
1. Tenure can be 3, 4 or 5 years. Like the RBI governor is appointed for 4 years.
2. Appointment is done by the government, not the President. The process of appointment is also different. For financial sector regulators, there is search-cum-selection committee headed by the cabinet secretary. The appointing authority is the Appointment Committee of Cabinet.
3. Removal: It is also done by the government, not the President.
Thus, the statements 3 & 4 are incorrect.

Answer: D
Explanation: all the four statements are correct and they together constitute the content of the oath of the governor. It has been mentioned under Article 159.
The Oath or affirmation by the Governor: Every Governor and every person discharging the functions of the Governor shall, before entering upon his office, make and subscribe in the presence of the Chief Justice of the High Court exercising jurisdiction in relation to the State, or, in his absence, the senior most Judge of that Court available, an oath or affirmation in the following form, that is to say :
“I, A.B., do swear in the name of God / solemnly affirm that I will faithfully execute the office of Governor (or discharge the functions of the Governor) of ……… (name of State) and will to the best of my ability preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and the law and that I will devote myself to the service and well-being of the people of ………. (name of the State).”

Answer: C
Explanation: The first three statements 1, 2 & 3 are correct and mentioned under article 175 and 176 of the constitution. The statement 4 is incorrect as there is not any provision in the constitution or under the rules of the business of the House which state that if the Motion of Thanks is defeated in the House or Houses, the government will fall.
1. Article 175: Right of Governor to address and send messages to the House or Houses.The Governor may address the Legislative Assembly or, in the case of a State having a Legislative Council, either House of the Legislature of the State, or both Houses assembled together, and may for that purpose require the attendance of members.
2. Article 176: Special address by the Governor : (1) At the commencement of the first session after each general election to the Legislative Assembly and at the commencement of the first session of each year, the Governor shall address the Legislative Assembly or, in the case of a State having a Legislative Council, both Houses assembled together and inform the Legislature of the causes of its summons.
3. Provision shall be made by the rules regulating the procedure of the House or House for the allotment of time for discussion and voting of the matters referred to in such address.
Therefore, the statement 1 is Correct and is directly governed by the constitution. Article 86/87 for president and article 175/176 for Governor.
Statement 2 & 3 are Correct. The content of the address by the President/Governor is decided by the government as both are formal heads and act as per the advice of the CoM. The content is also the stated policy of the government.
Statement 4: It is Incorrect. Since voting is done on the policy of the government, any defeat will be more as censure or indictment to the government rather than defeat. Although it can become a fit ground to bring No-Confidence Motion.

Answer: C
Explanation: The Options A, B & D are Correct. The Option C is Incorrect. The sessions are governed by the provisions of the constitutions and business rules of the House framed in this regard.
Statement 1 & 4: Since India follows sessions type convention, rather than day to day functioning, generally, there are three sessions-Budget, Monsoon and Winter. In the case of the US and UK, their legislature meets throughout the year and the duration runs in hours like two/ three hours of a day for which they adopt a calendar but in India, it is based on convention.
Article 85(1) states that “The President shall from time to time summon each House of Parliament to meet at such time and place as he/she thinks fit, but six months shall not intervene between its last sitting in one session and the date appointed for its first sitting in the next session.”
Even though it mandates two sessions in a window of six months, the provision is merely to ensure minimum parliamentary sitting. The article has provisions for the President to summon the house as and when required and does not prohibit the Parliament from meeting frequently. Hence, Statement 1 & 4 are correct.
Statement 3: The Constitution does not mention the term “special session.” The President, who summons a regular Parliamentary session will summon this session (special session) also as per provisions of Article 85(1) of the Constitution. It means a special session is also a session. Since it is not part of the three fixed sessions in a year, it is referred to as a special session. Hence, Statement 3 is Incorrect.
Statement 2: It is Correct: The power to convene a session of Parliament rests with the government. It is due to the parliamentary system wherein the president acts as per the aid and advice of the president. Although the formal language is written in the name of the president that the president summons the sessions including the special sessions of the House but in actual practice it is done on the advice of the government. While the President issues the summons, it is the government, led by the Prime Minister, that calls the session into action.

The term ‘special session’ is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution. However, Article 352 (Proclamation of Emergency) of the Constitution refers to a “special sitting of the House”, which was inserted to add safeguards to the power of proclaiming Emergency in the country. Under this provision, the President has the authority to convene a special sitting of the House if a Proclamation of Emergency is issued. One-tenth of Lok Sabha MPs can ask the President to convene a special meeting to disapprove the Emergency.

Recently, a special session was in the news. The following are the details of the special sessions since independence:
1. The first-ever special session of the Parliament was convened on August 14 and 15, of 1947 to celebrate India’s independence and mark the transfer of power from the British.
2. During the India-China war in 1962, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru agreed to his demand and convened a session on November 8.
3. Most special sessions have been called to celebrate days of national importance or significant milestones. For example, on 15 August 1972, a special session was called to mark the silver jubilee of India’s Independence.
4. A special session of Rajya Sabha was held in February 1977 for two days, to extend the President’s Rule in Tamil Nadu and Nagaland under the second provision of Article 356(4).
5. Another two-day special session (158th Session) was held on 3 June 1991 and 4 June 1991, for approval of the President’s Rule in Haryana, under the proviso to article 356(3). On both these occasions the Rajya Sabha met when the Lok Sabha was under dissolution.
6. A midnight session was called on 9 August 1992 to celebrate the 50-year anniversary of the ‘Quit India Movement’.
7. On 15 August 1997, a midnight session was convened to mark 50-years of India’s independence.
8. During the UPA era, a special session of Lok Sabha was called in July 2008 for a trust vote after the Left parties withdrew support from the Manmohan Singh government.
9. On 30 June 2017, the Modi government called for a joint midnight session of both the houses to roll out the Goods and Services Tax (GST), calling it the biggest indirect tax reform since Independence. This was the first special session of the Parliament where a bill was discussed.

Answer: A
Explanation: Option A is correct. It is due to the following factors:
1. Prison management is the complete responsibility of states as prisons come under the State List, item 4.
2. It is the state government which takes decisions on whether any inmate has to be released from the state prisons.
3. The remission to prisoners on the ground of good behaviour
While giving remission, the state government can take the views of
1. The Jail Advisory Committee
2. The DM/SP of the district under which the prison is located.
3. The state high court
4. The central government
5. The investigating agency which investigated the case
They can give their views, but the final decision is taken by the state government. The decision is governed by the policy of the government.

The recent case is related to Bilkis Bano in which the Supreme Court has struck down the decision of the Gujarat Government for granting remission to 11 inmates.