Create a custom practice set
Pick category, difficulty, number of questions, and time limit. Start instantly with your own quiz.
Generate QuizPick category, difficulty, number of questions, and time limit. Start instantly with your own quiz.
Generate QuizNo weekly quiz is published yet. Check the weekly page for the latest updates.
View Weekly PageFree practice for SSC, UPSC, Banking & Railway exams. No login required.
Answer: Soviet Union
Fundamental Duties comparison: (a) India: Article 51A (11 duties) added by 42nd Amendment (1976), inspired by USSR Constitution, (b) Other democracies: Most (USA, UK, Canada) don't have codified citizen duties in Constitution; duties implied through laws/citizenship oaths. Indian approach: Rights and duties are correlative; duties promote responsible citizenship, national unity, environmental protection. However, duties are non-justiciable; enforcement through moral/political pressure, not courts.
Answer: State Legislative Assemblies
Upper House comparison: (a) US Senate: 100 members (2 per State), directly elected by citizens, 6-year term, equal State representation regardless of population, (b) Indian Rajya Sabha: Max 250 members (238 elected + 12 nominated), elected by State Legislative Assemblies via proportional representation, 6-year term with 1/3 retiring every 2 years, representation based on State population. Rajya Sabha represents States in federal structure; Senate represents States as equal sovereign entities.
Answer: single
Citizenship comparison: (a) India: Single citizenship for entire country (Article 5-11), promoting national unity and equal rights across States, (b) USA: Dual citizenship - US citizenship + State citizenship, with States having powers over certain rights (e.g., voting in State elections, property ownership rules). India's single citizenship reflects Constituent Assembly's priority for national integration post-Partition; USA's dual citizenship reflects federal autonomy tradition.
Answer: President
Executive system comparison: (a) Presidential (USA): President is head of State (ceremonial) AND head of Government (executive powers), directly elected, fixed tenure, not responsible to legislature, (b) Parliamentary (India/UK): President is nominal head of State, PM is real head of Government, Council collectively responsible to Lok Sabha, can be removed by no-confidence motion. Parliamentary system emphasizes executive-legislative coordination; presidential emphasizes separation of powers.
Answer: Soviet Union (USSR)
From Soviet Union (USSR), India borrowed: (a) Fundamental Duties (Article 51A, added by 42nd Amendment, 1976), (b) Ideals of justice (social, economic, political) in Preamble, (c) Five-Year Plans for economic development (via Planning Commission, now NITI Aayog). Fundamental Duties remind citizens of obligations alongside rights, promoting responsible citizenship and national unity.
Answer: Australia
From Australia, India borrowed: (a) Concurrent List (List III in Seventh Schedule) where both Union and States can legislate (Union law prevails in conflict), (b) Freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse throughout the territory (Article 301, subject to reasonable restrictions), (c) Joint sitting of both Houses to resolve deadlocks (Article 108). These features balance federal autonomy with national economic integration.
Answer: Ireland
From Ireland (Irish Constitution, 1937), India borrowed: (a) Directive Principles of State Policy (called 'Directive Principles of Social Policy' in Ireland), (b) Method of election of President, (c) Nomination of members to Rajya Sabha by President. DPSP are non-justiciable guidelines for State policy, aiming to establish social and economic democracy, complementing justiciable Fundamental Rights.
Answer: postal
Section 60, R.P. Act: Postal ballot facility for: (a) Armed forces personnel, (b) Government employees posted outside India, (c) Preventive detainees, (d) Election officials on duty. ECI has expanded facility: (a) Senior citizens 85+, (b) Persons with disabilities, (c) Essential service employees. Enhances inclusive participation while maintaining electoral integrity through secure postal voting procedures.
Answer: Returning Officer
ADR v. Union of India (2002): SC directed ECI to require candidates to submit affidavits with Returning Officer at time of nomination, disclosing: (a) Criminal cases pending, (b) Assets/liabilities of candidate and spouse, (c) Educational qualification. Affidavits made public on ECI website for voter information. Foundation for electoral transparency; enables media/civil society scrutiny of candidates.
Answer: corrupt
Paid news issue: Media outlets publish favorable coverage of candidates in exchange for payment, without disclosure. ECI and Press Council have recommended: (a) Amend R.P. Act to treat paid news as corrupt practice, (b) Mandate disclosure of political advertising, (c) Strengthen media self-regulation. Challenge: Distinguishing paid news from legitimate news coverage; requires media literacy and regulatory clarity.
Answer: majority
NOTA provision (PUCL case, 2013): Enables voters to express dissent by selecting 'None of the Above'. However, election outcome determined by candidate with most votes regardless of NOTA count. Debate continues on making NOTA consequential: e.g., if NOTA gets majority, all candidates disqualified and fresh election held with new candidates. Would strengthen voter sovereignty but increase electoral costs.
Answer: voter turnout
SVEEP launched by ECI in 2009: Multi-pronged strategy to educate voters, build awareness about electoral process, encourage participation. Activities: (a) Voter awareness campaigns, (b) School/college programmes, (c) Media outreach, (d) Collaboration with civil society. Contributed to increased voter turnout, especially among women, youth, and marginalized groups.
Answer: Paravur
EVMs first used experimentally in Paravur Assembly constituency (Kerala) in 1982 by-election. Gradually expanded; used nationwide from 2004 general elections. Features: (a) Reduces bogus voting, (b) Faster counting, (c) Cost-effective. VVPAT (Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail) added from 2013 for transparency; now used in all constituencies for verification.
Answer: People's Union for Civil Liberties
PUCL v. Union of India (2013): SC directed ECI to provide NOTA option in EVMs/ballot papers to enable voters to reject all candidates if dissatisfied. NOTA votes don't affect election outcome (candidate with most votes wins regardless), but serves as expression of dissent. Debate continues on making NOTA consequential (e.g., fresh elections if NOTA gets majority).
Answer: census
Article 82 (Parliament) and Article 170 (State Assemblies): Delimitation of constituencies based on latest census figures. However, 42nd Amendment (1976) froze delimitation based on 1971 census till 2001; 84th Amendment (2001) extended freeze till first census after 2026. Aims to encourage population control measures without penalizing States that control population growth.
Answer: all of the above
Future directions for rights-based approach: (a) Digital inclusion: Ensure Aadhaar/DBT don't exclude vulnerable groups, (b) Climate resilience: Adapt NFSA, MGNREGA to climate-induced migration/disasters, (c) Urbanization: Extend rights architecture to urban poor (affordable housing, social security), (d) Demographic change: Address elderly care, intergenerational equity, (e) Globalization: Protect rights in gig economy, cross-border migration. Rights framework must evolve dynamically to remain relevant in changing socio-economic-technological landscape.
Answer: 68:32
RTE Act, Section 7: Financial responsibility shared between Centre and States: (a) For most States: 68:32 (Centre:State), (b) For Northeast States: 90:10, (c) For UTs: 100% Central. Similar sharing patterns in NFSA, MGNREGA. Ensures fiscal federalism: Centre provides resources, States implement based on local needs. Challenges: (a) Timely fund release, (b) State capacity to utilize funds, (c) Monitoring expenditure efficiency. Finance Commission recommendations critical for aligning resources with rights obligations.
Answer: PUCL v. Union of India
PUCL v. Union of India (Right to Food case, ongoing since 2001): SC issued continuing mandamus directing: (a) Universalization of ICDS, (b) Mid-day meals in schools (later codified in RTE Act), (c) PDS reforms, (d) Maternity entitlements. Illustrates judicial role in: (a) Interpreting right to life (Article 21) to include food security, (b) Monitoring executive implementation through continuing mandamus, (c) Catalyzing legislative action (NFSA, 2013). Balances judicial activism with respect for policy domain of elected branches.
Answer: All of the above
Rights-based legislations are interlinked: (a) NFSA (food security) requires Agriculture (production), Rural Development (PDS infrastructure), Health (nutrition monitoring), WCD (ICDS for children), (b) RTE Act requires Education (schools), Rural Development (infrastructure), Finance (funding), (c) MGNREGA requires Rural Development (implementation), Finance (wages), Environment (asset creation). Siloed administration hampers convergence; need for integrated planning, shared databases, joint monitoring to realize rights holistically.
Answer: 1 crore
Consumer Protection Act, 2019: Three-tier redressal: (a) District Commission: up to ₹1 crore, (b) State Commission: ₹1-10 crore, (c) National Commission: above ₹10 crore. New features: (a) E-filing, video conferencing, (b) Product liability, (c) Unfair trade practices coverage, (d) Central Consumer Protection Authority for class actions. Strengthens consumer rights enforcement; reduces litigation time, cost. Awareness and accessibility remain key challenges.