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: Hyderabad-Karnataka
Article 371J (proposed): Special provisions for Hyderabad-Karnataka region (6 districts) for: (a) Reservation in education/government jobs for locals, (b) Dedicated development board, (c) Financial allocation for backward region. Though 118th Amendment Bill lapsed, similar provisions implemented via Presidential Order under Article 371(1). Addresses regional imbalances within States.
Answer: Prime Minister of India
Section 4, Official Languages Act, 1963: Committee on Official Language comprises 30 MPs (20 from Lok Sabha, 10 from Rajya Sabha); chaired by Prime Minister. Reviews progress in use of Hindi for official Union purposes, makes recommendations. Ensures parliamentary oversight of language policy implementation while promoting Hindi progressively.
Answer: Curb opportunistic defections while allowing genuine ideological shifts
Tenth Schedule aims to: (a) Prevent horse-trading and unstable governments by curbing individual/small-group defections for personal gain, (b) Allow genuine realignments via merger exception (2/3 rule), (c) Maintain party discipline on critical votes while respecting dissent through condonation provision. Balance between stability and flexibility; ongoing reforms debated to address implementation gaps like Speaker bias and delayed decisions.
Answer: False
Tenth Schedule doesn't distinguish between 'conscience votes' and other votes. If party issues whip, members must follow it or face disqualification (unless condoned within 15 days). Contrast with UK/other democracies where 'free votes' allowed on conscience issues. Debate ongoing in India about introducing conscience vote exception to balance party discipline with individual conscience.
Answer: Right to Information (implicit in Article 19)
Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India (2024): 5-judge bench unanimously struck down Electoral Bonds Scheme (2018) holding: (a) Anonymous political funding violates voters' right to know (implicit in Article 19(1)(a)), (b) Disproportionate impact on transparency, (c) Potential for quid pro quo corruption. Directed ECI to disclose bond donor-recipient details. Landmark transparency judgment.
Answer: disassociation
Ravi Naik v. Union of India (1994) and subsequent cases: 'Voluntarily giving up membership' interpreted broadly to include: (a) Formal resignation, (b) Public statements against party, (c) Joining rival party activities, (d) Voting against party whip. Focus on substance over form; prevents technical evasion of anti-defection law while respecting genuine dissent.
Answer: Keisham Meghachandra Singh case (2020)
Keisham Meghachandra Singh v. Hon'ble Speaker Manipur Legislative Assembly (2020): SC held Speaker must decide Tenth Schedule petitions within reasonable time (suggested 3 months); unreasonable delay undermines law's efficacy. Court can intervene if delay causes irreversible harm. Highlighted need for parliamentary amendment to fix timeframe; reform still pending.
Answer: Election Symbols
Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968: Recognized parties must: (a) Conduct organizational elections periodically, (b) Maintain membership records, (c) Submit audited accounts to ECI, (d) Follow internal democratic procedures. Non-compliance can lead to derecognition. Aims to promote inner-party democracy, though enforcement remains challenging.
Answer: True
Kihoto Hollohan case (1992): SC held Speaker functions as quasi-judicial tribunal while deciding Tenth Schedule petitions; must act impartially, follow natural justice principles (notice, hearing, reasoned order). However, Speaker's political affiliation raises concerns about bias; reforms proposed to transfer power to independent tribunal (e.g., Election Commission or judicial panel).
Answer: True
Kihoto Hollohan case (1992): SC held judicial review of Speaker's decision under Tenth Schedule is available but: (a) Generally after final decision, (b) Interim relief only in exceptional cases (e.g., imminent irreversible harm), (c) Courts don't act as appellate authority but review constitutional validity. Balances legislative autonomy with constitutional safeguards.
Answer: No, no specific time limit
Tenth Schedule doesn't prescribe time limit for Speaker's decision on disqualification petitions. Supreme Court in Keisham Meghachandra Singh case (2020) recommended Parliament amend Schedule to specify timeframe (e.g., 3 months) except in exceptional cases. Delayed decisions undermine anti-defection law's deterrent effect; reform pending.
Answer: 15 days
Paragraph 2(1)(b) proviso: If member votes/abstains contrary to whip without prior permission, disqualification can be avoided if party condones the act within 15 days. Condonation must be explicit; implied approval insufficient. This allows parties flexibility to handle genuine dissent while maintaining discipline on critical votes.
Answer: one-third
Original Tenth Schedule allowed 'split' if 1/3 of legislature party members defected. 91st Amendment (2003) deleted this provision to curb defections. Now, only 'merger' exception (2/3 rule) remains. Also added Article 75(1B)/164(1B): Defectors cannot be appointed ministers until re-elected or term ends. Strengthened anti-defection regime.
Answer: True
Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992): SC upheld constitutional validity of Tenth Schedule but held: (a) Speaker's decision subject to judicial review on grounds of mala fides, perversity, violation of constitutional mandates, (b) Judicial intervention only after final decision by Speaker (not interim), (c) Courts can grant interim stay in exceptional cases. Balances legislative autonomy with constitutional accountability.
Answer: two-thirds
Paragraph 4 of Tenth Schedule: Merger exception - disqualification doesn't apply if original party merges with another party, OR if not less than 2/3 of members of legislature party agree to merge. This allows genuine ideological realignments while preventing small-group defections. 91st Amendment removed 'split' exception (1/3 rule) to curb defections.
Answer: Flexible federalism with Union supremacy in national interest
Indian federalism: (a) Division of powers via three Lists, but residuary powers with Union, (b) States have executive/legislative autonomy in State List, but Union can legislate during Emergency/with Rajya Sabha resolution, (c) Financial autonomy via tax devolution, but Finance Commission and GST Council ensure coordination, (d) Governor as bridge between Centre-State. Designed for unity in diversity: flexible enough for regional needs, strong enough for national challenges.
Answer: 1
Article 352(4): Emergency proclamation must be approved within one month by both Houses with special majority: (a) majority of total membership of each House, AND (b) 2/3 of members present and voting. If Lok Sabha is dissolved, Rajya Sabha approves, but Lok Sabha must approve within 30 days of reconstitution. 44th Amendment (1978) tightened approval requirements to prevent misuse like 1975 Emergency.
Answer: Article 303
Article 301: Freedom of trade/commerce/intercourse throughout India. Article 302: Parliament may impose restrictions in public interest. Article 303(1): Neither Parliament nor State Legislature can make law giving preference to one State over another or discriminating between States by virtue of any entry in Lists. Exception: Article 303(2) allows preference to address scarcity of goods. Balances economic unity with regulatory needs.
Answer: propriety
Article 360(3): During Financial Emergency, President may issue directions to States: (a) observe canons of financial propriety, (b) reduce salaries of government servants including HC Judges, (c) reserve Money Bills for Presidential consideration. Never invoked in India. Designed to protect national financial stability while respecting judicial independence through other safeguards.
Answer: True
SR Bommai v. Union of India (1994): Landmark 9-judge bench judgment: (a) Presidential satisfaction under Article 356 subject to judicial review, (b) Proclamation can be struck down if mala fide or based on irrelevant grounds, (c) Floor test is primary method to test majority, (d) Assembly dissolution not automatic; can be revived if proclamation invalidated. Curbed arbitrary use of Article 356.