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: True
Article 64 states that the Vice President is the ex-officio Chairman of Rajya Sabha. They vote only in case of a tie (casting vote), unlike the Speaker of Lok Sabha.
Answer: True
Though not explicitly mentioned, judicial review is an inherent power of the Supreme Court (Articles 13, 32, 131-136) and High Courts (Article 226) to examine constitutionality of laws and executive actions.
Answer: True
The 42nd Constitutional Amendment (1976) added Part IVA (Article 51A) containing 10 Fundamental Duties, based on the Swaran Singh Committee recommendations. One more duty was added by the 86th Amendment (2002).
Answer: True
Under Article 85(2)(b), the President dissolves the Lok Sabha on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers headed by the PM. This is a conventional executive power.
Answer: True
Preamble as educational tool: (a) Concise summary: 85 words capture Constitution's soul - source of authority, political system, core values, (b) Civic education: NCERT textbooks feature Preamble prominently; schools conduct Preamble recitation to instill constitutional values, (c) Public discourse: Politicians, activists, judges cite Preamble to frame arguments, (d) Limitation: Preamble alone insufficient; understanding requires study of operative provisions, institutional design, historical context. Balance: Preamble as entry point, not substitute for constitutional literacy.
Answer: True
Preamble jurisprudence evolution: (a) Berubari Union case (1960): Preamble not part of Constitution; merely introductory, (b) Kesavananda Bharati (1973): Overruled Berubari; Preamble is part of Constitution, amendable but basic structure unamendable, interpretive aid, (c) Subsequent cases: Used Preamble to interpret FRs (privacy as part of liberty), strike down amendments violating secularism/federalism, affirm transformative vision. Illustrates living constitutionalism: judicial understanding adapts to societal needs while preserving core values.
Answer: True
Preamble and basic structure: (a) Kesavananda Bharati (1973): Basic structure includes supremacy of Constitution, republican/democratic form, secularism, federalism, separation of powers, judicial review - many derived from Preamble values, (b) Subsequent cases: Minerva Mills (balance of FRs-DPSP), SR Bommai (federalism, secularism), Puttaswamy (privacy as part of liberty) reaffirm Preamble values as basic features, (c) Effect: Parliament cannot amend Constitution to destroy these Preamble-based values. Preamble thus provides substantive content to basic structure doctrine.
Answer: False
Preamble justiciability: (a) Kesavananda Bharati (1973): Preamble is part of Constitution but not enforceable by itself, (b) Role: Interpretive aid for ambiguous provisions, source of constitutional philosophy, limit on amending power (basic structure), (c) Not standalone cause of action: Citizens must invoke specific provisions (Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles) for relief; Preamble supports interpretation. Distinction: Preamble expresses values; operative provisions create enforceable rights. Ensures judicial review grounded in text, not abstract philosophy.
Answer: True
Indian secularism model: (a) Not 'wall of separation' like USA (strict non-interference), (b) 'Principled distance': State has no religion but can intervene to: (i) Abolish discriminatory practices (untouchability, triple talaq), (ii) Regulate secular aspects of religion (temple entry, management), (iii) Promote equality within religious communities, (c) Constitutional basis: Articles 25-28 (religious freedom with reasonable restrictions), Preamble (secularism added 1976). Balances religious freedom with social reform and individual rights.
Answer: True
Preamble and basic structure doctrine: (a) Kesavananda Bharati (1973): Preamble contains basic features (sovereignty, democracy, secularism, federalism, etc.), (b) Parliament can amend Constitution under Article 368, but cannot alter basic structure, (c) If amendment violates Preamble's core values (e.g., removing democracy, secularism), courts can strike it down despite procedural compliance. Preamble thus serves as substantive limit on amending power, not just interpretive aid.
Answer: True
Preamble liberty operationalization: (a) Thought/expression: Article 19(1)(a) - freedom of speech, (b) Belief/faith/worship: Articles 25-28 - religious freedom, (c) Assembly/association: Articles 19(1)(b)-(c), (d) Movement/residence: Articles 19(1)(d)-(e). However, liberties subject to reasonable restrictions (Articles 19(2)-(6)) for sovereignty, security, public order, morality. Preamble sets aspirational vision; Fundamental Rights provide enforceable mechanisms.
Answer: True
42nd Amendment (1976): Added three words to Preamble: (a) 'Socialist' - reflecting commitment to mixed economy and welfare state, (b) 'Secular' - State has no religion, equal respect for all faiths, (c) 'Integrity' - national unity beyond sovereignty. Original Preamble (1950) had 'Sovereign Democratic Republic'; now 'Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic'. Preamble amendment subject to basic structure limitation (Kesavananda).
Answer: False
Sevottam model (Service Delivery Excellence): Voluntary framework by DARPG with three modules: (a) Citizen's Charter: Commitment to service standards, (b) Public Grievance Redress: Mechanism for feedback/complaints, (c) Service Delivery Capability: Assess and improve organizational capacity. Departments can seek Sevottam certification after assessment. Not mandatory; adoption varies. Aims to promote culture of citizen-centric governance through continuous improvement, not compliance-driven certification.
Answer: False
Speaking orders requirement (Indian position): (a) Not universally mandated by Constitution, but (b) Courts have held: (i) Quasi-judicial decisions must contain reasons (natural justice), (ii) Administrative decisions affecting rights should give reasons to enable judicial review, (iii) Statutes may expressly require reasoned orders. Benefits: Transparency, accountability, better decision-making, facilitates appeal. Trend: Increasing judicial emphasis on reasoned decisions as part of fair procedure under Article 14/21.
Answer: True
Right to Public Services Acts (State-level legislation): First enacted by Madhya Pradesh (2010); now adopted by 20+ States. Features: (a) Notify list of services with timeframes (e.g., caste certificate: 7 days, ration card: 15 days), (b) Designate responsible officers, (c) Penalty for delays (deduction from salary), (d) Appeal mechanism for citizens. Not a Central law; varies by State. Aims to reduce corruption, improve accountability in service delivery. Challenges: Limited service coverage, weak penalty enforcement, awareness gaps.
Answer: False
Estoppel against State (Indian position): Doctrine applies with limitations: (a) State can resile from promise if: (i) Promise ultra vires statutory power, (ii) Resiling necessary for public interest, (iii) No fraud/mala fides in original promise, (b) Remedy: Fair hearing before withdrawal, or compensation for reliance loss (legitimate expectation doctrine). Balances citizen protection with State's need for policy flexibility in public interest. Illustrates nuanced administrative law: rights protection without paralyzing governance.
Answer: True
Outcome Budgeting (Ministry of Finance initiative): Key features: (a) Ministries specify measurable outcomes for each scheme/programme, (b) Performance indicators to track progress, (c) Mid-year reviews to assess implementation, (d) Public disclosure of outcomes for accountability. Aims to improve efficiency: funds allocated based on results, not just expenditure. Challenges: Data quality, attribution of outcomes, capacity for monitoring. Part of broader public financial management reforms.
Answer: True
Wednesbury principle (Associated Provincial Picture Houses v. Wednesbury Corporation, 1948; applied in India): Courts can intervene if administrative decision is: (a) So unreasonable that no reasonable authority could have made it, (b) Based on irrelevant considerations or ignoring relevant ones, (c) Mala fide or arbitrary. High threshold: Courts don't substitute their wisdom for administrators'; only check for extreme irrationality. Balances judicial oversight with respect for executive expertise.
Answer: True
Mission Karmayogi (National Programme for Civil Services Capacity Building): Key features: (a) Shift from 'rules-based' to 'roles-based' HR management, (b) Competency framework: Define skills needed for each post, (c) iGOT platform: Digital learning modules for continuous training, (d) Performance management: Link training to career progression. Aims to create future-ready civil servants capable of handling complex governance challenges. Implementation ongoing across Ministries/States.
Answer: True
Natural justice principles: (a) Audi alteram partem (hear the other side): Right to notice, hearing, representation before adverse decision, (b) Nemo judex in causa sua (no one judge in own cause): Rule against bias. Supreme Court has held these principles implicit in Article 14 (equality) and Article 21 (fair procedure); apply to administrative/quasi-judicial decisions unless expressly excluded by statute. Ensures fairness in governance.