Question 1

Under the Constitution of India, who appoints the Chairman and other members of a State Public Service Commission?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Public Service Commissions are important constitutional bodies responsible for recruitment to civil services at the Union and State levels. The Constitution lays down clear provisions for their composition, appointment and removal to ensure independence and impartiality. This question asks who appoints the Chairman and other members of a State Public Service Commission, testing your knowledge of the constitutional framework for these institutions. Given Data / Assumptions: - The question is about a State Public Service Commission, not the Union Public Service Commission. - The options include the Chief Minister of the State, the Governor of the State, the Chief Justice of the High Court and the Vice President of India. - The relevant Constitutional provisions are mainly in Articles 315 to 323. - It is assumed that the learner understands that appointment powers for constitutional officers are often vested in the Governor or President, rather than in the Chief Minister or judges. Concept / Approach: Article 316 of the Constitution of India states that the Chairman and other members of a State Public Service Commission are appointed by the Governor of the State. The Governor acts in a constitutional capacity, usually on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, but formally the appointment order is issued in the Governor's name. Neither the Chief Minister nor the Chief Justice of the High Court nor the Vice President has the formal power to make such appointments. The approach is to recall this specific provision and identify the Governor as the appointing authority. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that State Public Service Commissions are created under Article 315 and that Article 316 deals with appointment and term of office of members. Step 2: Article 316 specifies that the Chairman and other members of a State Public Service Commission shall be appointed by the Governor of the State. Step 3: The Chief Minister heads the Council of Ministers and may advise the Governor, but the formal appointment power is not vested directly in the Chief Minister. Step 4: The Chief Justice of the High Court has no constitutional role in appointing members of the State Public Service Commission; the judiciary is separate from this process. Step 5: The Vice President of India is a Union level office and does not appoint officials to State constitutional bodies such as State Public Service Commissions. Step 6: Therefore, the correct answer is that the Governor of the State appoints the Chairman and members of the State Public Service Commission. Verification / Alternative check: Verification can be done by reading Article 316 in any authoritative text of the Constitution or a standard polity textbook. It clearly states that the Governor appoints the Chairman and other members of the State Public Service Commission. The same sources also explain that the removal process involves the President in certain circumstances, but the initial appointment is in the Governor's domain. The absence of any mention of the Chief Minister, Chief Justice or Vice President in this context confirms that the Governor is the correct appointing authority. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A, Chief Minister of the State, is wrong because although the Chief Minister is the political head of the State government, the constitutional power to appoint the Commission's members is formally given to the Governor. Option C, Chief Justice of the High Court, is wrong because the judiciary does not appoint members of the State Public Service Commission; its role is separate from the executive and constitutional appointment functions in this context. Option D, Vice President of India, is wrong because the Vice President is a Union level authority, mainly associated with the Rajya Sabha, and does not appoint State Public Service Commission members. Common Pitfalls: A common pitfall is to assume that because the Chief Minister is the main executive authority in the State, the Chief Minister must directly appoint all important State officials. Another error is to confuse the role of the Governor with that of the President or to overlook the specific Constitutional Article that spells out the appointment power. To avoid these mistakes, students should remember that for State Public Service Commissions, appointment is by the Governor under Article 316, and removal in certain situations involves the President, reflecting a balance between State and Union involvement. Final Answer: The Chairman and other members of a State Public Service Commission are appointed by the Governor of the State.

Question 2

Who was the first Indian to be elected to the leadership of the Communist International (Comintern) and to play a prominent role in its activities?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The Communist International, often called the Comintern, was an international communist organisation that sought to coordinate communist parties around the world in the early twentieth century. Indians also participated in its activities, and one Indian revolutionary achieved a high position within the organisation. This question asks you to identify the first Indian to be elected to the leadership of the Communist International and to play an important role in it. Given Data / Assumptions: - The options include four well known Indian political figures: Jawaharlal Nehru, P. C. Joshi, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and M. N. Roy. - The question is specifically about leadership within the Communist International, not general national politics in India. - The learner is expected to know the association of M. N. Roy with international communist movements. - It is assumed that Nehru and Patel were leading figures in the Indian National Congress and not in the leadership of the Comintern. Concept / Approach: Manabendra Nath Roy, commonly known as M. N. Roy, was an Indian revolutionary who became an important figure in international communism. He participated in the early years of the Communist International, contributed to its ideological debates and held positions within its leadership. Jawaharlal Nehru and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel were central to the Indian National Congress and the freedom movement, while P. C. Joshi was a leader of the Communist Party of India but did not hold early Comintern leadership roles in the same way as M. N. Roy. The approach is to associate the Comintern specifically with M. N. Roy. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify which of the listed individuals is most closely associated with international communist movements rather than mainstream Indian nationalism. Step 2: Recognise that M. N. Roy was an Indian communist thinker and revolutionary who went abroad, participated in the Mexican Revolution and then became involved with the Communist International. Step 3: Recall that he was among the early leaders in the Comintern and contributed to formulating its policies on colonial and national questions. Step 4: Jawaharlal Nehru and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel were prominent leaders of the Indian National Congress and later independent India, but not leaders of the Comintern. Step 5: P. C. Joshi was a leading figure in the Communist Party of India, especially in later decades, but he was not the first Indian elected to the leadership of the Comintern. Step 6: Therefore, the correct answer is M. N. Roy. Verification / Alternative check: Historical accounts of the global communist movement and biographies of M. N. Roy highlight his role in the early years of the Communist International. They describe his membership in the executive and his participation in congresses and debates on colonial policy. In contrast, Nehru and Patel are documented as Congress leaders focused primarily on Indian nationalism, and P. C. Joshi is remembered as a later leader of the Communist Party of India. This clear distinction confirms that M. N. Roy was the first Indian to be in Comintern leadership. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A, Jawaharlal Nehru, is wrong because although Nehru had socialist sympathies and attended some international conferences, he was not a leader of the Communist International. Option B, P. C. Joshi, is wrong because his leadership was mainly within the Communist Party of India, and there is no record of him being the first Indian elected to the leadership of the Comintern. Option C, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, is wrong because he was a key leader in the Indian National Congress and later served as Deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister of India, not as a leader of the Communist International. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes associate any leader with socialist leanings or connections to left movements with international communist institutions without distinguishing specific roles. Another common pitfall is to overlook figures like M. N. Roy who were very influential internationally but less prominent in standard narratives of the Indian freedom struggle compared to Nehru and Patel. To avoid such mistakes, it is helpful to remember that the early international communist movement had a distinct set of leaders and that M. N. Roy is a key Indian name in that context. Final Answer: The first Indian to be elected to the leadership of the Communist International and to play a prominent role in it was M. N. Roy.

Question 3

Who was serving as the President of the Indian National Congress at the time of Indian independence in August 1947?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The Indian National Congress played a central role in the freedom struggle and had a tradition of electing Presidents for various sessions. At key historical moments, the identity of the Congress President can be an important fact for examinations. This question asks who was the President of the Indian National Congress at the time of Indian independence in August 1947, just as British rule ended and India became independent. Given Data / Assumptions: - The options include Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, J. B. Kripalani, Jawaharlal Nehru and Rajendra Prasad. - The specific time point is around August 1947, when India gained independence. - The learner is expected to distinguish between Congress Presidents of different years and those who later held high offices in independent India. - It is assumed that the Congress session and leadership immediately before independence is being referred to. Concept / Approach: J. B. Kripalani, also known as Acharya Kripalani, was the President of the Indian National Congress at the time of independence. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad had served as Congress President earlier during critical years of the freedom movement. Jawaharlal Nehru and Rajendra Prasad also held the Congress presidency at different times but not at the specific moment of independence. The approach is to recall that Kripalani presided over the Congress during the crucial transition to independence. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that different leaders served as Congress Presidents at various annual sessions, with names rotating across years. Step 2: Maulana Abul Kalam Azad was Congress President in the early 1940s, including periods around the Quit India Movement, but by 1947 a different leader had taken over. Step 3: Jawaharlal Nehru served as Congress President in several earlier years and later became the first Prime Minister of independent India, but he was not holding the presidency at the moment of independence. Step 4: Rajendra Prasad served as Congress President around the time of the Constituent Assembly and later became the first President of India, but again he was not the Congress President in August 1947. Step 5: J. B. Kripalani was elected President of the Indian National Congress during the period immediately preceding and coinciding with independence in 1947. Step 6: Therefore, the correct answer is J. B. Kripalani. Verification / Alternative check: Historical records of Congress sessions and standard modern Indian history textbooks list J. B. Kripalani as the Congress President at the time of independence. They mention his interactions with other leaders during the transfer of power and his role in representing the Congress at that critical juncture. Maulana Azad, Nehru and Prasad are listed as Presidents for other years and contexts, which confirms that Kripalani held the office in 1947. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, is wrong because although he was an important Congress President and a towering leader, his term in that office ended before independence. Option C, Jawaharlal Nehru, is wrong because he was not Congress President in August 1947, although he became the first Prime Minister of India at that time. Option D, Rajendra Prasad, is wrong because he was not the Congress President at independence; he later became President of the Constituent Assembly and then the first President of the Republic of India. Common Pitfalls: A common pitfall is to assume that major national leaders like Nehru or Azad must have been Congress President at every significant moment, including independence, without recalling the exact sequence of office holders. Another error is to confuse the roles of Congress President, Prime Minister and President of India, which are distinct offices. To avoid these mistakes, students should memorise a short list of Congress Presidents corresponding to key events like the Non Cooperation Movement, Quit India Movement and independence. Final Answer: At the time of Indian independence in August 1947, the President of the Indian National Congress was J. B. Kripalani.

Question 4

According to the Constitution of India, what is the maximum total strength (sanctioned membership) of the Council of States (Rajya Sabha)?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The Constitution of India specifies the composition and maximum strength of both Houses of Parliament. For the Council of States (Rajya Sabha), there is a defined upper limit on the total number of members. This question tests your knowledge of that maximum strength, which is an important basic fact in Indian polity. Given Data / Assumptions: - The question refers to the maximum total strength, not the current actual membership. - The House in question is the Council of States, also called the Rajya Sabha. - The options provided are 250, 260, 270 and 280. - It is assumed that the learner knows that a portion of the Rajya Sabha members are nominated and the rest are elected by State legislatures and certain Union Territories. Concept / Approach: Article 80 of the Constitution of India lays down the composition of the Rajya Sabha. It specifies that the total number of members in the Rajya Sabha shall not exceed 250, of which up to 238 are to represent the States and Union Territories and up to 12 may be nominated by the President from persons having special knowledge or practical experience in fields such as literature, science, art and social service. The approach is to recall this constitutional cap of 250 and identify it among the options. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that the Rajya Sabha is the Upper House of Parliament and is a permanent body, with one third of its members retiring every two years. Step 2: Article 80 specifies the maximum number of members, dividing them into elected and nominated categories. Step 3: The maximum total strength is given as 250 members, comprising up to 238 elected and up to 12 nominated members. Step 4: This maximum is a constitutional limit; the actual working strength may be slightly lower if certain seats are vacant or not fully allocated. Step 5: Among the options 250, 260, 270 and 280, only 250 matches the constitutional maximum. Step 6: Therefore, the correct answer is 250. Verification / Alternative check: Verification can be done by consulting Article 80 in the Constitution or checking standard polity references, which clearly state that the Rajya Sabha shall not consist of more than 250 members. These sources also explain the breakdown between nominated and elected members. No reputable reference mentions higher figures like 260, 270 or 280 as the maximum strength, which confirms that 250 is correct. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option B, 260, is wrong because the Constitution does not authorise such a high maximum; 260 exceeds the specified cap. Option C, 270, is wrong for the same reason; it is higher than the constitutional maximum of 250 members. Option D, 280, is also wrong because it significantly overshoots the maximum strength set by Article 80 and has no basis in law. Common Pitfalls: A common pitfall is to confuse the maximum strength with the actual current membership or to mix up the figures for the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha. Students may also assume that because India's population has grown, the maximum strength might have been increased, even though the constitutional text has not been amended in this respect. To avoid such errors, it is important to memorise the basic numbers: maximum 250 for the Rajya Sabha and a higher separate figure for the Lok Sabha. Final Answer: The maximum total strength of the Council of States (Rajya Sabha) under the Constitution of India is 250 members.

Question 5

In the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India, the subject “Population control and family planning” appears in which of the following lists?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India allocates legislative subjects between the Union and the States through the Union List, State List and Concurrent List. Some subjects, especially those involving social policy and welfare, are placed in the Concurrent List so that both levels of government can legislate. This question asks in which list the subject Population control and family planning appears. Given Data / Assumptions: - The subject named is Population control and family planning. - The options are Union List, State List, Global List and Concurrent List. - The question is about the allocation of legislative competence between Union and States. - It is assumed that the learner knows that some health and social welfare topics are in the Concurrent List. Concept / Approach: Population control and family planning affect the nation as a whole but also require local implementation and tailoring to State conditions. Therefore, the Constitution places this subject in the Concurrent List, allowing both Parliament and State legislatures to make laws on it. The Union can set broad policy and national programmes, while States can adapt and implement them. The Union List is reserved for subjects like defence and foreign affairs; the State List is for topics such as police and local public order. The term Global List has no constitutional meaning. The approach is to recall that Population control and family planning is specifically listed in the Concurrent List. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recognise that population control and family planning are social policy issues that require cooperation between Union and State governments. Step 2: Recall that the Concurrent List is designed for such subjects, allowing both levels of government to legislate. Step 3: Note that the Union List typically includes matters of national sovereignty, defence, external affairs, currency and large scale communications, not specific social programmes like family planning. Step 4: Understand that the State List covers subjects primarily of State and local significance, such as police, public health in many respects and local government, but Population control and family planning has been explicitly placed in the Concurrent List. Step 5: Recognise that there is no category called Global List in the Constitution of India; this option is clearly invalid. Step 6: Therefore, the correct answer is the Concurrent List. Verification / Alternative check: Standard polity textbooks and summaries of the Seventh Schedule list Population control and family planning as one of the entries in the Concurrent List. They often highlight it as an example of how both Union and States have roles in social welfare and health policy. None of these references place it in the Union or State Lists, and there is no mention of a Global List in the Constitution. This confirms that the Concurrent List is correct. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A, Union List, is wrong because while the Union may run national family planning programmes, the subject is formally placed in the Concurrent List, not exclusively under Union competence. Option B, State List, is wrong because although States play an important role in implementation, the subject is not solely their domain; it is jointly shared and therefore in the Concurrent List. Option C, Global List, is wrong because no such list exists in the Indian Constitution; it is not a recognised category for distribution of legislative powers. Common Pitfalls: A common pitfall is to assume that because family planning is often implemented by State health departments, it must be in the State List, overlooking the role of central schemes and funding. Another error is to place all health related topics into the same list without remembering that some, such as Population control and family planning, are deliberately placed in the Concurrent List. To avoid such mistakes, students should memorise a few key examples for each list, with family planning clearly associated with the Concurrent List. Final Answer: The subject Population control and family planning is listed in the Concurrent List in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India.

Question 6

The Twelfth Five-Year Plan of India, the last plan formulated under the Planning Commission framework, covered which of the following time periods?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: India followed a system of Five-Year Plans for economic development for several decades, coordinated first by the Planning Commission and later by the NITI Aayog framework. The Twelfth Five-Year Plan was the final plan under the traditional Planning Commission system. This question asks you to identify the exact five-year period covered by the Twelfth Plan. Given Data / Assumptions: - The options are four different five-year periods: 2007–2012, 2012–2017, 2015–2020 and 2005–2010. - The question is specific to the Twelfth (12th) Five-Year Plan, not earlier plans. - It is assumed that the learner is familiar with the approximate timeline of Five-Year Plans in India. - The Eleventh Plan preceded the Twelfth, and the Twelfth was the last in the traditional sequence. Concept / Approach: The Eleventh Five-Year Plan covered the period 2007–2012. Following that, the Twelfth Five-Year Plan began in 2012 and was scheduled to run until 2017. After this period, the traditional Five-Year Plan model was discontinued and replaced by a different planning framework. Therefore, the Twelfth Plan corresponds to the years 2012–2017. The other time spans given either belong to the Eleventh Plan or do not correspond to any classic plan period. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that the Eleventh Five-Year Plan was for the years 2007–2012. Step 2: The Twelfth Five-Year Plan logically follows and therefore begins in 2012. Step 3: Since each plan covers a five-year period, the Twelfth Plan must extend from 2012 to 2017. Step 4: Option A, 2007–2012, matches the period of the Eleventh Plan, not the Twelfth. Step 5: Option C, 2015–2020, does not match any official Five-Year Plan period under the Planning Commission framework. Step 6: Option D, 2005–2010, also does not align with the Eleventh or Twelfth Plans and instead overlaps with earlier periods. Step 7: Therefore, the Twelfth Five-Year Plan corresponds to 2012–2017. Verification / Alternative check: Economic survey documents and standard economic history references for India list out the sequence of plans: Tenth Plan (2002–2007), Eleventh Plan (2007–2012) and Twelfth Plan (2012–2017). They also note that after 2017, the country moved away from the Five-Year Plan model. No authoritative source associates the Twelfth Plan with the periods 2005–2010 or 2015–2020, confirming that 2012–2017 is correct. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A, 2007–2012, is wrong because it corresponds to the Eleventh Five-Year Plan, not the Twelfth. Option C, 2015–2020, is wrong because there was no formally designated Five-Year Plan for these years under the Planning Commission system; by this time, the planning model had changed. Option D, 2005–2010, is wrong because it does not match the official span of any of the later plans and overlaps with periods already assigned to earlier plans. Common Pitfalls: A common pitfall is to lose track of the numbering of plans and their corresponding years, especially since the Eleventh and Twelfth Plans spanned years close to each other and overlapped with major global economic events. Another error is to assume that Five-Year Plans continued unbroken into the 2020s, leading to incorrect choices like 2015–2020. To avoid such mistakes, students should memorise a brief timeline of the last few plans, particularly the Eleventh and Twelfth, and note that 2012–2017 was the final traditional Five-Year Plan period. Final Answer: The Twelfth Five-Year Plan of India covered the period from 2012–2017.

Question 7

In a unitary form of government, all powers of governance are constitutionally concentrated in the hands of which level of government?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Political science distinguishes between federal and unitary forms of government based on how power is distributed between different levels of government. In a federal system, powers are divided between central and regional governments by the Constitution. In a unitary system, power is organised quite differently. This question asks you to state in whose hands all powers are concentrated in a unitary form of government. Given Data / Assumptions: - The question is about a unitary form of government, not a federal system. - The options are local government, central government, provincial or State government and Panchayats. - It is assumed that the learner understands that a unitary system typically has one supreme central authority. - Examples of unitary states include countries where regional bodies derive their powers from the central authority rather than from the Constitution directly. Concept / Approach: In a unitary government, all legal powers are concentrated in the central or national government. Regional or local authorities may exist, but they exercise only those powers that the central government chooses to delegate, and these powers can often be altered or withdrawn by ordinary law. This is different from a federal system, where the Constitution itself divides powers between the central and State governments, making both levels coordinate and independent within their respective spheres. Therefore, in a unitary system, the central government is supreme and holds the ultimate authority. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall the basic definition of a unitary system: a system in which sovereignty and ultimate law making power are vested in a single central authority. Step 2: Recognise that in such a system, provinces, States, municipalities or Panchayats, if they exist, do so by virtue of laws made by the central authority and can be reorganised or abolished by it. Step 3: Understand that local government and Panchayats are subordinate bodies that operate within what the central authority or, in some systems, a delegated authority allows; they do not hold ultimate constitutional power. Step 4: Note that the term provincial or State government suggests a federal or quasi federal arrangement where States have constitutionally guaranteed powers, which is not typical of a purely unitary state. Step 5: Since the question asks in whose hands all powers are concentrated, the answer must be the central government in the unitary model. Step 6: Therefore, the correct answer is that powers are concentrated in the hands of the central government. Verification / Alternative check: Textbooks on political science and Indian polity explain that in a unitary state, the central government is legally supreme and that any sub national units exercise only those powers which it chooses to grant. Classic examples of unitary states include systems where the national parliament can alter regional boundaries and competences by ordinary law. These descriptions consistently emphasise that all powers flow from the central government, which confirms that central government is the correct answer for this question. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option A, local government, is wrong because local bodies in a unitary system are subordinate institutions created by the central authority and do not hold all powers themselves. Option C, provincial or State government, is wrong because this description is more appropriate for federal systems where States have constitutionally protected powers, which is not the defining feature of a unitary government. Option D, Panchayats, is wrong because Panchayats are local self government institutions at the village level and are subordinate to higher levels of government; they do not constitute the central authority in any form of government. Common Pitfalls: A common pitfall is to confuse the presence of local or provincial bodies with federalism, without examining whether their powers are constitutionally guaranteed or merely delegated. Another mistake is to think that any system with elected local bodies shares power equally among levels, even if the central government can legally override them. For exam purposes, students should remember that unitary means centralised power, whereas federal means divided power between central and State governments under the Constitution. Final Answer: In a unitary form of government, all powers are concentrated in the hands of the central government.

Question 8

In the Constitution of India, which Constitutional Amendment Act specifically deals with the disqualification of Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of Legislative Assemblies (MLAs) on the ground of defection?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The question asks about the specific Constitutional Amendment Act that introduced clear provisions for the disqualification of Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assemblies on the ground of defection. This is an important topic in Indian Polity as it relates to party discipline, stability of governments, and the anti defection law which every competitive exam frequently tests. Understanding which amendment did what helps you remember the major constitutional changes in a structured way. Given Data / Assumptions: We are dealing with the Constitution of India. The focus is on disqualification of MPs and MLAs. The ground of disqualification is defection from a political party. Options mention various Constitutional Amendment Acts by number. Concept / Approach: The approach is to recall which amendment introduced the anti defection provisions. The anti defection law is mainly contained in the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution. This schedule was not part of the original Constitution. It was added later through a specific Constitutional Amendment Act that came in the mid nineteen eighties. Candidates must link the Tenth Schedule with the correct amendment number and year, and then eliminate the remaining options which correspond to other reforms like the mini Constitution, reservation extensions or other structural changes. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that the anti defection law is contained in the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution of India. Step 2: Remember that the Tenth Schedule was added by the Fifty Second Constitutional Amendment Act in the year 1985. Step 3: The Fifty Second Amendment laid down when an elected member is considered to have defected, such as voluntarily giving up membership of a party or voting contrary to the party whip without permission. Step 4: Therefore, the amendment that specifically deals with disqualification of MPs and MLAs on grounds of defection is the 52nd Amendment Act. Step 5: Compare with other amendments in the options to make sure they refer to different subjects and not the anti defection law. Verification / Alternative check: A simple memory check method is to pair the number fifty two with the phrase anti defection and Tenth Schedule. Many standard polity textbooks and exam notes list the 52nd Amendment Act of 1985 as the one that inserted the Tenth Schedule. Cross reference with the fact that a later amendment, the Ninety First Amendment Act, further strengthened the anti defection framework but did not originally introduce it. This confirms that the 52nd Amendment is the correct answer for the first appearance of the anti defection law. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 42nd Amendment Act: Known as the mini Constitution. It made wide ranging changes in 1976 including changes in Preamble, Directive Principles and powers of the Supreme Court, but it did not introduce the Tenth Schedule on defection. 62nd Amendment Act: Mainly associated with extension of reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies, not with disqualification for defection. 32nd Amendment Act: This amendment relates to certain special provisions for some states and is not connected with the anti defection law. 44th Amendment Act: This amendment rolled back several provisions of the 42nd Amendment and strengthened civil liberties and emergency provisions, but did not insert the Tenth Schedule. Common Pitfalls: Many learners confuse the 42nd and 52nd Amendments because both are famous and both numbers sound similar. Another common mistake is to assume that a very prominent amendment like the 42nd, called the mini Constitution, must automatically be the answer for anything structural. Relying on guesswork like that often leads to errors. It is better to create small mental associations, for example: 10th Schedule, anti defection, 52nd Amendment, year 1985, to lock the idea clearly in memory. Final Answer: The Constitutional Amendment Act that deals with disqualification of MPs and MLAs on the ground of defection is the 52nd Amendment Act.

Question 9

Which State government launched the Smart Village Programme with the aim of improving public facilities, basic amenities and infrastructure in rural villages?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question checks awareness of recent governance initiatives and flagship schemes launched by State governments in India. The Smart Village idea focuses on improving quality of life in rural areas by providing better infrastructure, connectivity and services. Examinations often ask which State started a particular named programme, so it is useful to connect the scheme name with the correct State government and leadership. Given Data / Assumptions: The scheme is called the Smart Village Programme. It is a State government initiative, not a private project. The goal is to improve public facilities in villages. We must identify which State government launched it. Concept / Approach: The approach is to recall the political and administrative context in which the Smart Village idea was highlighted. In India, states like Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh have often branded development programmes with terms like smart village and smart city. However, the specific Smart Village Programme mentioned in many exam oriented sources is associated with the Gujarat government, which aimed to transform selected villages through convergence of various schemes and community participation. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall major State level initiatives that used the phrase smart village in their official titles. Step 2: Connect the Smart Village Programme with Gujarat, where the government launched a formal programme to convert villages into smart entities by strengthening amenities such as sanitation, health, education, roads and digital connectivity. Step 3: Cross check with memory of news and policy notes that often mention Gujarat as an early mover in smart village and smart city campaigns. Step 4: Eliminate other States in the options that are better known for different flagship rural schemes, not specifically the Smart Village Programme with this branding. Verification / Alternative check: If you are unsure, you can use a simple cross reference trick. Many practice questions and online quizzes directly pair the phrase Smart Village Programme with Gujarat. The scheme is listed among important initiatives of the Gujarat government to improve village level infrastructure. Remember that individual districts and other States might also run projects related to smart villages, but the exam reference is to the named State government programme most commonly cited, which is from Gujarat. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Maharashtra: Although Maharashtra has many rural development schemes, the main branded Smart Village Programme referred to in standard GK questions is linked to Gujarat, not Maharashtra. Rajasthan: Rajasthan focuses on schemes like Bhamashah and rural employment programmes, but it is not the main State cited for launching the specific Smart Village Programme. Odisha: Odisha runs several welfare and rural schemes, yet the phrase Smart Village Programme in exam books usually does not refer to Odisha initiatives. Andhra Pradesh: Andhra Pradesh has promoted the idea of smart villages in various contexts and pilots, but the commonly tested Smart Village Programme in this question is attributed to the Gujarat government. Common Pitfalls: The main confusion comes from the fact that more than one State may talk about smart villages in policy speeches or pilot projects. Students sometimes over generalise news about smart agriculture or smart village movements in other regions and wrongly attribute the programme. To avoid this, tie the exact phrase Smart Village Programme in capital letters to Gujarat in your notes. Another pitfall is confusing it with central government campaigns, but here the stem clearly says State government, which is an important clue. Final Answer: The Smart Village Programme to improve public facilities in villages was launched by the Government of Gujarat.

Question 10

Under the Constitution of India, in consultation with which authority does the President convene and prorogue all sessions of Parliament?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question examines understanding of how the Indian parliamentary system actually functions in practice and under the Constitution. While the President of India is the formal head of state and the authority who summons and prorogues Parliament, the real power in a parliamentary democracy lies with the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister. Knowing whose advice is binding on the President is crucial for many polity questions. Given Data / Assumptions: The subject is convening and proroguing sessions of Parliament. The authority mentioned in the question is the President of India. We need to identify in whose consultation or on whose advice this power is exercised. The options include various constitutional offices and bodies. Concept / Approach: Article 74 of the Constitution provides that there shall be a Council of Ministers with the Prime Minister at the head to aid and advise the President, and that the President shall act in accordance with such advice. This applies to almost all executive actions, including summoning and proroguing Parliament and dissolving the Lok Sabha. Therefore, even though the Constitution phrases the powers formally in the name of the President, those powers are in substance exercised on the advice of the Council of Ministers. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that Articles 85 and 174 relate to the summoning and prorogation of Parliament and State legislatures respectively. Step 2: Article 85 states that the President shall from time to time summon each House of Parliament to meet at such time and place as he thinks fit. Step 3: Combine this with Article 74 which makes the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister binding on the President. Step 4: Therefore, the President convenes and prorogues sessions of Parliament in consultation with, and on the advice of, the Council of Ministers, not on the personal decision of any other authority listed in the options. Verification / Alternative check: In any parliament based system derived from the Westminster model, the head of state is bound by the advice of the cabinet. India follows this pattern. A good verification trick is to remember that the President does not act independently on routine political matters such as fixing the parliamentary calendar. Instead, the cabinet through the Prime Minister recommends the session dates and the President issues the formal order. This is consistent with the principle of responsible government where the Council of Ministers is accountable to the Lok Sabha. Why Other Options Are Wrong: The Speaker of the Lok Sabha: The Speaker presides over the Lok Sabha and plays an important role inside the House, but does not formally advise the President on summoning and proroguing Parliament. The Prime Minister acting alone: Although the Prime Minister is the central figure in the executive, constitutional practice emphasises the collective responsibility of the Council of Ministers, not personal decisions of the Prime Minister alone. The Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha: The Leader of the Opposition is consulted on some appointments, but there is no requirement that the President act jointly on the advice of the government and the opposition in this matter. The Chief Justice of India: The Chief Justice is the head of the judiciary and has no role in routine executive decisions regarding parliamentary sessions. Common Pitfalls: A common mistake is to assume that because the Speaker controls proceedings inside the House, the Speaker must also control the summoning and prorogation of Parliament. Another error is to overestimate the role of the President as a personal decision maker. In reality, the Constitution creates a ceremonial head of state whose decisions are almost always based on cabinet advice. Remembering the broad rule President acts on the advice of the Council of Ministers helps avoid these confusions. Final Answer: The President convenes and prorogues all sessions of Parliament in consultation with, and on the advice of, the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister.

Question 11

In the context of the Supreme Court of India, which term refers to cases that can be taken up directly by the Supreme Court without being heard by any lower court first?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question focuses on the different types of jurisdiction exercised by the Supreme Court of India. Understanding terms such as original, appellate, writ and advisory jurisdiction is essential for mastering Indian Polity. Here the key idea is to identify the label used when the Supreme Court hears a matter for the first time, without any prior decision from a lower court. Given Data / Assumptions: The subject is the Supreme Court of India. The question asks about cases the Court can consider directly. No lower court judgement exists in such matters at the time of filing. We must match this description with the correct type of jurisdiction. Concept / Approach: Jurisdiction simply means the power of a court to hear and decide cases. The Supreme Court has several forms of jurisdiction: Original jurisdiction for certain disputes that start in the Supreme Court itself. Appellate jurisdiction to hear appeals from High Courts and tribunals. Writ jurisdiction to enforce fundamental rights. Advisory jurisdiction to give opinions to the President under Article 143. The term that describes cases which begin directly in the Supreme Court is original jurisdiction. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Read the key phrase in the stem, which says directly considered by the Supreme Court without going to lower courts. Step 2: Recall that Article 131 of the Constitution confers original jurisdiction on the Supreme Court in certain disputes, for example disputes between the Government of India and one or more States. Step 3: Recognise that in these cases, the Supreme Court is the first and only court to hear the matter, which matches the description given in the question. Step 4: Therefore, the correct term for such cases is original jurisdiction. Verification / Alternative check: A quick memory trick is to pair the word original with the phrase comes first. If a case is original in the Supreme Court, the Court is the starting point. In contrast, appellate jurisdiction is about appeals that come up from below, and advisory jurisdiction involves opinions requested by the President rather than a regular dispute. Writ jurisdiction is focused on protection of fundamental rights and may overlap with original jurisdiction, but the specific phrase in the question matches the definition used for original jurisdiction in textbooks. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Writ Jurisdiction: This refers to the power to issue writs for enforcement of fundamental rights and for other purposes, but writs can sometimes be issued by High Courts too. It does not by itself define that the Supreme Court is always the first and only court of instance. Appellate Jurisdiction: This clearly involves hearing appeals from decisions of lower courts, so by definition the case has already been heard once before. Advisory Jurisdiction: Under Article 143, the Supreme Court gives advice to the President on questions of law or fact. This is not a typical case between parties and does not fit the description in the stem. Special Leave Jurisdiction: Under Article 136, the Supreme Court may grant special leave to appeal from any judgement or order of any court or tribunal. This is again appellate in nature and not the first hearing. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes confuse writ jurisdiction with original jurisdiction because in both situations, an individual can approach the Supreme Court directly. However, writ jurisdiction is about the type of relief and matters of fundamental rights, whereas original jurisdiction is a broader idea about the Supreme Court being the first court for certain categories of disputes, especially federal disputes. Keeping these categories separate in your notes will avoid last minute confusion in the exam hall. Final Answer: The term for cases that can be filed directly in the Supreme Court of India without going to lower courts first is Original Jurisdiction.

Question 12

Under which type of jurisdiction can an individual whose fundamental rights have been violated directly approach the Supreme Court of India for an effective remedy?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests knowledge of fundamental rights enforcement in India. The Constitution provides a special remedy that allows any person whose fundamental rights are violated to move the Supreme Court directly. This power of the Court is one of the main reasons Article 32 is called the heart and soul of the Constitution by Dr B R Ambedkar. Knowing which jurisdiction label applies to this power is critical for exams. Given Data / Assumptions: An individual believes that a fundamental right has been violated. That individual can directly file a petition before the Supreme Court. The question asks under which jurisdiction this direct access is provided. Options list original, writ, appellate, advisory and special leave jurisdiction. Concept / Approach: Article 32 of the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights. The power to issue writs such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari forms the core of the Court writ jurisdiction. While this can be seen as a kind of original jurisdiction, the term that examiners are looking for in relation to enforcement of fundamental rights is writ jurisdiction. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the key phrase in the question, namely that fundamental rights have been violated. Step 2: Recall that Articles 32 and 226 deal with remedies for enforcement of fundamental rights at the Supreme Court and High Court levels respectively. Step 3: Under Article 32, the Supreme Court can issue writs to provide relief and this special remedy is what allows citizens to approach the Court directly. Step 4: The set of powers related to issuing writs is collectively described as writ jurisdiction. Step 5: Therefore the correct answer is that the individual moves the Supreme Court under its writ jurisdiction. Verification / Alternative check: A quick mental check is to remember the phrase writ petition under Article 32. When you read about famous cases where people directly approached the Supreme Court for violations of liberty or other rights, these are usually described as writ petitions. This tells you that the relevant jurisdiction label is writ jurisdiction, not merely original or appellate jurisdiction. High Courts have similar powers under Article 226, which can be used as a second anchor point to reinforce the concept. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Original Jurisdiction: Although a writ petition is indeed filed initially in the Supreme Court, the term original jurisdiction is generally reserved for disputes like those between the Union and States under Article 131, not specifically for fundamental right enforcement. Appellate Jurisdiction: Appellate jurisdiction involves appeals from lower courts, which is not what the question describes. Here the individual goes directly to the Supreme Court. Advisory Jurisdiction: This refers to the power of the Supreme Court to advise the President under Article 143 and does not concern private individuals or enforcement of rights. Special Leave Jurisdiction: Under Article 136, this power allows the Supreme Court to grant special leave to appeal from any judgement of any court or tribunal. It is still an appeal based power, not a direct fundamental rights remedy. Common Pitfalls: The most common confusion is between original jurisdiction and writ jurisdiction, since both allow cases to begin in the Supreme Court. Another pitfall is thinking of fundamental rights only at the High Court level under Article 226 and forgetting that the Supreme Court also has a dedicated remedy. To avoid such mistakes, associate Article 32, writ jurisdiction, fundamental rights and direct approach to the Supreme Court together as one single cluster in your memory. Final Answer: An individual whose fundamental rights have been violated can directly approach the Supreme Court of India under its Writ Jurisdiction.

Question 13

Under the Constitution of India, who finally decides disputes regarding the disqualification of members of Parliament, after obtaining the opinion of the Election Commission?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Disqualification of members of Parliament is a sensitive subject because it directly affects the composition of the supreme legislative body in the country. The Constitution lays down a specific procedure and designates a particular authority to decide these disputes. This question checks whether you know who takes the final decision and what role the Election Commission plays in that process. Given Data / Assumptions: The dispute is about disqualification of a member of Parliament. The Constitution prescribes a procedure for such disputes. The Election Commission gives an opinion, but someone else takes the formal decision. We must identify the authority that finally decides the matter. Concept / Approach: Article 103 of the Constitution of India deals with decisions on questions as to disqualifications of members. It states that if any question arises as to whether a member of either House of Parliament has become subject to any of the disqualifications mentioned in Article 102, the question shall be referred for the decision of the President and the decision shall be final. Before giving such decision, the President shall obtain the opinion of the Election Commission and shall act according to such opinion. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall Article 102 which lists grounds for disqualification of members of Parliament, such as holding an office of profit, unsound mind or being an undischarged insolvent. Step 2: Recall Article 103 which explains the procedure when a question arises about such disqualification. Step 3: Article 103 clearly states that the question is referred to the President whose decision is final. Step 4: Article 103 also requires that before making a decision, the President must obtain the opinion of the Election Commission and is bound by that opinion in practice. Step 5: Therefore, the correct answer is that the President of India, in consultation with the Election Commission, decides the dispute. Verification / Alternative check: A useful way to verify is to remember that the Election Commission plays a technical and advisory role regarding electoral matters, while the constitutional head of the Union, the President, formally issues the final order. Also note that the judiciary may later review the constitutionality of such decisions, but the initial decision maker specified in the Constitution is the President. Linking Article 103 with the President and the Election Commission helps fix the concept. Why Other Options Are Wrong: The Supreme Court of India: The Supreme Court can review the legality of actions, but the Constitution does not make it the first decision making authority for disqualification questions under Article 103. The Election Commission acting alone: The Election Commission gives its opinion, but the formal and final decision is taken by the President based on that opinion. The Prime Minister in consultation with the Election Commission: The Prime Minister is not the authority mentioned in Article 103 for deciding disqualification disputes. The Speaker of the Lok Sabha: The Speaker decides disqualification matters under the Tenth Schedule in relation to anti defection for members of the Lok Sabha, but the general constitutional disqualifications under Article 102 are decided in the manner laid down in Article 103, which names the President. Common Pitfalls: Learners sometimes mix up the role of the Speaker in anti defection cases with the role of the President under Article 103. Another common mistake is to think that the Election Commission itself issues the final order. Remember that for general constitutional disqualifications of MPs, the President decides, whereas for anti defection under the Tenth Schedule, the presiding officer of the House decides. Keeping these two areas distinct prevents confusion in exam questions. Final Answer: Disputes regarding the disqualification of members of Parliament are finally decided by the President of India in consultation with the Election Commission.

Question 14

The Kutir Jyoti Scheme of the Government of India is primarily associated with which of the following objectives?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question is about an important rural electrification scheme of the Government of India. Social sector schemes are a favourite area in competitive examinations, and many such schemes have very similar sounding names. Kutir Jyoti Scheme specifically targeted poor rural households, and remembering its main objective helps differentiate it from employment or housing schemes. Given Data / Assumptions: The scheme is called Kutir Jyoti Scheme. It is a Government of India initiative. Options mention cottage industry, rural employment, electrification and housing. We must identify the primary objective of the scheme. Concept / Approach: Kutir Jyoti literally means light in the hut. The scheme was launched to provide single point light connections to rural households that were below the poverty line. The idea was that even one light could significantly improve quality of life, enable children to study after sunset and support basic household activities. It was a component of the wider rural electrification efforts eventually integrated into later programmes. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Decode the words Kutir and Jyoti in common Indian languages. Kutir generally refers to hut or small dwelling and Jyoti means light. Step 2: Link this meaning with the policy focus on electrification of rural poor households. Step 3: Remember that the scheme provided a one time grant to cover the cost of internal wiring and connection for rural below poverty line families. Step 4: This clearly fits the description of providing electricity to rural families living below the poverty line. Step 5: Therefore, option that talks about electricity access for rural poor families is the correct one. Verification / Alternative check: You can verify by recalling that employment generation schemes often have words like Rojgar, Swarna Jayanti Gram Swarozgar or Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee. Housing related schemes may include terms like Awas Yojana. The use of the word Jyoti strongly suggests a focus on light and hence electricity. Reference materials on rural electrification describe Kutir Jyoti as a programme to provide single point light connections to below poverty line rural households. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Promoting cottage and small scale industry in villages: While electricity can indirectly support industry, Kutir Jyoti Scheme was not specifically designed as an industrial promotion programme. Promoting employment among unemployed rural youth: This is more closely associated with schemes such as Swarna Jayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana or later rural employment guarantee programmes. Providing all of the above benefits together: The scheme had a focused objective rather than a very broad multi sector mandate. Providing free housing to landless agricultural labourers: Housing for rural poor is addressed under different schemes such as Indira Awas Yojana and its successors, not Kutir Jyoti Scheme. Common Pitfalls: Candidates frequently mix up scheme names due to similar themes like poverty, rural and employment. Another pitfall is to pick the broadest sounding option, assuming that every scheme does everything. Examiners often include an all of these kind of distractor to trap such guesswork. To avoid this, focus on the literal meaning of the scheme name and at least one core fact about it, for example single light connection for Kutir Jyoti. Final Answer: The Kutir Jyoti Scheme is primarily associated with providing electricity to rural families living below the poverty line.

Question 15

Which central government scheme plans to issue soil health cards to farmers that carry crop wise recommendations of nutrients and fertilisers based on soil testing?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question is about a flagship agricultural scheme related to soil testing and scientific use of fertilisers. Many central schemes focus on farmers, but each has a distinct goal such as insurance, rural clusters or organic farming. The Soil Health Card Scheme is specifically about giving each farmer a card that lists the status of the soil and recommended nutrient management practices. Given Data / Assumptions: The scheme involves issuing soil cards to farmers. These cards contain crop wise recommendations of nutrients and fertilisers. The cards are based on soil testing results. We must pick the scheme name that matches this description. Concept / Approach: The Soil Health Card Scheme was launched to promote balanced use of fertilisers by first testing the nutrient status of soil and then guiding farmers with scientific recommendations. This helps improve productivity while reducing unnecessary chemical use and input costs. The name of the scheme itself directly reflects the idea of a card that records soil health indicators like nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and micronutrients. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the central keywords in the question, namely soil health cards, soil testing and nutrient recommendations. Step 2: Recall that the Government of India launched a dedicated Soil Health Card Scheme to give every farmer a card with soil test based advice. Step 3: Recognise that other listed schemes have different primary objectives, such as crop insurance or rural development. Step 4: Therefore, the scheme that best matches the description is the Soil Health Card Scheme. Verification / Alternative check: You can cross check by associating each scheme with one key phrase. For example, link Fasal Bima Yojana with crop insurance, Rurban Mission with rural urban clusters and Soil Health Card with nutrient based fertilizer recommendations. This type of one phrase mapping helps you avoid confusion when options contain several similar looking names. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Shyama Prasad Mukherji Rurban Mission: This mission aims to develop rural growth clusters that have urban like facilities, not to issue soil health cards. Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana: This is a crop insurance scheme designed to protect farmers against yield losses due to natural calamities and other risks. National Rurban Mission: This is essentially the full name of the Rurban Mission and again focuses on rural cluster development. Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana: This scheme promotes organic farming through cluster based approaches, not soil health cards. Common Pitfalls: The main pitfall is to be overwhelmed by the large number of similarly named schemes and to rely on guesswork. Another issue is mixing soil related schemes with crop insurance or irrigation schemes because they all aim to boost agricultural productivity. Creating a table that lists scheme names, ministries and one line objectives is a reliable way to avoid such confusion. Final Answer: The scheme that issues soil cards with crop wise nutrient and fertiliser recommendations is the Soil Health Card Scheme.

Question 16

Which jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India allows the President of India to refer any matter of public importance or any question involving interpretation of the Constitution to the Court for its advice?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question concerns the special power of the President of India to seek legal advice from the Supreme Court on important questions of law or fact. This feature, borrowed from the Canadian model, is known as the advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. It is different from regular court cases because the Court is not deciding a dispute between two parties, but advising the head of state. Given Data / Assumptions: The President refers a matter to the Supreme Court. The matter is of public importance or involves constitutional interpretation. The Supreme Court gives advice rather than a binding judgement in a typical adversarial case. We must identify which labelled jurisdiction this falls under. Concept / Approach: Article 143 of the Constitution empowers the President to refer questions to the Supreme Court. The Court may then report its opinion after hearing the matter. This power of the Court is called its advisory jurisdiction. It is advisory because the opinion is not strictly binding in the same way as a judgement between parties, though it carries great persuasive weight. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that Article 143 deals with the power of the President to obtain the opinion of the Supreme Court on questions of law or fact of public importance. Step 2: Recognise that when the Court acts under Article 143, it is not exercising original, appellate or writ jurisdiction. Step 3: The term used in standard polity books and exam syllabi for this function is advisory jurisdiction. Step 4: Therefore, the correct answer is advisory jurisdiction. Verification / Alternative check: You can confirm by recalling famous references such as the Berubari Union reference or the advisory opinion on the Ayodhya dispute in the past. These are typically called Presidential References, which signals that the President has sought advice. Whenever you see terms like Presidential Reference and Article 143, you should immediately think of the Supreme Court advisory jurisdiction. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Original Jurisdiction: This involves disputes that start in the Supreme Court between entities such as the Union and States. It is not the same as a Presidential Reference. Writ Jurisdiction: This concerns the enforcement of fundamental rights and other legal rights through writs and is not about advising the President. Appellate Jurisdiction: This is the power to hear appeals from lower courts and tribunals. Review Jurisdiction: This refers to the power of the Supreme Court to review its own judgements under Article 137, which is separate from advising the President. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes overuse the idea of original jurisdiction and forget that there is a separate advisory function. Another confusion arises when they assume that any matter involving the Constitution must be under original jurisdiction. The key to avoid error is to note who initiates the process. If the President is sending a question for an advisory opinion, it is advisory jurisdiction, not a regular case filed by parties. Final Answer: When the President refers a matter to the Supreme Court for its opinion, the Court acts under its Advisory Jurisdiction.

Question 17

How many Rajya Sabha seats represent the State of Sikkim in the Parliament of India?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The composition of the Rajya Sabha reflects the federal nature of the Indian Union. Each State is allocated a certain number of seats based broadly on its population, but some of the smaller States in the North East and hill regions have only one representative. This question asks specifically about Sikkim, one of the smallest States of India. Given Data / Assumptions: The focus is on the Rajya Sabha, the Council of States. We are asked about the number of seats allotted to Sikkim. Options include several numbers, many of which are far too large for a small State. The examiner expects knowledge of basic parliamentary seat distribution. Concept / Approach: Article 80 of the Constitution lays down the composition of the Rajya Sabha and authorises allocation of seats to States. For small States like Sikkim, which has a small population compared to big States such as Uttar Pradesh or Maharashtra, the number of seats is limited. In standard polity tables, Sikkim is shown with one seat in the Rajya Sabha. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that large States like Uttar Pradesh have more than thirty seats in the Rajya Sabha, whereas very small States often have one seat. Step 2: Sikkim is geographically small and has a low population. Step 3: From standard polity data, the allocation of Rajya Sabha seats to Sikkim is one. Step 4: Among the given options, only the number one matches this information. Verification / Alternative check: A good way to verify is to remember that Sikkim also has only one Lok Sabha constituency. This reflects its small size. Most exam guides provide a table summarising each State and its seats in both Houses. Sikkim consistently appears with one seat in the Rajya Sabha, which supports the chosen answer. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 11: This would be comparable to some medium sized States and is far too high for Sikkim. 19: This is close to what some larger States might have and clearly does not match Sikkim. 10: Again too large for such a small State. 3: Some small States have more than one seat, but in the case of Sikkim the correct allocation is only one. Common Pitfalls: A common mistake is to confuse the numbers for Sikkim with those for other small States such as Himachal Pradesh or Goa. Another error is to assume that every State must have multiple members in the Rajya Sabha. In reality, the Constitution allows some States to be represented by only one member in the Council of States. Memorising the seat distribution for at least the extreme cases, such as the largest and smallest allocations, can help avoid such errors. Final Answer: Sikkim has 1 Rajya Sabha seat in the Parliament of India.

Question 18

In the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India, trade unions are included in which of the following lists?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The Seventh Schedule of the Constitution distributes legislative subjects between the Union and the States through three lists, namely the Union List, State List and Concurrent List. Some subjects appear on the Concurrent List so that both Parliament and State legislatures can make laws. Trade unions are a typical example used to illustrate this shared competence. Given Data / Assumptions: The topic is trade unions. The question asks in which list trade unions appear. The options include Union, State, Concurrent and a distractor called Global List. We must recall the correct entry and its placement in the Seventh Schedule. Concept / Approach: Trade unions, industrial disputes and related labour matters are generally placed on the Concurrent List to allow both the Union and the States to legislate. In case of conflict, central law prevails, but States can address local conditions. Remember that labour is a classic concurrent subject in India, reflecting the need for national standards along with State level flexibility. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall the three lists in the Seventh Schedule: Union List, State List and Concurrent List. Step 2: Remember that subjects like defence, foreign affairs and railways are on the Union List, while subjects like police and public order are typically on the State List. Step 3: Labour and trade unions fall under the Concurrent List, allowing both levels of government to legislate. Step 4: Therefore, the correct answer is the Concurrent List. Verification / Alternative check: You can verify by recalling standard entries from the Concurrent List in any polity book. The entry relating to trade unions and industrial disputes appears on that list. Another way is to think of how labour laws in India often have both central Acts, such as the Industrial Disputes Act, and State level amendments or rules, which is only possible when the subject is concurrent. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Union List: If trade unions were exclusively a Union subject, States could not frame their own labour laws or make local modifications, which is not the case in practice. State List: Purely State subjects usually do not allow Parliament to legislate routinely, yet Parliament has passed many major labour laws. Global List: There is no such category in the Constitution of India. It is a distractor. Residuary powers of the Union: Residuary powers refer to subjects not mentioned in any of the three lists. Trade unions are explicitly mentioned and therefore are not residuary. Common Pitfalls: Learners sometimes assume that because labour issues are often handled by State departments, the subject must be on the State List. Others think that national level labour codes mean the Union List. The correct understanding is that labour is concurrent. A helpful memory aid is to associate education and labour together as classic concurrent subjects post constitutional amendments. Final Answer: Trade unions are included in the Concurrent List of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India.

Question 19

Which writ is issued by a higher court, such as a High Court or the Supreme Court, to stop a lower court or tribunal from proceeding with a case that is beyond its jurisdiction?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The Constitution of India empowers the Supreme Court and High Courts to issue several types of writs. Each writ has a specific purpose. This question deals with the situation where a lower court or tribunal is about to act beyond its jurisdiction and a higher court has to stop it from proceeding further. Knowing the distinct functions of each writ is vital for mastering fundamental rights remedies. Given Data / Assumptions: A lower court or tribunal is proceeding with a case. The case is beyond that body jurisdiction or is being handled in an unauthorised manner. A higher court, like a High Court or the Supreme Court, intervenes to stop those proceedings. We must identify which writ name fits this description. Concept / Approach: Two writs are often discussed together in this context: prohibition and certiorari. Prohibition is preventive and operates before a decision is delivered. It commands the lower court to refrain from continuing proceedings. Certiorari is corrective and operates after a decision is delivered. It can quash the order of a lower court that acted without jurisdiction. The question clearly describes a preventive situation, where the higher court stops the lower body from proceeding. That is the classic function of the writ of prohibition. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify from the stem that the lower court is being stopped from proceeding with a case. Step 2: Recall that prohibition is issued by a higher court to a lower court or tribunal to prevent it from exceeding its jurisdiction. Step 3: Distinguish this from certiorari, which usually comes into play after the lower court has already given an order which can then be quashed. Step 4: Confirm that none of the other writs, such as habeas corpus or mandamus, match the specific description given in the question. Step 5: Conclude that the correct writ is prohibition. Verification / Alternative check: A helpful memory aid is to associate prohibition with the idea of prohibit, that is to stop in advance. In contrast, certiorari is associated with correction or quashing of an order that has already been passed. If the question scenario is forward looking and preventive, prohibition is usually the answer. If the scenario concerns setting aside a completed decision, certiorari is more appropriate. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Habeas Corpus: This writ is used to secure the release of a person who is unlawfully detained and is not focused on jurisdictional errors of courts in civil or administrative matters. Mandamus: This writ commands a public authority or inferior court to perform a duty that it has failed to perform. It does not primarily function to stop a court from exceeding its jurisdiction. Quo Warranto: This writ challenges the legal authority of a person holding a public office. It is not used to control the proceedings of a court in a particular case. Certiorari: As explained, this writ is usually issued to quash an order of a lower court that has already been passed without or in excess of jurisdiction, rather than to stop a proceeding before the order is made. Common Pitfalls: The biggest pitfall is confusion between prohibition and certiorari, since both deal with jurisdiction of courts and tribunals. Another error is to forget that habeas corpus is focused on personal liberty, not on jurisdictional boundaries. To avoid mixing them up, always ask whether the question describes stopping a future act or correcting a past one. Prohibition stops future proceedings, while certiorari corrects or quashes done acts. Final Answer: The writ used to stop a lower court or tribunal from proceeding with a case beyond its jurisdiction is Prohibition.

Question 20

Which central government scheme aims to promote entrepreneurship among people belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes by facilitating bank loans for new enterprises?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question is about a financial inclusion and entrepreneurship promotion scheme that specifically targets members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, as well as women entrepreneurs. Competitive exams often test who the beneficiaries are and what kind of assistance is provided under such schemes. Given Data / Assumptions: The scheme is launched by the central government. It aims to promote entrepreneurship. The target group is people from Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, and often women. The scheme facilitates bank loans to start new enterprises. Concept / Approach: The Stand Up India Scheme was launched to support entrepreneurship among SC, ST and women borrowers by providing bank loans in a specified range, typically between ten lakh and one crore rupees, for setting up greenfield enterprises. Each bank branch is encouraged to support at least one SC or ST borrower and one woman borrower. This is different from crop insurance, rural development or general skill development schemes. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Focus on the key phrases in the question: promote entrepreneurship, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and bank loans for new enterprises. Step 2: Recall that Stand Up India is designed exactly for this purpose, to encourage bank funded entrepreneurship in these communities. Step 3: Identify that other listed schemes such as crop insurance or rural campaigns do not match this description. Step 4: Therefore, the correct answer is the Stand Up India Scheme. Verification / Alternative check: Use the memory trick Stand Up equals stand on your own feet in business. Standard exam guides clearly state that Stand Up India is meant to promote entrepreneurship among SC, ST and women. It is separate from Start Up India, which is a broader innovation and start up ecosystem programme without such community specific reservation in loans. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana: This scheme provides crop insurance to farmers and is connected to risk coverage in agriculture, not entrepreneurship loans for SC and ST communities. Gram Uday Se Bharat Uday Abhiyan: This is a campaign focusing on rural development, awareness and panchayat centred activities, not primarily a loan based entrepreneurship scheme. National Rurban Mission: This mission aims to develop rural clusters with urban like facilities and infrastructure, not specifically to provide loans for SC and ST entrepreneurs. Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Grameen Kaushalya Yojana: This scheme focuses on skill development and placement for rural youth, not on directly facilitating bank loans for enterprises. Common Pitfalls: Students often confuse Start Up India with Stand Up India because of the similar names. Another confusion arises between different rural and social justice schemes. To avoid this, remember that Stand Up India always points to standing up specific entrepreneurs from SC, ST and women communities with bank credit support, which is a distinctive feature. Final Answer: The scheme that promotes entrepreneurship among Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes by facilitating bank loans for new enterprises is the Stand Up India Scheme.

Indian Politics Questions