In a republican form of government, the ultimate political power and authority are vested in whom?

Introduction / Context:
Different forms of government are defined by where the ultimate political authority lies and how rulers derive legitimacy. In a monarchy, authority is centred on a king or queen, while in a republic, the source of authority is different. This question checks whether you understand the basic idea behind a republican system, an essential concept in political science and civics, especially because India describes itself as a sovereign democratic republic in the Preamble to its Constitution.

Given Data / Assumptions:

The question is about a republic, not a monarchy or dictatorship.
The options include the monarch, the people, the winning party and ministers.
You are expected to identify who holds ultimate power in principle, not who exercises day to day administration.

Concept / Approach:
A republic is a form of government in which the head of state is not a hereditary monarch and in which ultimate authority rests with the people, usually exercised through elected representatives. The people are the sovereign source of power, and governments derive their legitimacy from the consent of the governed. The winning party and ministers may run the government for a period, but they do so as representatives of the people and can be voted out. Therefore, the correct conceptual answer is that, in a republic, the people hold the ultimate political power.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Recall the definition of a republic: it is a system where the head of state is elected, directly or indirectly, and is not a hereditary monarch. Step 2: In such a system, sovereignty is usually said to reside in the people, who elect representatives to make laws and run the administration. Step 3: Consider option A, the monarch. This clearly describes a monarchy, not a republic, because in a republic there is no hereditary king or queen as the final source of authority. Step 4: Consider option C, the winning party. While the winning party forms the government, it does so temporarily and is accountable to the people. It is not the ultimate source of power. Step 5: Consider option D, ministers. Ministers are part of the executive who implement policies, but they derive their authority from the legislature and ultimately from the electorate. Step 6: Therefore, the only option that correctly reflects the principle of popular sovereignty in a republic is option B, the people.

Verification / Alternative check:
The Preamble to the Constitution of India begins with the words "We, the people of India", emphasising that the Constitution and the state derive authority from the people. Similarly, classical political theory often defines a republic as a polity in which the people hold ultimate authority, in contrast to a monarchy where a single ruler does. This widespread understanding confirms that the people are the correct answer.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
The monarch: This would be true in a hereditary monarchy, not in a republic where the head of state is elected and the people are sovereign. The winning party: A party may control the government for a term, but it does not own the state or hold permanent authority; it is accountable to the people. Ministers: They are part of the executive branch and hold office only as long as they command the confidence of the legislature and ultimately the support of the electorate.

Common Pitfalls:
Learners sometimes confuse the entity that exercises practical control at a given time with the entity that holds ultimate constitutional authority. Governments and parties change, but in a republic the enduring principle is that sovereignty belongs to the people. To avoid confusion, always link the idea of a republic with popular sovereignty and an elected head of state, rather than hereditary rule or permanent control by any one party.

Final Answer:
In a republican form of government, the ultimate political power and authority are vested in the people.