Q1.Consider the following statements:
Statement I: The Constitution of India describes the country as a 'Union of States' rather than a 'Federation of States'.
Statement II: The Indian federation is not the result of an agreement among the states, and the states do not have the right to secede from the federation.
Explanation: According to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the phrase 'Union of States' was deliberately used to signify two things: first, that the Indian federation was not formed by an agreement among states (unlike the US), and second, that states have no right to secede. This makes the federation an indestructible union. Therefore, Statement II provides the direct rationale for Statement I.
Textbookhard
Q2.Consider the following features of governmental systems:
1. Rigid Constitution
2. Bicameral Legislature
3. Independent Judiciary
4. Supremacy of the Constitution
How many of the above are essential features of a Federal Government, as distinguished from a Unitary Government which may or may not have them?
Explanation: Based on the comparative table, a Federal Government is characterized by a Rigid Constitution, an Independent Judiciary, and the Supremacy of the Constitution. A Unitary Government, however, may have a flexible constitution (like Britain), a judiciary that is not independent, or a constitution that is not supreme (like Britain). While many federal systems have a bicameral legislature, the table indicates that even unitary systems like Britain have one, making it a less distinct and essential feature for the purpose of this specific comparison.
Textbookmedium
Q3.With reference to the Indian federal system, consider the following statements:
1. The Indian federation is based on the American model, which establishes a very strong centre.
2. India's formation as a federation occurred through 'integration', where several independent states came together.
3. A key feature of the Indian federation is its centralising tendency, vesting more powers in the Union government compared to the states.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect; the Indian federal system is based on the Canadian model, not the American one. Statement 2 is incorrect; the Indian federation was formed by way of 'disintegration', where a large unitary state was converted into a federation, not 'integration'. Statement 3 is correct; the Indian system, much like the Canadian model it is based on, is characterized by a strong central government with more powers than the states.
Textbookmedium
Q4.Which one of the following statements is NOT a characteristic feature of a federal system of government?
1. It establishes a dual government, with both national and regional governments.
2. The Constitution divides powers between the national and regional governments.
3. The regional governments derive their authority directly from the national government.
4. It provides for an independent judiciary to resolve disputes between the different levels of government.
Explanation: In a federal system, both the national and regional governments derive their authority from the Constitution itself and operate independently in their respective jurisdictions. The statement that regional governments derive their authority from the national government is a defining feature of a unitary system, not a federal one.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Textbookhard
Q5.Consider the following pairs:
1. United States : Federation by disintegration
2. Canada : Federation by integration
3. Japan : Federal model of government
4. India : Based on the Canadian federal model
How many of the pairs given above are correctly matched?
Explanation: 1 is incorrect: The US is a federation by integration ('coming together'). 2 is incorrect: Canada is a federation by disintegration ('holding together'). 3 is incorrect: Japan has a unitary model of government. 4 is correct: The Indian federal system is explicitly stated to be based on the Canadian model, sharing features like a strong centre and formation by disintegration. Therefore, only one pair is correctly matched.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Textbookmedium
Q6.Consider the following pairs regarding the division of powers in the Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution:
1. Union List : 98 subjects
2. State List : 66 subjects
3. Concurrent List : 52 subjects
How many of the pairs given above are correctly matched with their present number of subjects?
Explanation: The Union List currently has 98 subjects, and the Concurrent List has 52 subjects. However, the State List currently has 59 subjects, not 66 (which was the original number). Therefore, only pairs 1 and 3 are correctly matched.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Textbookmedium
Q7.With reference to the legislative powers divided between the Centre and the states, consider the following statements:
1. In case of a conflict between a Central law and a State law on a subject in the Concurrent List, the State law prevails.
2. Residuary subjects, which are not mentioned in any of the three lists, are given to the states.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Explanation: Both statements are incorrect. In case of a conflict on a Concurrent List subject, the Central law prevails over the State law. Furthermore, residuary powers, i.e., subjects not mentioned in any list, are vested with the Centre, not the states.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Textbookhard
Q8.Consider the following statements:
Statement I: The Indian Constitution is considered rigid to the extent that provisions concerning the federal structure require a special procedure for amendment.
Statement II: Amending provisions related to the federal structure requires a special majority of the Parliament and also an approval of half of the state legislatures.
Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?
Explanation: Statement I correctly asserts that the Constitution is rigid regarding its federal provisions. Statement II correctly explains the specific procedure that makes it rigid: the requirement of both a special majority in Parliament and ratification by at least half of the states. Thus, Statement II is the correct explanation for Statement I.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Textbookmedium
Q9.Consider the following statements regarding the federal features of the Indian Constitution:
1. The Constitution establishes a dual polity consisting of the Union at the Centre and the states at the periphery.
2. The Rajya Sabha represents the states of the Indian Federation.
3. The Supreme Court can declare laws enacted by the Centre and states invalid if they do not conform to the Constitution's provisions.
Which of the statements given above is/are NOT correct?
Explanation: All the given statements are correct descriptions of the federal features of the Indian Constitution. The Constitution establishes a dual polity, the Rajya Sabha represents the states, and the judiciary has the power of judicial review to ensure laws conform to the Constitution. Therefore, none of the statements are incorrect.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Textbookmedium
Q10.As per the federal features of the Indian Constitution, consider the following as purposes for establishing an independent judiciary:
1. To protect the supremacy of the Constitution through judicial review.
2. To settle disputes between the Centre and the states.
3. To look after matters of regional importance like public order and agriculture.
4. To represent the interests of the states against undue interference from the Centre.
How many of the above are correct purposes for the establishment of an independent judiciary?
Explanation: The Constitution establishes an independent judiciary for two main purposes in the federal context: to protect the supremacy of the Constitution via judicial review and to settle disputes between the Centre and states or between states. Looking after regional matters is a function of state governments, and representing state interests in the legislature is a role of the Rajya Sabha. Therefore, only the first two statements are correct.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Textbookmedium
Q11.Consider the following features of a federal system:
1. Single Citizenship
2. Integrated Judicial System
3. Equality of representation of states in the Upper House
4. Right of states to frame their own Constitution
How many of the above are considered unitary features of the Indian Constitution as described in the text?
Explanation: The Indian Constitution exhibits several unitary features. Among the given options, Single Citizenship and an Integrated Judicial System are unitary characteristics present in India. In contrast, equality of representation in the Upper House (as in the US Senate) and the right for states to frame their own constitutions are features of other federations, not India's.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Textbookmedium
Q12.With reference to the division of powers in the Indian Constitution, consider the following statements:
1. The Union List contains more subjects than the State List, and the Centre has overriding authority over the Concurrent List.
2. The residuary powers, which are not mentioned in any of the three lists, are vested with the states.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct as the division of powers is heavily in favour of the Centre. The Union List is more extensive, and Central law prevails over state law on Concurrent List subjects. Statement 2 is incorrect because, unlike in the US, the residuary powers in India are vested with the Centre, not the states, further strengthening the Union.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Textbookhard
Q13.Consider the following statements regarding the nature of the Indian and American federations:
1. The Indian Federation is described as an “indestructible Union of destructible states” because the Parliament can unilaterally alter the area and boundaries of any state.
2. The American Federation is described as an “indestructible Union of indestructible states” because the territorial integrity of its constituent states is constitutionally guaranteed.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Explanation: Both statements correctly interpret the phrases used to describe the two federations. In India, the Parliament can change state boundaries by a simple majority, making the states 'destructible'. In the US, the federal government cannot alter the boundaries of a state without its consent, making the states 'indestructible' and reflecting a more rigid federal structure.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Textbookmedium
Q14.Consider the following features:
1. An integrated judicial system
2. Dual citizenship
3. All-India services
4. Equality of representation for states in the Upper House
How many of the above are NOT unitary features of the Indian Constitution?
Explanation: An integrated judicial system and All-India services are unitary features of the Indian Constitution. Dual citizenship and equality of representation for states in the Upper House are features of other federations like the US and are explicitly absent in India. Therefore, these two are not unitary features of the Indian Constitution.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Textbookhard
Q15.With reference to the institutional design of the Indian polity, consider the following statements:
1. The states in India are given representation in the Rajya Sabha on the basis of population.
2. The power to initiate an amendment to the Constitution lies with both the Centre and the states.
3. The Indian Constitution establishes a double system of courts to enforce Central and state laws separately.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct; representation in the Rajya Sabha is based on population, which is a unitary feature. Statement 2 is incorrect; the power to initiate a constitutional amendment lies only with the Centre. Statement 3 is incorrect; India has an integrated judicial system that enforces both Central and state laws, unlike the double system of courts in the US.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Textbookmedium
Q16.Consider the following pairs:
Constitutional Expert : Description of Indian Federalism
1. K.C. Wheare : Quasi-federal
2. Morris Jones : Cooperative federalism
3. Granville Austin : Bargaining federalism
4. Ivor Jennings : Federation with a strong centralising tendency
How many of the pairs given above are correctly matched?
Explanation: Pair 1 is correct as K.C. Wheare described the Indian Constitution as 'quasi-federal'. Pair 4 is correct as Ivor Jennings described it as a 'federation with a strong centralising tendency'. Pair 2 is incorrect; Morris Jones termed it 'bargaining federalism'. Pair 3 is incorrect; Granville Austin called it 'cooperative federalism'. Therefore, only two pairs are correctly matched.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Textbookhard
Q17.Statement I: Dr. B.R. Ambedkar asserted that the Indian Constitution is a Federal Constitution as it establishes a dual polity where both the Union and the states derive their respective authority from the Constitution.
Statement II: Dr. B.R. Ambedkar also observed that the Constitution avoids the tight mould of federalism and could be both unitary and federal according to the requirements of time and circumstances.
Explanation: Both statements are correct and accurately reflect Dr. Ambedkar's views. Statement I describes the foundational federal nature of the Constitution (dual polity, authority from the Constitution). Statement II describes its unique flexibility. While both are related aspects of his view, Statement II explains the Constitution's adaptability rather than being the direct reason for its fundamental federal character as defined in Statement I. It highlights a feature that coexists with the federal principle, not one that explains it.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Textbookmedium
Q18.Consider the following statements regarding the nature of Indian federalism:
1. According to K. Santhanam, the dominance of the Centre in the financial sphere has increased the unitary bias of the Constitution.
2. The Supreme Court in the S.R. Bommai case (1994) characterized federalism as a 'basic feature' of the Constitution.
3. The Supreme Court observed in the S.R. Bommai case that states are mere appendages of the Centre because their powers can be overridden during an emergency.
Which of the statements given above is/are NOT correct?
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct; K. Santhanam identified financial dominance of the Centre as a reason for unitary bias. Statement 2 is correct; the Supreme Court in the Bommai case did declare federalism a 'basic feature'. Statement 3 is incorrect; the Supreme Court explicitly stated the opposite, observing that 'the fact that under the scheme of our Constitution, greater power is conferred upon the Centre... does not mean that the states are mere appendages of the Centre.'
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Textbookmedium
Q19.How many of the following are mentioned as trends reflecting the federal spirit in the working of the Indian political system?
1. Territorial disputes between states over areas like Belgaum.
2. The creation of new states to fulfil regional aspirations.
3. Assertion of autonomy by the states and their resistance to interference from the Centre.
4. The emergence of a powerful erstwhile planning commission controlling development in states.
Explanation: Items 1, 2, and 3 are explicitly listed as trends reflecting the federal spirit, as they involve states acting as distinct political and administrative units with their own interests and aspirations. Item 4, the emergence of a powerful planning commission, was cited by K. Santhanam as a factor that increased the unitary bias (centralisation), not as a reflection of the federal spirit.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Textbookhard
Q20.With reference to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar's observations on the Indian Constitution, consider the following statements:
1. He stated that the states are agencies of the Union, deriving their powers from it.
2. He argued that the partition of legislative and executive authority between the Centre and the states is done by the Constitution itself.
3. He believed that neither the Centre by its own will nor the judiciary can alter the constitutional partition of authority between the Centre and the states.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Dr. Ambedkar explicitly stated the opposite: 'nor are the states the agencies of the Union, deriving powers from it.' Statement 2 is correct, as he noted that the authority is partitioned 'by the Constitution itself.' Statement 3 is also correct, as he argued, 'The Centre cannot by its own will alter the boundary of this partition. Nor can the judiciary.' Therefore, only statements 2 and 3 are correct.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Current Affairshard
Q21.Consider the following statements regarding the foundational principles of Indian federalism, particularly in the context of recent debates on Centre-state relations:
1. The Indian federation, unlike the American one, is not the result of an agreement among states, which constitutionally denies states the right to secede.
2. The Indian model is described as a 'Holding Together' federation, which inherently vests more power in the central authority compared to a 'Coming Together' federation like the US.
3. Recent demands for greater fiscal autonomy and opposition to centralizing policies like 'one nation, one election' reflect the ongoing tension between India's unitary bias and its federal character.
4. The phrase 'Union of States' was preferred over 'Federation of States' to signify that India was formed by the integration of militarily weak states, a process similar to the formation of the US.
How many of the above statements are correct?
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct; Dr. B.R. Ambedkar clarified that the phrase ‘Union of States’ indicates the federation is not a result of an agreement and states cannot secede. Statement 2 is correct; the current affairs article explicitly categorizes India as a 'Holding Together' federation with a strong centre, contrasting it with the 'Coming Together' model of the US. Statement 3 is correct; recent issues like GST disputes and the 'one nation, one election' debate exemplify the inherent friction in India's quasi-federal structure. Statement 4 is incorrect; India's federation was formed by way of 'disintegration' (a big unitary state granting autonomy to provinces), similar to the Canadian model, not 'integration' like the US model.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Current Affairshard
Q22.With reference to the recent Supreme Court ruling on industrial alcohol, consider the following statements regarding the division of powers in the Indian federal system:
1. The Centre's argument that it had 'occupied the field' for regulating industrial alcohol is based on its powers under the Union List and the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951.
2. The Supreme Court's ruling expands the states' legislative competence by interpreting 'intoxicating liquor' in the State List to include substances that are poisonous and can impact public health.
3. The dissenting opinion argued that the potential for misuse of industrial alcohol is not a sufficient ground to expand the scope of Entry 8 of the State List.
4. The final resolution places industrial alcohol exclusively in the Concurrent List, allowing both Centre and states to legislate with central law prevailing in case of conflict.
How many of the above statements are correct?
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct as the Centre based its claim on Entry 52 of the Union List (industries) and the IDRA, 1951. Statement 2 is correct as the majority ruling broadened the definition of 'intoxicating liquor' beyond just potable alcohol. Statement 3 is correct as Justice B.V. Nagarathna's dissent cautioned against stretching the interpretation of Entry 8 of List II based on potential misuse. Statement 4 is incorrect; the ruling affirmed the states' power under the State List, it did not move the subject to the Concurrent List. Therefore, three statements are correct.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Current Affairshard
Q23.Consider the following statements comparing the federal features of the Indian and US Constitutions:
1. In India, residuary legislative powers are vested in the Centre, whereas in the US, they are retained by the states.
2. The Indian model of federation is described as 'quasi-federal' partly because the Union Parliament can alter state boundaries without their consent, a power the US federal government lacks.
3. While both countries have a bicameral legislature, representation in India's Rajya Sabha is based on state population, whereas the US Senate provides equal representation to each state.
4. The Indian federation is not the result of an agreement among states, and no state has the right to secede, which is fundamentally different from the formation of the American federation.
How many of the above statements are correct?
Explanation: All four statements accurately capture key differences between the Indian and US federal systems. Statement 1 is correct as residuary powers are with the Centre in India (Article 248) and with the states in the US. Statement 2 is correct; Article 3 of the Indian Constitution allows Parliament to alter state boundaries, reflecting a quasi-federal nature, unlike the US system. Statement 3 correctly contrasts the proportional representation in the Rajya Sabha with the equal representation in the US Senate. Statement 4 correctly points out that the Indian Union is 'indestructible,' unlike the US federation, which was formed by an agreement among states.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Current Affairshard
Q24.Considering the Supreme Court's August 2024 ruling that prolonged incarceration under stringent laws like the PMLA violates the fundamental right to a speedy trial (Article 21), which of the following federal features of the Indian Constitution are reflected in this judicial action?
1. Supremacy of the Constitution: The Court's ability to review and limit the application of a law enacted by the Centre to ensure it conforms to fundamental rights.
2. Independent Judiciary: The Court acting as an impartial arbiter to settle a dispute concerning the application of a central law and its impact on an individual's civil liberties.
3. Division of Powers: The judiciary interpreting the limits of legislative power assigned to the Centre under the Union/Concurrent List, ensuring it does not infringe upon the constitutionally guaranteed rights.
4. Rigid Constitution: The judgment itself represents a rigid amendment to the powers of the central government, requiring state consent for future similar laws.
How many of the above statements are correct?
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct as the SC's ruling upholds the Constitution (specifically Article 21) as the supreme law over a legislative act (PMLA). Statement 2 is correct as an independent judiciary is essential for protecting constitutional supremacy and settling disputes, including those between the state and individuals over fundamental rights. Statement 3 is correct because the judiciary is ensuring that the Centre's power to legislate on subjects like criminal law does not overstep the boundaries set by the Fundamental Rights part of the Constitution. Statement 4 is incorrect; a judicial judgment interprets the law, it does not amend the Constitution. The rigidity of the Constitution pertains to the formal amendment process under Article 368, not judicial pronouncements.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Current Affairshard
Q25.The static content describes that provisions related to the federal structure require a rigid amendment process, including ratification by state legislatures. The current affairs article discusses several major amendments. Considering this, how many of the amendments listed below would necessitate this rigid procedure due to their impact on the federal balance?
1. The 73rd Amendment Act, 1992, constitutionalizing Panchayati Raj Institutions.
2. The 101st Amendment Act, 2016, introducing the Goods and Services Tax (GST).
3. The 42nd Amendment Act, 1976, which facilitated the establishment of an All India Judicial Service.
4. The 106th Amendment Act, 2023, reserving seats for women in Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies.
Explanation: All four amendments listed impact the federal structure and would require ratification by at least half of the states. 1) The 73rd Amendment deals with local government, a subject on the State List. 2) The 101st Amendment fundamentally altered the division of taxation powers between the Centre and states. 3) The establishment of an All India Judicial Service affects the judicial organization at the state level. 4) The 106th Amendment alters the composition of State Legislative Assemblies and the representation of states in Parliament. All these fall under the provisions that require the rigid amendment process as per Article 368.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Current Affairshard
Q26.Considering the federal features of the Indian Constitution and the recent discussions on judicial accountability, analyze the following statements regarding the judiciary's role in maintaining the federal balance:
1. The judiciary's power of judicial review is fundamental to upholding the division of powers between the Centre and states as specified in the Seventh Schedule.
2. Recent concerns about executive interference in judicial transfers, as highlighted in the current debate, could potentially undermine the judiciary's designated role in settling disputes between the Centre and states impartially.
3. The proposal for an All India Judicial Service (AIJS) is aimed at strengthening the dual polity by granting states greater autonomy in the recruitment process for the subordinate judiciary.
4. The security of tenure for judges is a constitutional safeguard designed exclusively to protect them from arbitrary actions by the central executive, with state executives having no influence.
How many of the above statements are correct?
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct as judicial review allows courts to strike down laws that transgress the legislative domains of the Centre or states. Statement 2 is correct because impartiality is key to the judiciary's role as a federal arbiter, and perceived executive influence erodes this. Statement 3 is incorrect; AIJS is a centralizing measure for uniform recruitment, often seen by states as an encroachment on their power over the subordinate judiciary. Statement 4 is incorrect as security of tenure protects judges from arbitrary actions from both the central and state executives, ensuring independence at all levels.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Current Affairshard
Q27.With reference to the Supreme Court's recent guidelines on "bulldozer justice," consider how they reflect the role of the judiciary as a federal feature of the Indian Constitution:
1. The guidelines directly address a dispute between the Centre and multiple states regarding the use of executive power, fulfilling the judiciary's role as a federal arbiter.
2. By invoking Article 142 to ensure "complete justice," the Court is acting to protect the supremacy of the Constitution against arbitrary state executive actions, a key function of an independent judiciary.
3. The Court's intervention reinforces the principle of dual polity by prescribing limits within which state governments must operate, particularly concerning matters of regional importance like public order and local government.
How many of the above statements are correct?
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. The case did not involve a dispute between the Centre and the states. It was about protecting citizens' rights against arbitrary actions by state governments. Statement 2 is correct. The static text highlights that an independent judiciary protects the supremacy of the Constitution. The SC's use of Article 142 to enforce due process against executive overreach is a clear example of this function. Statement 3 is correct. The dual polity system endows states with sovereign powers in their assigned fields. However, the Constitution also prescribes limits. The SC's guidelines reinforce these limits, ensuring that state actions, even on state subjects, comply with constitutional mandates like Articles 14 and 21.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Current Affairshard
Q28.Considering the federal features of the Indian Constitution and the recent debate on judicial activism, how many of the following statements are correct?
1. The Supreme Court's directive for states to distance liquor shops from highways can be interpreted as an instance of judicial activism potentially encroaching upon the State List subjects, thereby challenging the principle of dual polity.
2. The power of judicial review, which allows courts to declare laws invalid if they violate the Constitution, is the foundational tool that enables the judiciary to uphold constitutional supremacy, but its expansive use leads to accusations of 'judicial despotism'.
3. The invocation of Article 142 to do 'complete justice' is explicitly limited by the division of powers in the Seventh Schedule, preventing the Supreme Court from issuing orders on subjects in the State List.
4. The rigidity of the constitutional amendment process for federal provisions acts as a check, ensuring that the fundamental division of powers between the Centre and states cannot be altered by judicial interpretation alone.
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct as matters like public order and health (related to liquor sales) fall under the State List, and a nationwide directive by the SC can be seen as an overreach into the states' domain. Statement 2 is correct; judicial review is the basis for checking legislative/executive action, but its frequent or broad application fuels the debate on judicial overreach. Statement 4 is correct; amending federal features requires a special majority in Parliament plus ratification by half the states, a legislative process that the judiciary cannot bypass. Statement 3 is incorrect; the use of Article 142 is often criticized precisely because it has been used to issue directives in areas that may fall under legislative or state jurisdiction, suggesting its powers are not strictly limited by the Seventh Schedule in practice.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Current Affairshard
Q29.Consider the following statements regarding the role of the judiciary in upholding the federal structure of the Indian Constitution, in light of recent discussions on the separation of powers:
1. The power of judicial review is fundamental to maintaining the supremacy of the Constitution, a core federal principle, by ensuring both Central and state laws conform to its provisions.
2. The 'basic structure' doctrine, established in the Kesavananda Bharati case, reinforces the rigidity of the Constitution by preventing the Parliament from unilaterally altering provisions critical to the federal balance.
3. The judiciary's role in settling disputes between the Centre and the states is a direct operationalization of the dual polity system, which endows both with sovereign powers in their respective fields.
4. Article 50, which directs the separation of the judiciary from the executive, is exclusively a federal feature designed to protect states from central executive overreach.
How many of the above statements are correct?
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct as judicial review ensures laws adhere to the supreme Constitution, a key federal feature. Statement 2 is correct as the basic structure doctrine limits Parliament's amendment power, protecting federal provisions from being easily changed, thus reinforcing rigidity. Statement 3 is correct as an independent judiciary resolving Centre-State disputes is essential for a dual polity to function. Statement 4 is incorrect; while an independent judiciary (supported by Article 50) is a federal feature, the primary purpose of Article 50 is to ensure impartial justice by separating judicial functions from executive influence, which is a broader principle of separation of powers, not exclusively a federal one.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Current Affairshard
Q30.Considering the constitutional principle of India as an “indestructible Union of destructible states,” analyze the following statements in the context of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019.
1. The Act, which bifurcated the erstwhile state into two Union Territories, is a direct application of the unitary feature allowing Parliament to unilaterally alter a state's territory.
2. The process for this reorganisation required a constitutional amendment under Article 368, similar to the process in the American federation for altering state boundaries.
3. The creation of a Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir with a legislative assembly, while Ladakh was formed without one, demonstrates the Centre's overriding authority in territorial administration, a non-federal characteristic.
How many of the above statements are correct?
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct as the reorganisation of J&K into two UTs exemplifies the principle that the Indian Parliament can alter the boundaries or status of a state. Statement 3 is also correct as the differential arrangement for the two new UTs highlights the Centre's strong, flexible, and unitary control over territory. Statement 2 is incorrect; the static content clarifies that Parliament can change the area, boundaries, or name of any state by a simple majority, not a special majority or constitutional amendment as required in other federations. The American federation is described as an “indestructible Union of indestructible states,” where such changes are far more rigid.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Current Affairshard
Q31.Considering the recent extension of President's Rule in Manipur and the historical debates on India's federal structure, how many of the following statements accurately reflect the tension between the unitary and federal features of the Indian Constitution?
1. The frequent use of Article 356 aligns with K.C. Wheare's description of the Indian Union as a 'unitary state with subsidiary federal features'.
2. The Supreme Court's ruling in the S.R. Bommai case, which established federalism as a 'basic feature', acts as a direct constitutional counterweight to the centralizing power inherent in Article 356.
3. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar's view that the Constitution can be 'both unitary as well as federal according to the requirements of time and circumstances' provides a foundational justification for provisions like President's Rule.
4. The Punchhi Commission's suggestion for 'localized emergency provisions' is an attempt to reconcile the need for central intervention with the principles of cooperative federalism, as termed by Granville Austin.
Explanation: All four statements are correct. 1. K.C. Wheare's 'quasi-federal' or 'unitary with subsidiary federal features' view is exemplified by strong centralizing tools like Article 356. 2. The Bommai case (1994) is a landmark judgment that limited the arbitrary use of Article 356 by affirming federalism as a basic feature, thus acting as a counterweight. 3. Ambedkar's defense of the Constitution's flexibility justifies the use of unitary features like President's Rule during exceptional circumstances. 4. The Punchhi Commission's recommendation for localized emergencies is a reform aimed at minimizing the disruption to state autonomy, reflecting the spirit of cooperative federalism.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
Current Affairshard
Q32.Consider the following statements regarding the nature of Indian federalism as described by various constitutional experts:
1. K.C. Wheare described the Indian Union as a unitary state with subsidiary federal features.
2. Granville Austin termed Indian federalism as 'cooperative federalism', highlighting that a strong Centre does not necessarily mean weak states.
3. Ivor Jennings characterized the Indian system as 'bargaining federalism'.
4. The Supreme Court, in the Bommai case (1994), opined that the greater power conferred on the Centre makes the states mere appendages.
How many of the above statements are correct?
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct as K.C. Wheare described the Constitution as 'quasi-federal' and remarked that the 'Indian Union is a unitary state with subsidiary federal features'. Statement 2 is correct as Granville Austin called it 'cooperative federalism' and argued that it created a strong central government without weakening the states. Statement 3 is incorrect; Morris Jones termed it 'bargaining federalism', while Ivor Jennings described it as a 'federation with a strong centralising tendency'. Statement 4 is incorrect; the Supreme Court in the Bommai case explicitly stated the opposite: 'The fact that under the scheme of our Constitution, greater power is conferred upon the Centre vis-a-vis the states does not mean that the states are mere appendages of the Centre.' Therefore, only two statements (1 and 2) are correct.
🔒 Verify your phone to reveal the answer & explanation
29 answers locked
You've used your 3 free answers in Indian Polity. Verify your phone to unlock 20 more — free.
Unlock All Questions
All questions with explanations, AI notes and a personalised revision calendar — in the free app.