Daily Static MCQs Quiz for UPSC, IAS, UPPSC/UPPCS, MPPSC. BPSC, RPSC & All State PSC Exams
Subject : Polity (28 November 2023)
1. Consider the following statements regarding the status of Fundamental Rights vs Directive Principles of State policy:
1. The Supreme Court in Golaknath Case, 1967 held that the Indian Constitution is founded on the bedrock of the balance between the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles.
2. The Parliament can completely amend Directive Principles of State policy in order to improve the administration of any of the Fundamental Rights.
Which of the above statements is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
Answer: (D)
Explanation: In the Minerva Mills case (1980), the Supreme Court also held that ‘the Indian Constitution is founded on the bedrock of the balance between the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles. This harmony and balance between the two is an essential feature of the basic structure of the Constitution. The Parliament can amend the Fundamental Rights for implementing the Directive Principles, so long as the amendment does not damage or destroy the basic structure of the Constitution. However, the Parliament cannot amend the Directive principles on its whims and fancies and affect the ‘welfare state’ credential of Indian constitution since it forms a part of the basic structure. Hence, both statements are not correct.
2. Consider the following statements regarding Governor’s legislative powers:
1. If a bill passed by the state legislature endangers the position of the state high court, the Governor shall reserve the bill for consideration of the President.
2. If a bill sent by Governor for the reconsideration of the State legislature is passed again without amendments, the Governor is under no constitutional obligation to give his assent to the bill.
Which of the above statements is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
Answer: (A)
Explanation: Article 200 provides that when a Bill passed by the State Legislature, is presented to the Governor, the Governor shall declare—
(a) that he assents to the Bill; or
(b) that he withholds assent therefrom; or
(c) that he reserves the Bill for the President’s consideration; or
(d) the Governor may, as soon as possible, return the Bill (other than a Money Bill) with a message for re-consideration by the State Legislature.
But, if the Bill is again passed by the Legislature with or without amendment, the Governor shall not withhold assent therefrom; or
(e) if in the opinion of the Governor, the Bill, if it became law, would so derogate from the powers of the High Court as to endanger its constitutional position, he shall not assent to but shall reserve it for the consideration of the President.
Hence, statement 2 is not correct.
3.The Constitution of India lays down a functional separation of the organs of the State in which of the following manner?
1. The President or the Governor shall not be answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of his office.
2. The validity of proceedings in Parliament and the Legislatures cannot be called into question in any Court.
3. Parliament cannot discuss the conduct of the judges except when the proceeding to remove a judge is being carried out.
Select the correct answer using the code given below:
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3
Answer: (D)
Explanation: The Constitution of India lays down a functional separation of the organs of the State in the following manner:
Article 50: State shall take steps to separate the judiciary from the executive. This is for the purpose of ensuring the independence of judiciary.
Article 122 and 212: validity of proceedings in Parliament and the Legislatures cannot be called into question in any Court. This ensures the separation and immunity of the legislatures from judicial intervention on the allegation of procedural irregularity.
Judicial conduct of a judge of the Supreme Court and the High Courts’ cannot be discussed in the Parliament and the State Legislature, according to Article 121 and 211 of the Constitution.
Articles 53 and 154 respectively, provide that the executive power of the Union and the State shall be vested with the President and the Governor and they enjoy immunity from civil and criminal liability.
Article 361: the President or the Governor shall not be answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of his office.
Hence, all statements are correct.
4. If any question arises whether a matter falls within the Governor’s discretion or not, whose decision shall be final and why?
(a) Chief Minister because he heads the Council of Ministers
(b) State Legislature since it is the highest law-making body within the State
(c) Governor of the State because the Constitution confers him this authority
(d) President of India who advises Governor of the same
Answer: (C)
Explanation: If any question arises whether a matter falls within the Governor’s discretion or not, decision of the Governor shall be final, and the validity of anything done by the Governor shall not be called in question on the ground that he ought or ought not to have acted in his discretion. Also, the constitution says that the advice tendered by Ministers to the Governor shall not be inquired into in any court. Hence, statement (c) is correct.
5. Consider the following statements regarding Article 32 of the Indian Constitution:
1. Article 32 affirms the right to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of the rights conferred in Part III of the Indian Constitution.
2. The right guaranteed under Article 32 is not absolute and can be suspended.
3. An individual approaching the High Court under Article 226 for the violation of fundamental rights is itself is a fundamental right.
How many of the above statements is/are correct?
(a) Only one
(b) Only two
(c) All three
(d) None
Answer: (B)
Explanation: It is one of the fundamental rights listed in the Constitution that each citizen is entitled. Article 32 deals with the ‘Right to Constitutional Remedies’, or affirms the right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the rights conferred in Part III of the Constitution. During the 1975 Emergency, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court, in the ADM Jabalpur vs Shivakant Shukla case, had ruled that the right to constitutional remedies under Article 32 would remain suspended during a national emergency. The 44th Amendment also stated that according to Article 359, the president could issue orders suspending the right to move any court for the enforcement of fundamental rights, under Article 32, during a national emergency, with the exception of Article 20 ( deals with protection of certain rights in case of conviction for offences) and Article 21 (protection of life and personal liberty). In civil or criminal matters, the first remedy available to an aggrieved person is that of trial courts, followed by an appeal in the High Court and then the Supreme Court. When it comes to violation of fundamental rights, an individual can approach the High Court under Article 226 or the Supreme Court directly under Article 32. Article 226, however, is not a fundamental right like Article 32. Hence, statement 3 is not correct.
