Polity Set 180
🔍
📌 Judiciary • Fundamental Rights
Q.1) The legal “Doctrine of Laches” essentially states that courts will not help people who sleep on their rights. However, the Supreme Court has generally ruled that this doctrine does NOT strictly apply to petitions filed under which Article?
Ans > Article 32 (Fundamental Rights)
- The Concept of Laches: The legal doctrine of laches is based on the equitable maxim that “equity aids the vigilant, not those who slumber on their rights.” It prevents a party from asserting a legal right if they have unreasonably delayed in bringing their claim to court, especially if this delay prejudices the opposing party.
- Application to Article 32: The Supreme Court of India has firmly established that fundamental rights are sacrosanct. Because Article 32 is itself a fundamental right (the right to constitutional remedies), the court has generally held that these rights cannot be easily waived or defeated by mere delay. Cases like Tilokchand Motichand illustrate this high threshold.
- Judicial Discretion and Exceptions: While the doctrine does not strictly bar an Article 32 petition, the Supreme Court still exercises judicial discretion. If a petitioner’s delay is deemed entirely unreasonable, or if the delay has allowed third-party rights to solidify over many years, the court may still refuse to issue a writ to prevent severe administrative chaos.
📌 Judiciary • Impeachment
Q.2) Under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, a motion for the removal (impeachment) of a Supreme Court or High Court judge requires the signatures of at least how many members if introduced in the Lok Sabha?
Ans > 100
- Constitutional Basis for Removal: Articles 124(4) and 217 of the Indian Constitution outline the strict process for the removal of higher judiciary judges. They can only be removed on the grounds of “proved misbehaviour or incapacity,” ensuring that judges are protected from arbitrary executive action.
- Initiation Threshold in the Lower House: To operationalize this constitutional mandate, Parliament enacted the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. If a motion for removal originates in the lower house of Parliament (the Lok Sabha), the Act strictly mandates that a minimum of 100 Members of Parliament must sign the notice.
- Preventing Frivolous Impeachments: The requirement of 100 signatures acts as a significant democratic filter. It prevents politically motivated or frivolous attempts by individual members or small factions to intimidate the judiciary, ensuring that an impeachment motion is only brought forward when there is substantial parliamentary backing.
📌 Judiciary • Impeachment
Q.3) Under the same Act, a motion for the removal of a judge requires the signatures of at least how many members if introduced in the Rajya Sabha?
Ans > 50
- Upper House Initiation Threshold: The impeachment of a judge is a parliamentary process that can be initiated in either house. If the motion is introduced in the upper house, the Rajya Sabha, the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, requires a minimum of 50 signatures from its members to validate the notice.
- Rationale for the Proportional Number: The requirement of 50 signatures in the Rajya Sabha is exactly half of the 100 required in the Lok Sabha. This proportional threshold is designed because the maximum total strength of the Rajya Sabha (250) is roughly half that of the Lok Sabha (543), maintaining a balanced burden of proof across both houses.
- The Chairman’s Prerogative: Once the 50 signatures are gathered and submitted, the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha (who is the Vice-President of India) holds the critical authority to either admit or outright reject the motion, acting as the first safeguard to protect judicial independence before any investigation begins.
📌 Judiciary • Impeachment
Q.4) Once the motion is admitted by the Speaker/Chairman, a three-member committee is constituted to investigate the charges against the judge. Which of the following is NOT typically a member of this committee?
Ans > The Union Law Minister
- Statutory Committee Formation: If the presiding officer (Speaker of the Lok Sabha or Chairman of the Rajya Sabha) officially admits an impeachment motion, they are legally obligated under the Judges (Inquiry) Act to constitute a specialized three-member committee to investigate the charges of misbehavior or incapacity.
- Mandatory Judicial Composition: The law strictly defines the membership to guarantee profound legal expertise and absolute impartiality. The committee must consist of one sitting Chief Justice or Judge of the Supreme Court, one sitting Chief Justice of a High Court, and one distinguished jurist.
- Strict Exclusion of the Executive: The Union Law Minister, or any member of the executive branch, is intentionally and strictly excluded from this investigative committee. This deliberate exclusion is necessary to uphold the separation of powers doctrine, ensuring the judiciary is not subjected to political trials orchestrated by the ruling government.
📌 Judiciary • Supreme Court
Q.5) Which Article grants the President of India the power to refer any matter of public importance to the Supreme Court for its advisory opinion?
Ans > Article 143
- Scope of Presidential Reference: Article 143(1) of the Constitution allows the President of India to consult the Supreme Court on any pressing question of law or fact that is of significant public importance. This applies to matters that have already arisen or those that are likely to arise in the near future.
- Historical Constitutional Context: This unique advisory jurisdiction was fundamentally borrowed from Section 213 of the Government of India Act, 1935, which bestowed similar consultation powers upon the colonial Governor-General. It serves as a vital constitutional safety valve for the executive branch to navigate complex legal territories.
- Nature of the Court’s Pronouncement: The opinion rendered by the Supreme Court under this specific article is strictly advisory in nature. It does not constitute a binding judicial precedent or a formal legal decree. Consequently, the executive branch is not legally bound to execute or accept the advice provided.
📌 Judiciary • Supreme Court
Q.6) Is the Supreme Court bound to give its opinion to the President on all matters referred to it under Article 143?
Ans > No, it is bound to give its opinion only on pre-constitution treaty disputes, and may decline to answer other questions of law or fact.
- Discretion on General Public Importance: Under Article 143(1), when the President refers a general question of law or fact, the Supreme Court is absolutely not obligated to provide an answer. The Court retains the right to respectfully decline the reference, as demonstrated in the Ismail Faruqui (Ayodhya) case.
- Mandatory Obligation for Historical Treaties: Under Article 143(2), however, the rule changes. If the President refers a dispute arising out of any pre-Constitution treaty, agreement, or covenant entered into by former Princely States, the Supreme Court is constitutionally bound to tender its opinion to the President.
- Purpose of the Jurisdictional Distinction: This distinction is deliberate. Pre-Constitution treaties are normally excluded from the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction under Article 131. Mandating an advisory response ensures the executive receives legal guidance on historical treaties, while allowing the Court to dodge heavily politicized modern queries.
📌 Local Government • Panchayati Raj
Q.7) Which committee’s recommendations paved the way for the enactment of the PESA Act (Provisions of the Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996)?
Ans > Bhuria Committee
- Inception of the specialized Committee: Following the landmark 73rd Constitutional Amendment which constitutionalized the Panchayati Raj system, the government realized these generic provisions might aggressively clash with the unique customary laws of tribal populations. Consequently, the Dilip Singh Bhuria Committee was constituted in 1994.
- Core Committee Recommendations: The Bhuria Committee submitted its comprehensive report in 1995. It strongly advocated for a decentralized, participatory governance model that deeply respected tribal customs, traditional land rights, and local resource management, positioning the village assembly at the heart of governance.
- Enactment and Impact of PESA: Based directly on the Bhuria Committee’s blueprint, Parliament enacted the PESA Act in 1996. It successfully extended the Panchayati Raj provisions to Fifth Schedule Areas (tribal regions) with crucial modifications, legally empowering local Gram Sabhas to manage minor forest produce, prevent land alienation, and regulate village markets.
📌 Local Government • Rights
Q.8) The Ministry of Tribal Affairs is the nodal agency for the implementation of the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006. Under this Act, who is the authority to initiate the process for determining the nature and extent of individual or community forest rights?
Ans > The Gram Sabha
- Empowering Grassroots Democracy: The Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006, represents a massive paradigm shift in Indian forest governance. It aims to rectify historical injustices faced by forest-dwelling scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers by decentralizing power back to the village level.
- Statutory Initiation Authority: Under Section 6 of the FRA, the Gram Sabha (the village assembly consisting of all adult members) is legally designated as the primary and absolute authority to initiate the complex process of determining the nature and extent of Individual Forest Rights (IFR) or Community Forest Rights (CFR).
- The Bottom-Up Verification Process: Instead of bureaucrats dictating terms, the Gram Sabha receives traditional land claims, consolidates them, and passes a formal resolution. This ensures that the people most intimately connected with the forest ecosystem have the first and most vital say in determining traditional territorial rights.
📌 Statutory Bodies • Women
Q.9) Which statutory body was established in 1990 to protect and promote the interests of women in India, and to review the constitutional and legal safeguards for women?
Ans > National Commission for Women (NCW)
- Statutory Foundation and Origins: The National Commission for Women (NCW) is not a constitutional body but a powerful statutory one. It was established in January 1992 under the provisions of the National Commission for Women Act, 1990, responding directly to a long-standing demand from the Indian women’s movement.
- Core Protective Mandate: The Commission’s primary objective is comprehensively broad: to continuously review the constitutional and legal safeguards provided for women, recommend remedial legislative measures, facilitate urgent grievance redressal, and advise the central government on all major policy matters affecting women’s welfare.
- Investigative Powers of a Civil Court: While investigating specific matters relating to the deprivation of women’s rights or the non-implementation of protective laws, the NCW enjoys the formidable powers of a civil court. This includes the legal authority to summon witnesses from across the country and demand the production of official documents.
📌 Statutory Bodies • Children
Q.10) The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) was established in 2007 as a statutory body under the CPCR Act, 2005. It operates under the administrative control of which Ministry?
Ans > Ministry of Women and Child Development
- Establishment and Core Mandate: The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) was officially established in March 2007 under the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights (CPCR) Act, 2005. Its central mandate is to ensure that all laws, policies, and administrative mechanisms conform seamlessly to the child rights perspective enshrined in the UN Convention.
- Nodal Administrative Control: Because child welfare, nutrition, early development, and protection are intricately and operationally linked to maternal and broad societal well-being, the NCPCR functions directly under the administrative control of the Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD).
- Universal Definition of a Child: The Commission operates with a strict universal mandate covering all children up to the age of 18 years. It is tasked with taking special, proactive cognizance of highly vulnerable groups, including child laborers, children in distress, marginalized youth, and children in conflict with the law.
📌 Statutory Bodies • Economy
Q.11) Which statutory authority was established in 2003, replacing the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices (MRTP) Commission, to prevent practices having an adverse effect on economic competition?
Ans > Competition Commission of India (CCI)
- Transition from the MRTP Era: Prior to the creation of the CCI, India’s corporate economic competition was regulated by the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices (MRTP) Act, 1969. As India heavily liberalized its economy post-1991, the MRTP Act became functionally obsolete, focusing too much on curbing company size rather than promoting market efficiency.
- Establishment via the Raghavan Committee: Based on the vital recommendations of the S.V.S. Raghavan Committee, the modern Competition Act was passed in 2002. Subsequently, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) was fully constituted in 2009, completely and officially replacing the outdated MRTP Commission framework.
- Core Economic Objectives: The CCI acts as the ultimate market watchdog in India. Its primary statutory goals are to rapidly eliminate practices that have an adverse effect on competition, protect consumer interests against corporate cartels, and ensure the unhindered freedom of trade for all participants in the Indian markets.
📌 Statutory Bodies • Corporate Law
Q.12) The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) were constituted under the provisions of which Act?
Ans > The Companies Act, 2013
- Consolidation of Corporate Justice: Before the NCLT was formed, corporate disputes, mergers, and insolvency matters were chaotically scattered across various bodies like the High Courts, the Company Law Board (CLB), and the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR), leading to massive judicial delays.
- Eradi Committee and the 2013 Act: Following the recommendations of the Justice Eradi Committee to streamline corporate justice, the legal framework for a unified tribunal was embedded into the new Companies Act, 2013. The NCLT and its appellate body (NCLAT) were officially constituted on June 1, 2016.
- Pivotal Role in the IBC: While they were strictly established under the Companies Act of 2013, the NCLT and NCLAT subsequently became the primary, indispensable adjudicating authorities for complex corporate insolvency resolution processes under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016.
📌 Defense • Executive
Q.13) In 2019, the Government of India created the post of Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) to act as the principal military advisor to the Defence Minister. The CDS is a:
Ans > Four-star General
- Origins in the Kargil Review Committee: The strategic necessity for a single-point military advisor was first strongly recommended by the Kargil Review Committee in 1999. The committee found that the lack of synergy among the Army, Navy, and Air Force was a critical vulnerability during the conflict.
- Creation and Rank Parity: The post was finally operationalized in December 2019. The CDS is an active-duty four-star General (or equivalent rank from the Navy or Air Force). They serve as the “first among equals” compared to the other three traditional service chiefs, who are also four-star officers.
- Extensive Roles and Responsibilities: Beyond advising the Defence Minister, the CDS executes several massive administrative roles. They head the newly created Department of Military Affairs (DMA) within the Ministry of Defence, function as the Permanent Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, and command tri-service agencies.
📌 Executive • Security
Q.14) The National Security Council (NSC) of India is the apex agency looking into the country’s political, economic, energy, and strategic security concerns. It is headed by the:
Ans > Prime Minister
- Apex National Security Body: Established formally in 1998 by the Vajpayee government following the Pokhran-II nuclear tests, the National Security Council (NSC) is India’s premier executive agency. It is responsible for advising the highest levels of government on complex matters of national security and strategic interest.
- Leadership by the Prime Minister: Recognizing that modern security encompasses economic, energy, cyber, and internal political dimensions—not merely military defense—the NSC is chaired directly by the Prime Minister of India. This guarantees the highest level of executive authority and inter-ministerial attention.
- Structure and the Role of the NSA: While the Prime Minister heads the Council, the National Security Advisor (NSA) plays a critical, daily operational role as the Secretary of the NSC. The Council’s core decision-making members include the Ministers of Home Affairs, Defence, External Affairs, and Finance.
📌 Executive • Security
Q.15) What is the Strategic Policy Group (SPG)?
Ans > The core inter-ministerial coordination mechanism of the National Security Council (NSC)
- Tiered Structure of the NSC: The broader National Security Council system consists of three distinct, functional tiers: the Strategic Policy Group (SPG), the National Security Advisory Board (NSAB), and a dedicated Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC).
- Core Inter-Ministerial Mechanism: The SPG operates as the topmost administrative and inter-ministerial coordination body within this security architecture. It is responsible for rigorously formulating strategic defense policies and ensuring that different, often siloed, government ministries work in tandem during crises.
- Leadership and Bureaucratic Composition: Originally headed by the Cabinet Secretary, the SPG was significantly restructured in 2018 to be chaired directly by the National Security Advisor (NSA). Its membership includes top-tier bureaucrats like the Chiefs of the armed forces, the RBI Governor, and key ministry Secretaries.
📌 Amendments • Constitution
Q.16) Which Constitutional Amendment Act (1971) made it clear that the Parliament has the power to amend any part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights, under Article 368?
Ans > 24th Amendment Act
- The Golaknath Case Catalyst: In the landmark 1967 Golaknath case, the Supreme Court radically ruled that Parliament could not amend Fundamental Rights, essentially placing them beyond the reach of Article 368. This judicial roadblock severely restricted the Indira Gandhi government’s ability to implement aggressive socialist policies.
- Restoring Parliamentary Supremacy: To decisively overcome this judicial constraint, the government enacted the 24th Constitutional Amendment Act in 1971. This amendment explicitly altered Article 13 and Article 368 to clarify beyond doubt that Parliament possesses the absolute power to amend any part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights.
- Presidential Assent Made Mandatory: Furthermore, the 24th Amendment fundamentally altered the legislative process by making it completely obligatory for the President of India to give their assent to a Constitutional Amendment Bill once passed by Parliament, effectively stripping away any presidential veto power on constitutional changes.
📌 Amendments • DPSP
Q.17) The 25th Amendment Act (1971) inserted Article 31C. It gave primacy to the Directive Principles contained in Article 39(b) and (c) over the Fundamental Rights contained in Articles:
Ans > 14, 19, and 31
- Advancing the Socialist Directives: Enacted in rapid succession after the 24th Amendment, the 25th Amendment Act of 1971 was specifically engineered to further the government’s socialist agenda. It aimed to aggressively pursue land reform and wealth redistribution by permanently shielding these economic policies from judicial scrutiny.
- The Insertion of Article 31C: The amendment introduced a highly controversial new Article 31C. This article provided that any law made to give effect to the Directive Principles specified in Article 39(b) (equitable distribution of material resources) and Article 39(c) (prevention of wealth concentration) could not be easily challenged in court.
- Overriding Core Fundamental Rights: Crucially, Article 31C dictated that such wealth-redistribution laws could not be declared unconstitutional or struck down on the grounds that they directly violated the Fundamental Rights guaranteed by Article 14 (Equality before law), Article 19 (Freedoms), or Article 31 (Right to property).
📌 Amendments • Basic Structure
Q.18) The 42nd Amendment Act (1976) attempted to extend the scope of Article 31C by giving primacy to all Directive Principles over Fundamental Rights. Which landmark Supreme Court case struck down this specific expansion?
Ans > Minerva Mills case (1980)
- Overreach of the 42nd Amendment: During the controversial period of the Emergency, the 42nd Amendment Act (1976) attempted a massive, unprecedented constitutional overhaul. It amended Article 31C to give sweeping, absolute primacy to all Directive Principles of State Policy (Part IV) over the core Fundamental Rights (Articles 14, 19, and 31).
- The Minerva Mills Challenge: A struggling textile mill in Karnataka legally challenged the forced nationalization of its industry by the government, leading to the monumental Minerva Mills vs. Union of India case in 1980. The Supreme Court was forced to review this massive expansion of Article 31C.
- Restoring the Constitutional Balance: The Supreme Court definitively struck down this expansive clause, ruling that the Indian Constitution is securely founded on the “bedrock of balance” between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles. The Court stated that giving absolute primacy to one over the other destroys the basic structure of the Constitution.
📌 Amendments • Tribunals
Q.19) Which Constitutional Amendment Act inserted a new Part XIV-A (Tribunals) containing Articles 323A and 323B?
Ans > 42nd Amendment Act (1976)
- Reducing the Heavy Judicial Burden: By the mid-1970s, the traditional court system in India was severely clogged with highly specialized administrative, service, and tax disputes. To expedite justice and reduce the immense burden on High Courts, the Swaran Singh Committee heavily recommended the establishment of specialized tribunals.
- Introduction of Part XIV-A: Acting on this recommendation during the Emergency, the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976 added a completely new part to the Constitution—Part XIV-A, titled “Tribunals.” This formally constitutionalized the concept of quasi-judicial administrative bodies in the Indian legal framework.
- The Function of Articles 323A and 323B: This new part contained two distinct articles. Article 323A specifically empowers Parliament to establish Administrative Tribunals to resolve disputes regarding public servants. Article 323B allows both Parliament and State Legislatures to set up tribunals for other technical matters like taxation, foreign exchange, and land reforms.
📌 Amendments • Emergency
Q.20) The 44th Amendment Act (1978) substituted the term “Internal Disturbance” with “Armed Rebellion” in Article 352. It also required that a National Emergency can only be declared by the President on the written advice of the:
Ans > Cabinet
- Post-Emergency Democratic Reforms: The 44th Amendment Act was purposefully enacted by the newly elected Janata Party government in 1978. Its primary objective was to systematically undo the severe distortions and authoritarian provisions introduced during the 1975-1977 Emergency by the sweeping 42nd Amendment.
- Tightening the Emergency Grounds: It struck out the vague and highly subjective phrase “Internal Disturbance” and replaced it with the much stricter, tangible term “Armed Rebellion” in Article 352. This ensured that a National Emergency could no longer be declared simply because of domestic political protests or civil unrest.
- Mandating Written Cabinet Advice: To fundamentally prevent the Prime Minister from unilaterally and secretly imposing an emergency (as Indira Gandhi did in 1975), the amendment inserted a safeguard mandating that the President can proclaim an Emergency only after receiving a formal, written recommendation from the entire Union Cabinet.
📌 Amendments • Fundamental Rights
Q.21) Which Amendment Act is recognized for making primary education a Fundamental Right (Article 21A) and adding the 11th Fundamental Duty?
Ans > 86th Amendment Act (2002)
- Elevation to a Fundamental Right: Before this pivotal amendment, providing free and compulsory education was merely an aspirational Directive Principle under Article 45. The 86th Constitutional Amendment Act of 2002 revolutionized India’s educational framework by inserting Article 21A, making primary education a legally justifiable Fundamental Right for children aged 6 to 14.
- Subsequent Changes to Directive Principles: Because children aged 6-14 were now covered under Article 21A, the amendment consequentially altered the subject matter of the old Article 45. It now directs the State to endeavor to provide early childhood care and education for all children until they complete the age of six years.
- Addition of the 11th Fundamental Duty: To ensure strict parental participation in this educational push, the amendment also added a new clause (k) to Article 51A. This established an 11th Fundamental Duty, requiring every citizen who is a parent or guardian to provide educational opportunities to their child.
📌 Amendments • Executive
Q.22) Which Constitutional Amendment Act restricted the size of the Council of Ministers to 15% of the total strength of the Lok Sabha / State Legislative Assembly?
Ans > 91st Amendment Act (2003)
- Curbing Jumbo Ministries and Defections: Historically, Prime Ministers and Chief Ministers frequently created excessively large “jumbo ministries.” They handed out minister portfolios to appease fractured political allies and prevent defections in unstable coalition governments, a practice that severely drained the public exchequer.
- Imposing the 15% Constitutional Cap: To enforce strict political morality and curb this inefficient practice, the 91st Constitutional Amendment Act (2003) amended Articles 75 and 164. It constitutionally mandated that the total number of Ministers, including the PM/CM, absolutely cannot exceed 15% of the total strength of the respective lower house.
- Minimum Limit for Small States: Acknowledging the baseline administrative needs of geographically or demographically smaller states (like Goa or Sikkim), the amendment prudently provided a caveat: the number of ministers in a state shall not be less than 12, regardless of how small the assembly’s total strength is.
📌 Amendments • Co-operatives
Q.23) The 97th Constitutional Amendment Act (2011) gave constitutional status to Co-operative Societies. It added which new Part to the Constitution?
Ans > Part IX-B
- Protecting Grassroots Economics: The cooperative sector plays a massive, foundational role in India’s rural economy, particularly in the dairy, banking, and agriculture sectors. However, many grassroots societies suffered heavily from persistent political interference and poor internal management.
- Three-Tier Constitutional Protection: The 97th Amendment Act of 2011 aimed to insulate them by acting on three constitutional fronts. First, it made the right to form cooperative societies a Fundamental Right under Article 19(1)(c). Second, it added a new Directive Principle (Article 43B) directing the state to promote them.
- Insertion of Part IX-B: Finally, and most comprehensively, it inserted a completely new section into the Constitution, Part IX-B (Articles 243ZH to 243ZT). This dedicated part dictates strict, standardized guidelines for the incorporation, board composition, terms of office, and regular auditing of cooperative societies across the nation.
📌 Amendments • Taxation
Q.24) The 101st Constitutional Amendment Act (2016) introduced the Goods and Services Tax (GST). Which new Article was inserted to establish the GST Council?
Ans > Article 279A
- Overhauling Indirect Taxation: The 101st Constitutional Amendment Act implemented the most significant, sweeping tax reform in India’s independent history. It replaced a highly complex, cascading web of central and state indirect taxes (like excise, VAT, and service tax) with a single, unified Goods and Services Tax (GST).
- Concurrent Taxation Powers: To make this work, it inserted Article 246A. This groundbreaking article gave both the Parliament and State Legislatures concurrent, simultaneous power to make laws with respect to GST, fundamentally altering the traditional federal financial relationship between the Centre and States.
- Establishment of the GST Council: Crucially, to manage this new system, it inserted Article 279A, empowering the President to constitute the GST Council. Chaired by the Union Finance Minister, this joint federal forum dictates all vital recommendations on tax rates, exemptions, thresholds, and dispute resolution.
📌 Amendments • Commissions
Q.25) Which Constitutional Amendment Act granted constitutional status to the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC)?
Ans > 102nd Amendment Act (2018)
- From Statutory to Constitutional: The National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) was originally set up in 1993 as a mere statutory body under an Act of Parliament following the historic Mandal case judgment. Consequently, it lacked the strong constitutional teeth that the commissions for SCs and STs possessed.
- The Insertion of Article 338B: The 102nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 2018 permanently rectified this disparity. It inserted a new Article 338B into the Constitution, officially granting high-level constitutional status to the NCBC, placing it on absolute par with the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
- Enhanced Empowerment and Grievance Redressal: This elevation significantly enhanced the NCBC’s powers. Instead of just advising on inclusion lists, it now has the independent authority to investigate specific grievances regarding the deprivation of rights of socially and educationally backward classes, possessing the formidable powers of a civil court.
📌 Amendments • Fundamental Rights
Q.26) The 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act (2019) provided for a maximum of 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS). It amended which two Articles of the Constitution?
Ans > Articles 15 and 16
- Addressing Economic Backwardness: Historically, affirmative action and reservations in India were strictly and exclusively based on social and educational backwardness (caste-based discrimination). The 103rd Amendment Act introduced a massive paradigm shift by legally recognizing economic disadvantage among the unreserved (“forward”) categories as a valid ground for state support.
- Amending Educational Rights: To achieve this, the amendment altered two core Fundamental Rights. It added clause (6) to Article 15, allowing the state to make special provisions—specifically including admissions to educational institutions (both public and private)—for the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS).
- Amending Employment Quotas: Furthermore, it added clause (6) to Article 16, permitting the government to reserve up to 10% of appointments or posts in public employment in favor of EWS citizens. This 10% quota operates independently and in addition to the existing 49.5% reservation cap for SCs, STs, and OBCs.
📌 Amendments • Legislature
Q.27) The 104th Constitutional Amendment Act (2020) extended political reservations for SCs and STs for another ten years, but officially ended the provision for nominating members of which community to the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies?
Ans > The Anglo-Indian community
- Extending SC/ST Political Reservations: Since the adoption of the Constitution in 1950, political reservations for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies (under Articles 330 and 332) have been continually extended every ten years. The 104th Amendment Act maintained this tradition, extending these vital democratic reservations until 2030.
- Ending Anglo-Indian Nominations: However, the amendment made a historic, permanent break with the past regarding the Anglo-Indian community. Under Articles 331 and 333, the President and State Governors previously held the discretionary power to nominate members of this specific community to legislative bodies if they were deemed underrepresented.
- Rationale for the Abolition: The government successfully argued that the Anglo-Indian community’s socio-economic status had significantly improved over 70 years and their absolute numbers had drastically dwindled, rendering the nomination provision obsolete. Consequently, the amendment did not extend this provision, officially abolishing the reserved seats.
📌 Special Provisions • States
Q.28) Article 371 of the Constitution makes special provisions for the establishment of separate development boards for Vidarbha, Marathwada, Saurashtra, and Kutch in the states of:
Ans > Maharashtra and Gujarat
- The Principle of Asymmetrical Federalism: While the Indian Constitution generally applies uniformly across the country, Part XXI contains “Temporary, Transitional and Special Provisions.” Article 371 kicks off this section, brilliantly representing India’s asymmetrical federalism by accommodating highly specific regional developmental needs to prevent internal resentment and secessionist tendencies.
- Special Responsibilities of the Governor: Under Article 371, the President can authorize the Governors of Maharashtra and Gujarat to assume special, independent responsibilities. This is a unique constitutional departure from the normal democratic rule where a Governor must act solely and strictly on the advice of the State Cabinet.
- Mandating Regional Development Boards: The core, functional purpose of this provision is to constitutionally mandate the establishment of separate development boards for historically backward regions: Vidarbha and Marathwada in Maharashtra, and Saurashtra and Kutch in Gujarat, ensuring equitable allocation of state funds for technical education and vocational training.
📌 Special Provisions • States
Q.29) Article 371A gives special provisions to the state of Nagaland. Under this Article, acts of Parliament relating to Naga religious or social practices do not apply unless approved by the:
Ans > State Legislative Assembly of Nagaland
- Historical Context and the Naga Accord: Article 371A was carefully inserted into the Constitution by the 13th Constitutional Amendment Act in 1962, following the complex 16-point agreement between the Government of India and the Naga People’s Convention. It was a crucial political compromise that directly paved the way for the creation of the State of Nagaland in 1963.
- Protecting Tribal Customary Law: The primary objective of this powerful article is to deeply protect the unique cultural, historical, and social identity of the Naga tribes. It dictates that no act of the Indian Parliament regarding Naga religious or social practices, customary law, or ownership and transfer of land shall automatically apply to Nagaland.
- The State Assembly’s Veto Power: Such central laws can only apply within the borders of Nagaland if the State Legislative Assembly specifically passes a resolution formally adopting them. This effectively gives the local state assembly a massive constitutional veto power over Parliament on matters concerning their traditional way of life.
📌 Special Provisions • States
Q.30) Article 371G provides similar protections regarding Mizo religious or social practices and Mizo customary law for the state of:
Ans > Mizoram
- The Historic Mizo Peace Accord: Similar to the situation in Nagaland, the special constitutional provisions for Mizoram were born out of a desperate need for a lasting peace settlement. Article 371G was inserted by the 53rd Constitutional Amendment Act in 1986 following the signing of the historic Mizo Peace Accord, which successfully ended two devastating decades of insurgency.
- Constitutional Safeguards for Mizo Culture: This article closely mirrors the strong cultural protections granted to Nagaland. It firmly and explicitly stipulates that Acts of Parliament relating to Mizo religious or social practices, Mizo customary law and procedure, and the administration of civil and criminal justice involving decisions according to Mizo customary law shall not automatically apply to the state.
- State Assembly Supremacy on Land and Culture: Furthermore, central parliamentary laws concerning the ownership and transfer of land are also strictly restricted. These laws remain completely inapplicable in Mizoram unless the locally elected Mizoram Legislative Assembly formally resolves to adopt them, thus permanently securing their socio-cultural autonomy within the Indian Union.
📌 Quick Summary — Polity Set 180
- Article 32 & Laches: The Doctrine of Laches generally does not strictly bar Article 32 petitions.
- Judge Impeachment (LS): Requires at least 100 signatures in the Lok Sabha.
- Judge Impeachment (RS): Requires at least 50 signatures in the Rajya Sabha.
- Investigation Committee: Does NOT include the Union Law Minister.
- Presidential Advisory: Article 143 grants the President power to consult the Supreme Court.
- SC Binding Opinion: SC is only bound to answer on pre-constitution treaty disputes under Art 143(2).
- PESA Act 1996: Enacted based on the recommendations of the Bhuria Committee.
- Forest Rights Act: The Gram Sabha is the authority to initiate the determination process.
- Women’s Safeguards: National Commission for Women (NCW) established in 1990.
- Child Rights (NCPCR): Operates under the Ministry of Women and Child Development.
- Economic Competition: CCI replaced the MRTP Commission in 2003.
- Corporate Tribunals: NCLT and NCLAT constituted under the Companies Act, 2013.
- Chief of Defence Staff: The CDS holds the rank of a Four-star General.
- National Security Council: The NSC is headed directly by the Prime Minister.
- Strategic Policy Group: It is the core inter-ministerial coordination mechanism of the NSC.
- 24th Amendment: Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights.
- 25th Amendment: Gave primacy to DPSP Articles 39(b) and (c) over Articles 14, 19, and 31.
- Minerva Mills (1980): Struck down the 42nd Amendment’s expansion of Article 31C.
- Tribunals (Part XIV-A): Inserted into the Constitution by the 42nd Amendment Act.
- 44th Amendment: Emergency declaration requires written advice of the Cabinet.
- 86th Amendment: Made primary education a Fundamental Right (Article 21A).
- 91st Amendment: Restricted the Council of Ministers’ size to 15%.
- 97th Amendment: Granted constitutional status to Co-operative Societies (Part IX-B).
- 101st Amendment (GST): Inserted Article 279A to establish the GST Council.
- 102nd Amendment: Granted constitutional status to the NCBC (Article 338B).
- 103rd Amendment: Provided 10% EWS reservation by amending Articles 15 and 16.
- 104th Amendment: Ended Anglo-Indian community nominations to the legislature.
- Article 371: Development boards for Vidarbha, Marathwada, Saurashtra, Kutch (MH & GJ).
- Article 371A (Nagaland): Acts require State Assembly approval to apply.
- Article 371G (Mizoram): Provides similar cultural/legal protections for Mizo practices.
Timer ⏳
15:00
Progress (0/30)
Click any card to flip and reveal the summarized answer!
Smart Review: Questions you got wrong appear here for focused study.