Indian Polity Set 70
🔍
📌 Judiciary • Supreme Court
Q.1) The Supreme Court of India was inaugurated on January 28, 1950. Which court did it succeed?
Ans > The Federal Court of India (established under the Government of India Act, 1935)
- The Transition of Power: The Supreme Court of India was inaugurated exactly two days after India became a Sovereign Democratic Republic. It directly succeeded the Federal Court of India, which was established under the Government of India Act of 1935 and had functioned as the highest judicial body from 1937 to 1950.
- Abolition of the Privy Council: Alongside replacing the Federal Court, the new Supreme Court also replaced the British Privy Council as the absolute highest court of appeal for India. This crucial step completely localized the ultimate judicial authority within the Indian subcontinent, breaking final legal ties with the British crown.
- The Inaugural Venue: The prestigious inauguration ceremony took place in the Chamber of Princes located within the Parliament building. The Supreme Court continued to hold its sittings in this historic chamber for several years until it finally moved to its present, dedicated premises in 1958.
📌 Constitution • Supreme Court
Q.2) Part V of the Constitution deals with the organization, independence, jurisdiction, and powers of the Supreme Court in Articles:
Ans > 124 to 147
- The Constitutional Framework: Part V of the Indian Constitution is titled “The Union,” and Chapter IV within this specific part exclusively governs the Union Judiciary. Articles 124 to 147 meticulously lay down the structural and functional framework of the Supreme Court, ensuring its robust independence.
- Upholding Separation of Powers: These defining articles are vital for upholding the democratic doctrine of separation of powers. They establish the Supreme Court not merely as the highest court of appeal, but as the ultimate interpreter and guardian of the Constitution, keeping a continuous check on the legislative and executive branches.
- Comprehensive Legal Coverage: The constitutional provisions encompass a wide spectrum of judicial mechanics, ranging from the appointment and removal of judges (Article 124), the physical seat of the Supreme Court (Article 130), its original jurisdiction (Article 131), to its advisory jurisdiction (Article 143), creating a fully self-contained judicial ecosystem.
📌 Legislature • Judicial Strength
Q.3) The Constitution originally fixed the strength of the Supreme Court at eight (one chief justice and seven other judges). Who is authorised to regulate and increase this number?
Ans > The Parliament
- Original Constitutional Limit: When the Constitution formally commenced in 1950, Article 124(1) established a highly compact Supreme Court comprising exactly one Chief Justice and seven other judges. The framers intentionally left the future expansion of this number entirely to the legislative wisdom of the Parliament to manage growing workloads.
- Continuous Legislative Expansions: Recognizing the heavily mounting pendency of cases over the decades, Parliament has utilized this constitutional power multiple times through various Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Acts. The sanctioned strength was increased sequentially to 10 in 1956, 13 in 1960, 17 in 1977, 25 in 1986, and 30 in 2008.
- Current Judicial Strength: The most recent and significant legislative intervention regarding bench strength occurred in 2019. The Parliament further increased the maximum number of Supreme Court judges from 31 to 34 (including the Chief Justice of India) to tackle the massive, nationwide backlog of litigation reaching the apex court.
📌 Judiciary • Appointment
Q.4) To be appointed as a judge of the Supreme Court, a person must have been a judge of a High Court (or high courts in succession) for at least:
Ans > 5 years
- Ensuring Adjudicatory Experience: The framers of the Constitution stipulated the mandatory five-year High Court tenure under Article 124(3)(a) to strictly guarantee that only individuals with substantial, proven adjudicatory experience at the state appellate level can ascend to the nation’s absolute highest judicial forum.
- The Crucial Succession Clause: The constitutional clause explicitly mentions “two or more such Courts in succession.” This thoughtful provision ensures that judges who are administratively transferred across different state High Courts during their career are not penalized, and their cumulative judicial service is rightfully counted toward their apex eligibility.
- Elevation Norms in Practice: While the Constitution mandates a mere five years of experience on paper, in practical terms, the Supreme Court Collegium typically recommends current Chief Justices of High Courts or highly senior High Court judges for elevation, meaning successful appointees usually possess far more than the minimum five years.
📌 Judiciary • Appointment
Q.5) Alternatively, a person can be appointed as a Supreme Court judge if they have been an advocate of a High Court for at least:
Ans > 10 years
- The Bar as a Source of Talent: Article 124(3)(b) formally and legally recognizes that exceptional legal acumen is not confined solely to those already serving on the bench. By allowing advocates with ten years of High Court practice to be appointed, the Constitution opens the doors for eminent practicing lawyers to enter the Supreme Court.
- Rare but Significant Elevations: Direct elevation from the practicing Bar to the Supreme Court bench is historically quite rare compared to traditional promotions from the High Court bench. However, this pathway has successfully produced some of India’s most brilliant legal minds, bringing fresh, practical perspectives directly from active, high-stakes litigation.
- Notable Direct Appointees: Justice S.M. Sikri was the historic pioneer, becoming the very first advocate to be directly elevated to the Supreme Court in 1964 (and later serving as Chief Justice). More recent notable examples include Justice Indu Malhotra and Justice Rohinton Nariman, proving the enduring value of this clause.
📌 Judiciary • Qualifications
Q.6) What is the minimum age prescribed by the Constitution for appointment as a judge of the Supreme Court?
Ans > No minimum age is prescribed
- Focus on Qualifications Over Age: Unlike the explicit constitutional age requirements set for the President (35), Governor (35), or Members of Parliament (25/30), the Constitution notably omits any minimum age for Supreme Court judges. The framers prioritized specific professional milestones over an arbitrary chronological baseline.
- The Practical Reality of Appointment: Although theoretically, a 31-year-old who began legal practice at 21 could qualify by completing 10 years at the Bar, the rigorous Collegium system and the immense time required to build a national legal reputation mean that appointees are almost invariably in their late 50s or early 60s.
- Contrast with Global Jurisdictions: This specific constitutional omission contrasts with several global jurisdictions that prescribe strict age floors for their highest constitutional courts. In India, the implicit assumption is that fulfilling the stringent professional experience criteria inherently guarantees the deep maturity and seasoned judgment expected of an apex justice.
📌 Judiciary • Tenure
Q.7) A judge of the Supreme Court holds office until he attains the age of:
Ans > 65 years
- The Constitutional Benchmark: Article 124(2) unambiguously caps the active tenure of a Supreme Court judge at the exact age of 65 years. This uniform retirement age was established to ensure a continuous infusion of fresh judicial perspectives while providing judges a securely long tenure to function without fear or favor.
- Distinction from High Courts: It is highly crucial to note that this apex retirement age is higher than that of High Court judges, who currently retire at 62 years (increased from the original 60 years by the 15th Amendment in 1963). This age disparity naturally creates a hierarchy and a strong aspiration for elevation.
- Age Determination Authority: In the highly unlikely event of any dispute or ambiguity regarding the exact biological age of a sitting Supreme Court judge, the Constitution dictates that such a question shall be determined by such authority and in such a manner as Parliament may by law provide.
📌 Judiciary • Impeachment
Q.8) A judge of the Supreme Court can be removed from his office by an order of the President based on a resolution passed by the Parliament. The grounds for removal are:
Ans > Proved misbehaviour or incapacity
- The Impeachment Shield: The Constitution grants Supreme Court judges immense security of tenure to fiercely preserve judicial independence. Under Article 124(4), they cannot be removed arbitrarily or easily; removal requires a formidable parliamentary process colloquially referred to as “impeachment,” though the Constitution technically uses the term “removal.”
- Strict Grounds for Removal: A sitting judge can strictly only be removed on two highly specific grounds: “proved misbehaviour” or “incapacity.” This prevents politically motivated dismissals. The Judges (Inquiry) Act of 1968 governs the precise, legal procedure for investigating these serious allegations before Parliament can even initiate a final vote.
- The Special Majority Requirement: The final removal resolution must be passed in the exact same session by both Houses of Parliament. It requires a grueling special majority: a majority of the total membership of that House AND a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members present and voting.
📌 Judiciary • Impeachment History
Q.9) Has any judge of the Supreme Court of India been impeached and removed from office so far?
Ans > No, no judge of the Supreme Court has been impeached so far
- A Testament to Judicial Integrity: Since the historical inception of the Supreme Court in 1950, the stringent constitutional mechanism for removing a judge has never been fully successfully executed against a sitting apex court judge, highlighting both the intentionally high bar for removal and generally maintained institutional integrity.
- The Ramaswami Precedent: The closest the Indian parliament ever came to removing a Supreme Court judge was in 1993 with Justice V. Ramaswami. A formal inquiry committee definitively found him guilty of misbehaviour. However, the impeachment motion failed in the Lok Sabha because the ruling party abstained from voting.
- The Case of Justice Dipak Misra: In 2018, an unprecedented removal motion was moved by several opposition parties against the then-Chief Justice Dipak Misra. However, the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha summarily rejected the notice at the very preliminary stage, preventing the formation of an inquiry committee altogether.
📌 Judiciary • Ad hoc Judges
Q.10) When there is a lack of quorum of the permanent judges to hold or continue any session of the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice of India can appoint a High Court judge as an ad hoc judge. This requires the previous consent of the:
Ans > President
- Maintaining Judicial Continuity: Article 127 provides a crucial constitutional failsafe. If there is no working quorum of permanent Supreme Court judges available to hold or continue a specific session, the Chief Justice of India (CJI) is uniquely empowered to temporarily appoint a High Court judge to fill the numerical gap.
- Mandatory Prerequisites for Appointment: The CJI cannot act entirely unilaterally in this matter. This exceptional appointment requires two strict prerequisites: the prior consent of the President of India and mandatory consultation with the Chief Justice of the specific High Court from which the ad hoc judge is being drawn.
- Rights and Duties of the Ad Hoc Judge: While attending the sittings of the Supreme Court, the appointed ad hoc judge enjoys all the jurisdiction, powers, and privileges of a regular Supreme Court judge. However, it explicitly becomes their overriding constitutional duty to prioritize attendance at the Supreme Court over their normal High Court duties.
📌 Judiciary • Original Jurisdiction
Q.11) Article 131 of the Constitution gives the Supreme Court original and exclusive jurisdiction over disputes between:
Ans > The Centre and one or more states
- The Federal Arbiter: Article 131 completely cements the Supreme Court’s role as the ultimate umpire of India’s complex federal structure. It grants the court “original jurisdiction”—meaning cases can originate directly in the Supreme Court without going through lower courts—specifically for high-stakes political disputes between the Union and the States.
- Scope of Valid Disputes: This highly exclusive jurisdiction covers disputes between the Government of India and one or more States; between the Government of India and any State(s) on one side and other State(s) on the other; or directly between two or more States, provided the dispute involves a legal right.
- Exceptions to the Rule: This original jurisdiction is not entirely absolute. It notably excludes disputes arising out of pre-Constitution treaties, agreements, or covenants. Furthermore, inter-state river water disputes are typically handled by specialized tribunals established under Article 262, deliberately bypassing the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction under Article 131.
📌 Judiciary • Advisory Jurisdiction
Q.12) Which Article authorises the President to seek the opinion of the Supreme Court on any question of law or fact of public importance (Advisory Jurisdiction)?
Ans > Article 143
- The Presidential Reference: Article 143 formally establishes the unique “Advisory Jurisdiction” of the Supreme Court. It allows the President of India to consult the apex court if a critical question of law or fact has arisen, or is likely to arise, which is of such profound public importance that obtaining the court’s expert opinion is expedient.
- Non-Binding Nature of Advice: When the President makes such a formal reference, the Supreme Court may report its opinion to the President after conducting a hearing. Crucially, this opinion is purely advisory in nature; it is not a judicial pronouncement or decree, and therefore, it is not legally binding on the President or the Government.
- The Court’s Discretion to Refuse: The Supreme Court is not rigidly bound to answer every single presidential reference. In matters concerning general public importance (Article 143(1)), the court retains the constitutional discretion to respectfully decline to offer its opinion. However, for disputes arising from pre-constitution treaties, providing an opinion is mandatory.
📌 Judiciary • Court of Record
Q.13) Article 129 declares the Supreme Court to be a Court of Record. This means its judgments are recorded for perpetual memory and it has the power to punish for:
Ans > Contempt of court
- Preserving Institutional Dignity: By explicitly declaring the Supreme Court a “Court of Record” under Article 129, the Constitution ensures the institution possesses the inherent, unassailable power to protect its own dignity and authority. This inherently includes the formidable power to punish individuals or entities for contempt of itself.
- Perpetual Memory and Precedent: As a designated Court of Record, all acts, proceedings, and final judgments of the Supreme Court are enrolled for perpetual memory and testimony. These highly guarded records hold immense evidentiary value and cannot be questioned when produced before any subordinate court in the country.
- Scope of Contempt Powers: The legal power to punish for contempt is expansive. It robustly covers both “civil contempt” (the willful, intentional disobedience of any judgment, decree, or court order) and “criminal contempt” (publishing any matter that scandalizes the court, prejudices judicial proceedings, or interferes with the administration of justice).
📌 Constitution • State Executive
Q.14) Part VI of the Constitution deals with the government in the states. Which Articles cover the State Executive?
Ans > Articles 153 to 167
- The Mirror Image of the Union: Part VI of the Indian Constitution essentially mirrors the complex structural blueprint of the Union Government, carefully adapting it for the state level. Articles 153 to 167 specifically and exclusively outline the State Executive, establishing the constitutional machinery that governs daily state administration.
- Components of the Executive: These defining articles clearly clarify that the state executive is a collective, multi-tiered entity. It comprehensively includes the Governor (the constitutional head), the Chief Minister (the real, functioning executive), the Council of Ministers, and the Advocate General (the chief legal advisor to the state government).
- Exclusion of Jammu and Kashmir: Historically, it is vital to know that Part VI applied to all Indian states except the state of Jammu and Kashmir, which enjoyed a special status under Article 370. Following the historic abrogation of Article 370 in 2019, this specific constitutional exception is no longer applicable.
📌 State Executive • Advocate General
Q.15) The state executive consists of the Governor, the Chief Minister, the Council of Ministers, and the:
Ans > Advocate General of the state
- The State’s Chief Legal Advisor: Embedded firmly within the state executive under Article 165 is the Advocate General, serving as the absolute highest law officer within the state territory. This crucial position corresponds directly to the Attorney General of India at the central Union level, providing expert legal counsel.
- Qualifications and Appointment: To be successfully appointed as the Advocate General by the State Governor, an individual must strictly possess the exact same professional qualifications required to be appointed as a judge of a High Court, ensuring the state receives counsel of exceptional legal caliber.
- Rights and Limitations in Legislature: The Advocate General holds a highly unique constitutional privilege: the right to speak and take part in the proceedings of both Houses of the state legislature (or any legislative committee they are named to). However, they explicitly do not possess the right to vote in these proceedings.
📌 State Executive • Governor
Q.16) Originally, the Constitution provided for one governor for each state. Which Amendment Act facilitated the appointment of the same person as a governor for two or more states?
Ans > 7th Amendment Act of 1956
- The Original Constitutional Design: When the Constitution was originally drafted and adopted in 1950, Article 153 mandated a very strict one-to-one ratio: “There shall be a Governor for each State.” This rigid, inflexible structure did not properly account for administrative conveniences or temporary, sudden vacancies in neighboring states.
- The Catalyst for Change: The massive, complex reorganization of Indian states along linguistic lines in 1956 necessitated significant constitutional adjustments. The 7th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1956 was enacted to seamlessly facilitate these administrative shifts, deeply impacting several constitutional provisions, including the rigid structure of the state executive.
- Enabling Dual Governorships: To provide necessary administrative flexibility, the 7th Amendment appended a crucial proviso directly to Article 153. It legally authorized the Central Government to officially appoint the exact same person as the Governor for two or more states simultaneously, a practice commonly utilized today.
📌 State Executive • Governor Qualifications
Q.17) The Governor is appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal. The minimum age prescribed by the Constitution to be appointed as a Governor is:
Ans > 35 years
- Minimal Constitutional Criteria: The Constitution deliberately keeps the strict eligibility criteria for the high office of the Governor extremely brief and remarkably simple. Under Article 157, there are only two explicit qualifications: the individual must be a citizen of India, and they must have successfully completed the age of 35 years.
- Parity with the President: The minimum age requirement of 35 years perfectly mirrors the age requirement established for the President of India. This reflects the constitutional design where the Governor acts as the definitive constitutional head of the state, holding a position of dignity equivalent to the President at the Union level.
- Conventions Beyond the Constitution: While 35 is the absolute legal minimum, two strong political conventions have evolved: the nominee should ideally be an “outsider” (not belonging to the state they are appointed to) to ensure political neutrality, and the President conventionally consults the Chief Minister before finalizing the appointment.
📌 State Executive • Governor Oath
Q.18) Who administers the oath of office to the Governor of a state?
Ans > The Chief Justice of the concerned state High Court
- The Solemn Constitutional Vow: Before stepping into the formidable, powerful role of the state’s constitutional head, every incoming Governor must physically subscribe to an oath or affirmation. As detailed in Article 159, this oath binds them to faithfully execute the office and to rigorously preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.
- The Administering Authority: To strictly maintain the separation of powers and the immense dignity of the office, the oath is administered not by a political figure, but by the highest judicial officer resident in the state: the Chief Justice of the concerned state High Court, underscoring the legal gravity of the duties.
- Provisions for Judicial Absence: The Constitution is highly pragmatic and structurally accounts for unforeseen circumstances. If the Chief Justice of the High Court is legally absent, unavailable, or the office is temporarily vacant, the oath is then administered by the senior-most judge of that High Court who is currently available.
📌 State Executive • Governor Tenure
Q.19) A Governor holds office for a term of five years, but this term is subject to the pleasure of the:
Ans > President
- The Illusion of a Fixed Term: While Article 156(3) explicitly states that a Governor formally holds office for a term of five years from the date they enter the office, this tenure is highly conditional in reality. It is fundamentally overridden by Article 156(1), which makes the term completely subject to the “pleasure of the President.”
- Lack of Security of Tenure: Because the President constitutionally acts on the binding aid and advice of the Union Council of Ministers, the Governor essentially serves entirely at the pleasure of the Central Government. The Constitution provides absolutely no specific grounds or procedures for the removal of a Governor.
- Supreme Court Rulings on Dismissal: The Supreme Court has explicitly ruled that the President’s power to dismiss a Governor is not entirely absolute or arbitrary and must be exercised for valid reasons. However, a sudden change in the ruling party at the Centre historically frequently leads to the mass replacement of Governors.
📌 State Executive • Pardoning Power
Q.20) The Governor has the power to pardon, reprieve, respite, or remit punishments. However, unlike the President, the Governor CANNOT pardon:
Ans > A death sentence
- The Breadth of Clemency Powers: Article 161 confers vital, sovereign clemency powers upon the State Governor. They have the constitutional authority to grant pardons, reprieves, respites, or remissions of punishment, or to suspend, remit, or commute the sentence of any person convicted of an offense against a state law.
- The Critical Death Penalty Exception: The most significant, defining limitation on the Governor’s pardoning power lies strictly in cases of capital punishment. Even if a death sentence is awarded strictly under a state law, the Governor absolutely lacks the power to pardon it. The absolute pardon of a death sentence is exclusively the President’s prerogative.
- Suspension and Commutation Distinctions: It is highly important to note a legal nuance: while the Governor cannot completely pardon (forgive and wipe the slate clean) a death sentence, they do legally possess the authority to merely suspend, remit, or commute a death sentence under specific circumstances dictated by the Code of Criminal Procedure.
📌 State Executive • Ordinance
Q.21) Under Article 213, the Governor can promulgate ordinances when the state legislature is not in session. These ordinances must be approved by the state legislature within what time frame from its reassembly?
Ans > Six weeks
- Emergency Legislative Powers: Article 213 empowers the Governor to formally promulgate ordinances, functioning essentially as highly powerful temporary laws, when the state legislature is not currently in session and immediate, urgent legislative action is required. This extraordinary power perfectly mirrors the President’s ordinance-making power at the central level.
- The Strict Constitutional Expiry Clock: Ordinances are legally not permanent substitutes for democratic legislation. The Constitution strictly mandates that once the state legislature reassembles, the ordinance must be laid before it. If the legislature does not explicitly approve it, the ordinance automatically expires exactly six weeks from the date the legislature reassembled.
- Premature Disapproval: The six-week window is merely the maximum lifespan post-reassembly. The elected state legislature possesses the sovereign authority to prematurely kill the ordinance. If the legislative assembly passes a formal resolution disapproving the ordinance before the six weeks elapse, the ordinance ceases to operate immediately upon that negative vote.
📌 State Legislature • Nominations
Q.22) If a state has a legislative council, the Governor nominates what fraction of its members from amongst persons having special knowledge in literature, science, art, cooperative movement, and social service?
Ans > One-sixth
- Enriching the Upper House: In Indian states that operate with a bicameral legislature (having both an Assembly and a Legislative Council), the Constitution specifically seeks to inject specialized knowledge into the legislative process. It achieves this by allowing the Governor to bypass regular elections and directly nominate a specific fraction of members.
- The Mathematical Mandate: Article 171(5) clearly provides the exact, inflexible mathematical formula: the Governor shall nominate exactly one-sixth of the total members of the State Legislative Council. This strict ratio ensures a balanced representation without allowing nominated members to numerically overwhelm the democratically elected majority in the upper house.
- Specific Fields of Expertise: The Governor cannot nominate individuals randomly or arbitrarily. The Constitution strictly confines these high-level nominations to persons possessing specialized, proven knowledge or vast practical experience in five distinct fields: Literature, Science, Art, the Cooperative Movement, and Social Service, thereby elevating legislative debates.
📌 State Legislature • Bills
Q.23) Under Article 200, when a bill passed by the state legislature is presented to the Governor, he can give assent, withhold assent, return the bill (if not a money bill), or:
Ans > Reserve the bill for the consideration of the President
- The Governor’s Veto Toolkit: When a legislative bill successfully passes through the state legislature, it absolutely cannot become law without the Governor’s formal signature. Article 200 outlines the Governor’s options: grant assent (making it law), withhold assent (an absolute veto), return it for reconsideration, or utilize a unique federal mechanism.
- The Mechanics of Reservation: The power to “reserve a bill for the President’s consideration” is a highly unique federal tool. Once a Governor chooses this specific route, they essentially step entirely out of the legislative process for that bill. The bill is sent to the Centre, and the Governor has no further role.
- The Complete Shift of Authority: Upon official reservation, the absolute veto power completely transfers to the President of India under Article 201. The President can assent, withhold assent, or direct the Governor to return the bill to the state legislature. Crucially, even if passed again, the President is not bound to give assent.
📌 State Legislature • Reservation of Bills
Q.24) Reservation of a state bill for the consideration of the President is OBLIGATORY for the Governor if the bill:
Ans > Endangers the position of the state High Court
- Discretionary vs. Obligatory Reservation: In the vast majority of legislative scenarios, reserving a state bill for the President is a discretionary power exercised by the Governor to prevent unconstitutional state laws. However, the Constitution explicitly carves out one specific, completely non-negotiable scenario where the Governor has absolutely no choice.
- Protecting Judicial Independence: Under the strict second proviso to Article 200, if a state bill contains provisions that would legally derogate from or severely endanger the constitutionally guaranteed powers, position, and absolute independence of the state’s High Court, the reservation for Presidential consideration becomes legally obligatory.
- The Logic of the Exception: This strict constitutional mandate acts as a powerful, necessary safeguard against overreaching state legislatures. It inherently prevents any state government from passing retaliatory laws that could intentionally cripple its own High Court, ensuring that the federal structure and judicial independence remain protected by the central authority.
📌 State Executive • Advocate General
Q.25) Who is appointed by the Governor to act as the highest law officer in the state (Article 165)?
Ans > Advocate General
- The Apex Legal Counsel: As explicitly mandated by Article 165 of the Constitution, the Advocate General is the absolute supreme law officer of the state government. Their primary constitutional duty is to give expert legal advice to the state executive on highly complex matters referred to them directly by the Governor.
- Court Appearances and Representation: Beyond behind-the-scenes advisory roles, the Advocate General acts as the primary, face-forward litigator for the state. They have the constitutional right of audience in any court within the state’s territory and are heavily obligated to appear before the High Court in crucial cases where the state is a party.
- Remuneration and Political Tenure: Unlike regular government civil service employees, the Advocate General does not receive a fixed, constitutional salary. Their remuneration is determined entirely by the Governor. Furthermore, they hold office during the pleasure of the Governor, meaning they conventionally resign when the ruling government that originally appointed them loses political power.
📌 State Institutions • Election Commission
Q.26) The Governor appoints the State Election Commissioner. However, the State Election Commissioner can be removed only in the like manner and on the like grounds as a:
Ans > Judge of a High Court
- Securing Electoral Integrity: The State Election Commission (SEC) is tasked with the monumental, highly critical responsibility of conducting free and fair elections for all local bodies (Panchayats and Municipalities). To ensure the SEC can operate without political intimidation from the state government, the Constitution grants the Commissioner formidable security of tenure.
- Shielding from State Executive Control: Although the State Election Commissioner is technically appointed by the Governor (who fundamentally acts on the state government’s advice), the Governor is explicitly stripped of the power to independently remove them. This strongly prevents the Chief Minister from arbitrarily dismissing a Commissioner who makes politically inconvenient electoral decisions.
- The Complex Impeachment-Like Process: Article 243K guarantees that the Commissioner can only be removed in the “like manner and on the like grounds as a Judge of a High Court.” This means removal requires proven misbehaviour or incapacity, followed by a highly complex, nearly impossible impeachment process involving a special majority vote in the national Parliament.
📌 State Institutions • SPSC
Q.27) The Governor appoints the chairman and members of the State Public Service Commission. Who has the authority to REMOVE them?
Ans > The President
- A Unique Constitutional Anomaly: The State Public Service Commission (SPSC) presents a highly fascinating exception in Indian constitutional law regarding the delicate balance of power between the state and the center. While the power to successfully appoint the SPSC Chairman and its members lies squarely with the State Governor, the power to remove them absolutely does not.
- Federal Protection for State Institutions: To deeply insulate the SPSC from immense local political pressure and corruption—especially regarding the massive recruitment of civil servants—Article 317 vests the exclusive authority to remove SPSC members solely with the President of India, completely and intentionally bypassing the state executive and state legislature.
- The Supreme Court Inquiry Requirement: The President cannot remove SPSC members unilaterally or arbitrarily. If the proposed removal is based on serious grounds of “misbehaviour,” the President must formally refer the matter to the Supreme Court of India for a judicial inquiry. The President can only execute the removal if the Supreme Court advises it post-investigation.
📌 State Executive • Governor Discretion
Q.28) Article 163 establishes that there shall be a council of ministers to aid and advise the Governor, except when he is required to act in his:
Ans > Discretion
- The Core of the State Executive Machinery: Article 163 forms the absolute bedrock of the parliamentary democratic system at the state level. It strictly mandates the creation of a Council of Ministers, headed by the Chief Minister, whose primary, binding constitutional function is to “aid and advise” the Governor in the daily exercise of executive functions.
- The Binding Nature of Advice: In the vast, overwhelming majority of scenarios, this constitutional “advice” is practically and legally binding. The Governor fundamentally acts as a constitutional figurehead and must act according to the decisions of the elected Council of Ministers, accurately reflecting the democratic will of the state’s populace.
- The Discretionary Carve-Out: The highly crucial exception to this rule is embedded right in the article text: the Governor is legally not bound by cabinet advice when they are constitutionally required to act in their own “discretion.” In these very specific, rare situations, the Governor operates entirely independently of the state cabinet.
📌 State Executive • Situational Discretion
Q.29) Which of the following is a constitutional (situational) discretion of the Governor?
Ans > Appointing a Chief Minister when no party has a clear majority
- Situational vs. Constitutional Discretion: The Governor’s highly debated discretion essentially falls into two distinct categories. “Constitutional discretion” is explicitly written in the Constitution (e.g., reserving a bill). “Situational discretion” arises naturally from highly specific political circumstances where the Constitution is relatively silent, forcing the Governor to make an independent judgment call.
- Navigating a Hung Assembly: The absolute classic example of situational discretion is navigating a fractured electoral mandate where no single political party or pre-poll alliance secures a clear, numerical majority in the legislative assembly. In this chaotic vacuum, the Governor cannot rely on the “aid and advise” of a nonexistent cabinet.
- The Governor as the Political Referee: In a hung assembly, the Governor must independently evaluate post-poll alliances, highly scrutinized letters of support, and the volatile political landscape to determine which leader is most likely to command the confidence of the house. This subjective decision rests entirely on their situational discretion.
📌 State Executive • Collective Responsibility
Q.30) Under Article 164, the ministers hold office during the pleasure of the Governor, and the Council of Ministers is collectively responsible to the:
Ans > Legislative Assembly of the State
- The Principle of Collective Responsibility: Article 164 mathematically enshrines the absolutely most fundamental principle of a functioning parliamentary democracy: collective responsibility. This vital doctrine ensures that the executive branch (the government) remains perpetually and legally accountable to the legislative branch, and by direct extension, to the voting electorate.
- Sinking or Swimming Together: The Council of Ministers acts entirely as a unified, cohesive team. They are collectively responsible specifically to the Legislative Assembly (the lower, directly elected house), not the Legislative Council. If the Assembly passes a formal no-confidence motion, the entire Council of Ministers, including the Chief Minister, must resign immediately.
- Individual Responsibility Distinctions: While collectively responsible to the Assembly as a whole, individual ministers are individually responsible to the Governor, as they legally hold office during the Governor’s pleasure. This allows the Chief Minister to advise the Governor to remove a specific, non-performing minister without intentionally bringing down the entire state government.
📌 Quick Summary — Indian Polity Set 70
- Supreme Court Origin: The Supreme Court succeeded the Federal Court of India (1935 Act).
- Constitutional Provisions: Part V (Articles 124 to 147) deals with the Supreme Court.
- Judicial Strength: Parliament is authorised to regulate the number of SC judges.
- SC Appointment (Judge): Must have been a High Court judge for at least 5 years.
- SC Appointment (Advocate): Must have been a High Court advocate for at least 10 years.
- Age Limit for SC: No minimum age is prescribed for appointment as an SC judge.
- SC Retirement Age: A judge of the Supreme Court holds office until the age of 65.
- Removal Grounds: Impeachment is strictly based on proved misbehaviour or incapacity.
- Impeachment Record: No Supreme Court judge has been impeached and removed so far.
- Ad hoc Judges: Appointment of ad hoc judges requires the previous consent of the President.
- Original Jurisdiction: Article 131 covers disputes between the Centre and States.
- Advisory Jurisdiction: Article 143 allows the President to seek the Supreme Court’s opinion.
- Court of Record: Article 129 allows the Supreme Court to punish for contempt of court.
- State Executive Articles: Part VI (Articles 153 to 167) covers the State Executive.
- State Executive Composition: Includes the Governor, CM, Council of Ministers, and Advocate General.
- Dual Governorship: The 7th Amendment Act (1956) allows one governor for two or more states.
- Governor Age Requirement: Minimum age to be appointed as a Governor is 35 years.
- Governor’s Oath: Administered by the Chief Justice of the concerned state High Court.
- Governor’s Tenure: A Governor holds office subject to the pleasure of the President.
- Pardoning Power Limit: The Governor CANNOT pardon a death sentence.
- Ordinance Approval: Ordinances must be approved by the state legislature within six weeks.
- Council Nominations: The Governor nominates one-sixth of the Legislative Council members.
- Reserving Bills: The Governor can reserve a bill for the consideration of the President.
- Obligatory Reservation: Must reserve bills that endanger the state High Court’s position.
- Advocate General: Appointed by the Governor to act as the highest law officer in the state.
- Election Commissioner Removal: Removed like a High Court Judge (Special Majority).
- SPSC Members Removal: SPSC members can only be removed by the President.
- Governor’s Discretion: Article 163 allows the Governor to act in his own discretion.
- Situational Discretion: Used when appointing a CM in a hung assembly.
- Collective Responsibility: State ministers are collectively responsible to the Legislative Assembly.
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.