1. Which of the following is not a limitation on the amending power of Parliament under Article 368?
A. It cannot alter the basic structure of the Constitution.
B. It cannot convert India into a theocratic state.
C. It cannot amend Fundamental Rights at all.
D. It cannot alter the principle of judicial review.
B. It cannot convert India into a theocratic state.
C. It cannot amend Fundamental Rights at all.
D. It cannot alter the principle of judicial review.
Correct Answer: C
Explanation: Parliament can amend Fundamental Rights (1st, 25th, 42nd Amendments), provided the basic structure is preserved.
Explanation: Parliament can amend Fundamental Rights (1st, 25th, 42nd Amendments), provided the basic structure is preserved.
2. In the context of Article 356 (President’s Rule), which principle was laid down in S.R. Bommai?
A. The President’s satisfaction is final and beyond judicial review.
B. The floor test is the only method to prove majority in the legislature.
C. The President must always dissolve the State Assembly once Article 356 is imposed.
D. Governors have unfettered discretion in recommending President’s Rule.
B. The floor test is the only method to prove majority in the legislature.
C. The President must always dissolve the State Assembly once Article 356 is imposed.
D. Governors have unfettered discretion in recommending President’s Rule.
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: SR Bommai laid that majority must be tested on the floor of the House.
Explanation: SR Bommai laid that majority must be tested on the floor of the House.
3. The doctrine of prospective overruling was first adopted in India in which case?
A. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala
B. Golak Nath v. State of Punjab
C. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
D. Minerva Mills v. Union of India
B. Golak Nath v. State of Punjab
C. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
D. Minerva Mills v. Union of India
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: Golak Nath introduced prospective overruling. Parliament could not amend Fundamental Rights, but ruling applied only prospectively.
Explanation: Golak Nath introduced prospective overruling. Parliament could not amend Fundamental Rights, but ruling applied only prospectively.
4. Which of the following correctly describes parliamentary privileges under Articles 105 and 194?
A. They are absolute and beyond judicial review.
B. They are subject to Fundamental Rights.
C. They are codified exhaustively in the Constitution.
D. They apply only to Lok Sabha, not Rajya Sabha.
B. They are subject to Fundamental Rights.
C. They are codified exhaustively in the Constitution.
D. They apply only to Lok Sabha, not Rajya Sabha.
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: Keshav Singh case stated that privileges are subject to Fundamental Rights. They are not absolute or fully codified and apply to both Houses.
Explanation: Keshav Singh case stated that privileges are subject to Fundamental Rights. They are not absolute or fully codified and apply to both Houses.
5. Which doctrine was applied in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) to expand the scope of Article 21?
A. Doctrine of Severability
B. Doctrine of Due Process (substantive and procedural)
C. Doctrine of Pith and Substance
D. Doctrine of Colourable Legislation
B. Doctrine of Due Process (substantive and procedural)
C. Doctrine of Pith and Substance
D. Doctrine of Colourable Legislation
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: The Court held “procedure established by law” must be just, fair, and reasonable, effectively introducing due process.
Explanation: The Court held “procedure established by law” must be just, fair, and reasonable, effectively introducing due process.
6. Which of the following constitutional provisions explicitly requires ratification by at least half the State legislatures for an amendment?
A. Change in representation of States in Parliament
B. Change in Directive Principles of State Policy
C. Change in Fundamental Duties
D. Change in President’s ordinance-making power
B. Change in Directive Principles of State Policy
C. Change in Fundamental Duties
D. Change in President’s ordinance-making power
Correct Answer: A
Explanation: Amendments affecting federal structure (e.g., representation of States in Parliament, Supreme Court/High Courts powers) require State ratification.
Explanation: Amendments affecting federal structure (e.g., representation of States in Parliament, Supreme Court/High Courts powers) require State ratification.
7. The Kesavananda Bharati case was decided by a bench of how many judges?
A. 7
B. 9
C. 11
D. 13
B. 9
C. 11
D. 13
Correct Answer: D
Explanation: It was decided by the largest bench in Indian judicial history: 13 judges, with a 7:6 verdict.
Explanation: It was decided by the largest bench in Indian judicial history: 13 judges, with a 7:6 verdict.
8. Which principle was laid down in Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997) regarding Tribunals?
A. Tribunals are substitutes for High Courts.
B. Tribunal decisions are final and beyond review.
C. Tribunal decisions are subject to judicial review by High Courts.
D. Tribunals can strike down constitutional amendments.
B. Tribunal decisions are final and beyond review.
C. Tribunal decisions are subject to judicial review by High Courts.
D. Tribunals can strike down constitutional amendments.
Correct Answer: C
Explanation: Tribunals are supplementary, not substitutes; their decisions can be reviewed under Articles 226/227.
Explanation: Tribunals are supplementary, not substitutes; their decisions can be reviewed under Articles 226/227.
9. Which of the following is an essential feature of federalism as part of the basic structure in India?
A. Equal powers for Union and States
B. Judicial review of Centre-State disputes
C. Complete autonomy of States
D. Exclusive power of Parliament to amend State List
B. Judicial review of Centre-State disputes
C. Complete autonomy of States
D. Exclusive power of Parliament to amend State List
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: Federalism is asymmetric in India; judicial review of Centre–State disputes under Article 131 maintains balance.
Explanation: Federalism is asymmetric in India; judicial review of Centre–State disputes under Article 131 maintains balance.
10. Under Article 123, the President’s ordinance-making power is subject to which limitation?
A. It can amend the Constitution.
B. It requires prior approval of the Governor.
C. It lapses if not approved by Parliament within six weeks of reassembly.
D. It continues indefinitely until revoked.
B. It requires prior approval of the Governor.
C. It lapses if not approved by Parliament within six weeks of reassembly.
D. It continues indefinitely until revoked.
Correct Answer: C
Explanation: Ordinances lapse if not approved within six weeks of Parliament reassembling.
Explanation: Ordinances lapse if not approved within six weeks of Parliament reassembling.
Subscribe for updates
Join 10,000+ subscribers.
RU
Ruchika Mohapatra
Contributing author
Have a doubt about this?Ask Doubts
