Questions on Landmark Cases on Constitutional Law
Practice these Questions on Landmark Cases on Constitutional Law and test yourself today!
QUESTIONS
1. In the Kesavananda Bharati verdict, which of the following was NOT identified as part of the basic structure?
a) Judicial review
b) Parliamentary form of government
c) Right to property
d) Separation of powers
Correct Answer: c) Right to property
Explanation: While several features were identified as part of the basic structure, right to property was specifically excluded. It was later removed as a fundamental right through constitutional amendment.
2. The Maneka Gandhi judgment expanded Article 21 by establishing which unique interpretation?
a) The interrelation between Articles 14, 19, and 21
b) The inclusion of privacy as a fundamental right
c) The right to travel abroad
d) The concept of due process
Correct Answer: a) The interrelation between Articles 14, 19, and 21
Explanation: The case revolutionized constitutional jurisprudence by establishing that any law affecting personal liberty would have to stand scrutiny of Articles 14, 19, and 21 conjunctively, not in isolation.
3. Which constitutional principle was primarily challenged through the second part of Section 4 of the 42nd Amendment Act in Minerva Mills case?
a) Judicial supremacy
b) Limited amendatory power
c) Balance between Fundamental Rights and DPSPs
d) Federal structure
Correct Answer: c) Balance between Fundamental Rights and DPSPs
Explanation: The amendment made Directive Principles superior to Fundamental Rights, disturbing the careful balance between them, which the Court held as violative of the basic structure.
4. In the I.R. Coelho case, what complex constitutional question was resolved regarding the Ninth Schedule?
a) Whether laws in Ninth Schedule are completely immune from judicial review
b) Whether basic structure doctrine applies to pre-1973 laws
c) Whether Article 31-B is constitutionally valid
d) Whether Parliament can add laws to Ninth Schedule
Correct Answer: a) Whether laws in Ninth Schedule are completely immune from judicial review
Explanation: The Court established that even laws in the Ninth Schedule would be subject to basic structure review if they violate fundamental rights forming part of the basic structure.
5. The S.R. Bommai judgment established which intricate principle regarding Article 356?
a) Complete immunity of presidential proclamation from judicial review
b) Necessity of floor test before proclamation
c) State’s right to challenge proclamation
d) Limited scope of judicial intervention
Correct Answer: b) Necessity of floor test before proclamation
Explanation: The Court mandated that the strength of the government should be tested on the floor of the House before invoking Article 356, except in extraordinary circumstances.
6. In M.C. Mehta’s environmental jurisprudence, which principle was NOT established?
a) Public Trust Doctrine
b) Precautionary Principle
c) Prior Appropriation Doctrine
d) Polluter Pays Principle
Correct Answer: c) Prior Appropriation Doctrine
Explanation: While M.C. Mehta cases established several environmental principles, the Prior Appropriation Doctrine (relating to water rights) was not among them.
7. The K.S. Puttaswamy judgment’s understanding of privacy encompasses which complex aspect?
a) Only informational privacy
b) Only bodily privacy
c) Only spatial privacy
d) Informational, bodily, and decisional privacy
Correct Answer: d) Informational, bodily, and decisional privacy
Explanation: The Court recognized privacy as a comprehensive right including multiple dimensions: informational privacy, bodily privacy, and decisional autonomy.
8. In Indra Sawhney, what was the Court’s position on reservations in promotions?
a) Completely prohibited
b) Allowed with conditions
c) Left to state discretion
d) Allowed only for SCs/STs
Correct Answer: a) Completely prohibited
Explanation: The Court held that Article 16(4) reservations are confined to initial appointments and cannot extend to promotions, leading to the 77th Constitutional Amendment.
9. The Vishaka guidelines derived their authority from which international convention?
a) Universal Declaration of Human Rights
b) CEDAW
c) International Labour Organization Convention
d) European Convention on Human Rights
Correct Answer: b) CEDAW
Explanation: The Court relied on the Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) to formulate binding guidelines in absence of domestic legislation.
10. In L. Chandra Kumar, what was held regarding the power of High Courts under Article 226?
a) Can be completely taken away by Parliament
b) Forms part of basic structure
c) Limited to fundamental rights only
d) Subject to Article 323A and 323B
Correct Answer: b) Forms part of basic structure
Explanation: The Court held that the power of judicial review under Article 226 forms part of the basic structure and cannot be ousted by any legislation.
Read More: Writ of Certiorari
Subscribe for updates
Join 10,000+ subscribers.
RU
Ruchika Mohapatra
Contributing author
Have a doubt about this?Ask Doubts
