UPSC Prelims 2018
Indian Polity Previous Year Questions (PYQs)

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 1 — 1 only

The Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 consolidated multiple food-related laws including the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, creating a unified regulatory framework for food safety in India. However, FSSAI operates as an autonomous statutory body under the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare with its own Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, not under the Director General of Health Services.

✅ Statement 1 – Correct: The Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 replaced the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, establishing FSSAI as the nodal regulatory body for food safety.
❌ Statement 2 – Incorrect: FSSAI is an autonomous statutory authority with its own Chairperson and CEO, not under the charge of the Director General of Health Services, though it functions under the administrative jurisdiction of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.

📝 Short Notes: Food Safety Regulatory Framework in India

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 1 — 1 only

The Parliament of India can indeed place laws in the Ninth Schedule through constitutional amendments to protect them from judicial review. However, the protection is not absolute—after the I.R. Coelho judgment (2007), laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after April 24, 1973, can be challenged if they violate the Basic Structure of the Constitution.

✅ Statement 1 – Correct: Parliament has the power to place laws in the Ninth Schedule through constitutional amendments, as it did first through the First Amendment Act, 1951.

❌ Statement 2 – Incorrect: The validity of Ninth Schedule laws can be examined by courts if they violate the Basic Structure doctrine, especially those added after April 24, 1973 (as per Kesavananda Bharati and I.R. Coelho cases).

📝 Short Notes: Ninth Schedule of the Constitution

• Introduction: Added by the First Constitutional Amendment Act, 1951, to protect land reform and other laws from judicial review.
• Purpose: Laws placed in the Ninth Schedule are protected from being challenged on the ground of violation of Fundamental Rights under Part III.
• Kesavananda Bharati Case (1973): Established the Basic Structure doctrine, limiting Parliament's amending power.
• I.R. Coelho Case (2007): Supreme Court held that laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after April 24, 1973, can be subject to judicial review if they violate the Basic Structure of the Constitution.
• Current Status: The Ninth Schedule currently contains 284 Acts and Regulations (as amended up to the 103rd Amendment).
• Limitation: While the Ninth Schedule provides protection, it is not a blanket immunity—the doctrine of Basic Structure acts as a constitutional safeguard against arbitrary laws.

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 2 — the powers of the Legislature of that State shall be exercisable by or under the authority of the Parliament.

When the President imposes President's Rule under Article 356 due to the breakdown of constitutional machinery in a state, the legislative powers of the state legislature are transferred to Parliament. Parliament becomes empowered to make laws for that state during this period, ensuring continuity of governance.

❌ Option 1 – Incorrect: The State Assembly is not automatically dissolved under Article 356; it can be kept in suspended animation or dissolved later through a separate proclamation.

✅ Option 2 – Correct: Article 356 explicitly provides that Parliament shall exercise the legislative powers of the state during President's Rule.

❌ Option 3 – Incorrect: Article 19 (fundamental rights like freedom of speech, movement) is not suspended under Article 356; such suspension occurs only during a National Emergency under Article 352.

❌ Option 4 – Incorrect: The President does not directly make laws; it is Parliament that exercises legislative powers for the state during President's Rule.

📝 Short Notes: Article 356 - President's Rule

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 1 — 1 only

The Speaker of a State Legislative Assembly vacates office if they cease to be a member of the Assembly (Article 179). However, when the Assembly is dissolved, the Speaker does not vacate office immediately but continues until a new Speaker is elected by the newly constituted Assembly, ensuring administrative continuity.

✅ Statement 1 – Correct: Article 179 of the Constitution explicitly mandates that the Speaker shall vacate office if they cease to be a member of the Legislative Assembly.

❌ Statement 2 – Incorrect: Upon dissolution of the Assembly, the Speaker does not vacate office immediately but continues until the first meeting of the new Assembly when a new Speaker is elected, ensuring continuity in legislative administration.

📝 Short Notes: Speaker of State Legislative Assembly

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 3 — 1, 2 and 4 only

The Rule of Law is a fundamental principle ensuring that all individuals and institutions, including the State, are accountable under publicly known, equally enforced laws. It emphasizes limitation of governmental powers, equality before law, and protection of civil liberties, while focusing on government's accountability to people rather than people's responsibility to government.

✅ Statement 1 – Correct: Limitation of powers is a core feature ensuring no authority is above the law and preventing arbitrary exercise of power.
✅ Statement 2 – Correct: Equality before law (Article 14) is a fundamental principle ensuring all individuals are treated equally regardless of status.
❌ Statement 3 – Incorrect: Rule of Law focuses on government's accountability to people and the legal framework, not people's responsibility to government.
✅ Statement 4 – Correct: Liberty and civil rights are protected under Rule of Law, safeguarding individual freedoms from arbitrary state action.

📝 Short Notes: Rule of Law

• Origin: Concept developed by A.V. Dicey, a British jurist, emphasizing supremacy of law over arbitrary power.
• Key Principles: (i) Supremacy of law over arbitrary power; (ii) Equality before law; (iii) Predominance of legal spirit and protection of rights through ordinary law.
• Constitutional Provisions: Article 14 (Equality before law), Article 21 (Protection of life and personal liberty), Article 32 (Right to Constitutional remedies).
• Application in India: Unlike British Rule of Law, Indian Constitution provides for preventive detention and certain emergency provisions that may temporarily restrict rights.
• Judicial Review: Courts can strike down arbitrary executive and legislative actions, ensuring adherence to Rule of Law.
• Accountability: Government and its officials are accountable to law; no one is above the law including the highest officials.

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 3 — Both 1 and 2

Both statements regarding the constitutional provisions for the Governor of a State are correct. Article 361 provides immunity to the Governor from criminal proceedings during their term of office, while Article 158 ensures that their emoluments and allowances cannot be diminished during their tenure.

✅ Statement 1 – Correct: Article 361 grants immunity to the Governor from criminal proceedings in any court during their term of office, though civil proceedings may be instituted with two months' prior notice.
✅ Statement 2 – Correct: Article 158 mandates that the emoluments and allowances of the Governor shall not be diminished during their term of office, ensuring financial independence.

📝 Short Notes: Constitutional Provisions for Governor

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 4 — None of the above

Both statements regarding Aadhaar are incorrect. The Aadhaar Act explicitly clarifies that Aadhaar is only a proof of identity and residence, not citizenship or domicile. Additionally, UIDAI has the authority to deactivate or omit Aadhaar numbers under specific circumstances, making Statement 2 also incorrect.

❌ Statement 1 – Incorrect: Aadhaar card cannot be used as proof of citizenship or domicile; it only serves as proof of identity and residence as per the Aadhaar Act, 2016.
❌ Statement 2 – Incorrect: The UIDAI can deactivate Aadhaar numbers temporarily and in certain cases can permanently omit them from the database.

📝 Short Notes: Aadhaar - Key Legal Provisions

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 2 — 2 only

The Right to Education (RTE) Act, 2009, mandates specific qualifications and eligibility criteria for teachers. Statement 2 is the only correct statement as it accurately reflects the requirement of passing the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) conducted as per NCTE guidelines for teaching primary classes.

❌ Statement 1 – Incorrect: The minimum qualifications for teachers are laid down by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), not by State Councils of Teacher Education. The NCTE is the national authority that sets uniform standards across India.

✅ Statement 2 – Correct: As per the RTE Act, candidates must pass the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) conducted in accordance with NCTE guidelines to be eligible for teaching primary classes (Classes I to V).

❌ Statement 3 – Incorrect: According to the All India Survey on Higher Education (AISHE) 2019-20, approximately 67% of teacher education institutions in India are privately managed, while only about 33% are government-run. This is contrary to the claim that more than 90% are directly under State Governments.

📝 Short Notes: Right to Education Act and Teacher Eligibility

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 2 — 2 only

Only statement 2 is correct. The position of Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha was formally recognized for the first time in 1969. The other two statements contain factual errors regarding the largest opposition party in the first Lok Sabha and the minimum strength required for recognition as Leader of the Opposition.

❌ Statement 1 – Incorrect: In the first Lok Sabha (1952), the single largest opposition party was the Communist Party of India (CPI) with 16 seats, not the Swatantra Party (which was formed only in 1959).

✅ Statement 2 – Correct: The Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha was formally recognized for the first time in 1969 when the post was accorded statutory recognition under the Salary and Allowances of Leaders of Opposition in Parliament Act, 1977 (with retrospective effect from 1969).

❌ Statement 3 – Incorrect: The minimum requirement for recognition as Leader of the Opposition is not 75 members but 10% of the total strength of the House, which amounts to 55 members (10% of 545) in the current Lok Sabha.

📝 Short Notes: Leader of the Opposition

• Statutory Recognition: The post of Leader of the Opposition was given statutory recognition through the Salary and Allowances of Leaders of Opposition in Parliament Act, 1977.
• First Recognition (Lok Sabha): Ram Subhag Singh of Congress (O) was the first formally recognized Leader of the Opposition in 1969.
• Minimum Strength Requirement: A party must have at least 10% of the total membership of the House (currently 55 members in Lok Sabha) for its leader to be recognized as Leader of the Opposition.
• Constitutional Status: Though not mentioned in the Constitution, the Leader of the Opposition holds a crucial position and is consulted in appointments like CEC, CVC, Lokpal, etc.
• Salary and Allowances: The Leader of the Opposition receives a salary and allowances equivalent to that of a Cabinet Minister.

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 3 — 1 only

The value of the vote of each MLA varies from State to State because it is calculated based on the population of the state divided by the number of elected MLAs in that state. However, all MPs (both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha) have equal voting value in Presidential elections, making Statement 2 incorrect.

✅ Statement 1 – Correct: The value of an MLA's vote is calculated as (Population of State ÷ Number of MLAs ÷ 1000), which varies across states based on population and assembly strength.

❌ Statement 2 – Incorrect: All MPs have equal voting value in Presidential elections; the value is the same for both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha members.

📝 Short Notes: Election of the President of India

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 2 — If there are no laws, there is no liberty.

This statement reflects the most appropriate relationship between law and liberty. Liberty does not mean absolute freedom but freedom within the framework of law. Without laws, society would descend into anarchy where the strong would dominate the weak, and individual rights would have no protection. Laws provide the structure that protects individual freedoms, ensures equality, and prevents one person's liberty from infringing upon another's. True liberty exists only when it is regulated and protected by law.

❌ Option 1 – Incorrect: More laws do not necessarily mean less liberty; well-designed laws actually protect and enhance liberty by preventing exploitation and ensuring justice.

✅ Option 2 – Correct: Laws are the foundation of liberty, providing the framework within which freedom can be exercised without descending into chaos.

❌ Option 3 – Incorrect: While democratic participation in law-making is important, liberty can exist even when laws are made through representative mechanisms rather than directly by all people.

❌ Option 4 – Incorrect: Frequent changes in laws do not inherently endanger liberty; what matters is the substance and purpose of laws, not their frequency of change.

📝 Short Notes: Law and Liberty

• Complementary Relationship: Law and liberty are not opposed but complementary; law creates the conditions for liberty to flourish.
• Rule of Law: The principle of Rule of Law ensures that liberty is protected through legal frameworks that apply equally to all citizens.
• Negative vs Positive Liberty: Laws prevent negative liberty (freedom from interference) from becoming license, and enable positive liberty (freedom to achieve potential).
• Constitutional Safeguards: Constitutional provisions and fundamental rights define the scope of liberty while laws provide mechanisms for their enforcement.
• Social Contract Theory: Thinkers like Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau emphasized that individuals surrender certain freedoms to the state in exchange for protection of their remaining liberties through law.
• Balance: The challenge is to ensure laws are just and proportionate, protecting liberty without becoming instruments of oppression.

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 4 — World Justice Project

The Rule of Law Index is published annually by the World Justice Project (WJP), an independent, multidisciplinary organization working to advance the rule of law worldwide. The index measures how the rule of law is experienced and perceived in countries across the globe based on eight primary factors: Constraints on Government Powers, Absence of Corruption, Open Government, Fundamental Rights, Order and Security, Regulatory Enforcement, Civil Justice, and Criminal Justice.

📝 Short Notes: Rule of Law Index

• Publisher: World Justice Project (WJP) - an independent, non-profit organization founded in 2006
• Frequency: Published annually since 2011
• Coverage: Measures rule of law in 140+ countries and jurisdictions worldwide
• Methodology: Based on household surveys and expert questionnaires
• Eight Factors: (1) Constraints on Government Powers, (2) Absence of Corruption, (3) Open Government, (4) Fundamental Rights, (5) Order and Security, (6) Regulatory Enforcement, (7) Civil Justice, (8) Criminal Justice
• India's Performance: India typically ranks in the middle range among countries assessed, with strengths in open government and areas needing improvement in civil and criminal justice delivery

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 3 — A Money Bill is concerned with the appropriation of money out of the Contingency Fund of India.

This statement is incorrect because the Contingency Fund of India, established under Article 267, is at the disposal of the President to meet unforeseen expenditures. Withdrawals from this fund are not governed by a Money Bill but are later regularized through an Appropriation Bill passed by Parliament.

✅ Statement 1 – Correct: Article 110(1)(a) explicitly states that a Money Bill contains provisions relating to imposition, abolition, remission, alteration, or regulation of any tax.
✅ Statement 2 – Correct: Article 110(1)(c) provides that a Money Bill may include provisions regarding the custody of the Consolidated Fund of India or the Contingency Fund of India.
❌ Statement 3 – Incorrect: Appropriation of money from the Contingency Fund is not governed by a Money Bill; it is under the President's disposal and later regularized through an Appropriation Bill.
✅ Statement 4 – Correct: Article 110(1)(d) states that provisions regarding borrowing of money or giving of guarantees by the Government of India fall within the scope of a Money Bill.

📝 Short Notes: Money Bill (Article 110)

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 2 — Committee on Subordinate Legislation

The Committee on Subordinate Legislation (CSL) is specifically mandated to scrutinize and report to Parliament whether the powers to make regulations, rules, sub-rules, by-laws, etc., conferred by the Constitution or delegated by Parliament are being properly exercised by the Executive within the scope of such delegation. This committee ensures that the executive does not exceed its delegated authority and that all subordinate legislation conforms to the parent Act and constitutional provisions.

Why other options are incorrect:
❌ Option 1 – Committee on Government Assurances: This committee tracks the implementation of assurances, promises, and undertakings given by Ministers in Parliament, not subordinate legislation.
❌ Option 3 – Rules Committee: This committee is concerned with framing and amending rules for regulating the procedure and conduct of business in the House itself.
❌ Option 4 – Business Advisory Committee: This committee allocates time for discussion of government and other business in the House and does not scrutinize delegated legislation.

📝 Short Notes: Parliamentary Committees

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 3 — Article 21 and the freedoms guaranteed in Part III

The Right to Privacy was recognized as an intrinsic part of the Right to Life and Personal Liberty under Article 21 in the landmark K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) vs. Union of India (2017) judgment. This right is protected alongside other fundamental freedoms guaranteed in Part III of the Constitution, making Article 21 and Part III the correct constitutional basis for privacy protection.

❌ Option 1 – Incorrect: Article 14 guarantees equality before law but does not directly deal with privacy; the 42nd Amendment dealt with the term 'Socialist' and 'Secular' and other matters, not specifically privacy.

❌ Option 2 – Incorrect: Article 17 abolishes untouchability and has no connection to privacy; Directive Principles are non-justiciable guidelines, not enforceable fundamental rights.

✅ Option 3 – Correct: Article 21 protects life and personal liberty (including privacy as per Puttaswamy judgment), and Part III contains all fundamental rights including freedoms under Article 19.

❌ Option 4 – Incorrect: Article 24 prohibits employment of children in hazardous work and is unrelated to privacy; the 44th Amendment dealt with fundamental rights and emergency provisions but not specifically privacy.

📝 Short Notes: Right to Privacy and Article 21

• K.S. Puttaswamy vs. Union of India (2017): A 9-judge bench unanimously held that the right to privacy is a fundamental right protected under Article 21 and Part III of the Constitution.
• Article 21: Guarantees protection of life and personal liberty; interpreted expansively to include various rights like right to privacy, right to education, right to clean environment, right to speedy trial, etc.
• Part III – Fundamental Rights: Contains Articles 12-35 covering all fundamental rights including equality (Art. 14), freedoms (Art. 19), right to life (Art. 21), cultural and educational rights, and constitutional remedies (Art. 32).
• Privacy Components: Includes bodily integrity, informational self-determination, and the right to be left alone; protects against arbitrary state action and private intrusions.
• Article 19: Guarantees six freedoms including speech, assembly, movement, which complement the right to privacy under Article 21.