UPSC Prelims 2019
Indian Polity Previous Year Questions (PYQs)

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 2 — 2 and 3 only

This question tests knowledge of the Forest Rights Act, 2006 and amendments to the Indian Forest Act, 1927. Statement 1 is incorrect because the 2017 amendment to the Indian Forest Act removed bamboo from the definition of 'tree' but did not grant forest dwellers the right to fell bamboo on forest land. Statements 2 and 3 are correct as the FRA, 2006 classifies bamboo as minor forest produce and grants ownership rights over minor forest produce to forest dwellers.

❌ Statement 1 – Incorrect: The 2017 amendment to the Indian Forest Act, 1927 removed bamboo grown in non-forest areas from the definition of 'tree' (not forest areas), thereby exempting it from requirement of felling/transit permits; it did not grant forest dwellers right to fell bamboo in forest areas.
✅ Statement 2 – Correct: The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 explicitly classifies bamboo as a minor forest produce.
✅ Statement 3 – Correct: The Forest Rights Act, 2006 grants forest dwellers the right to own, collect, use, and dispose of minor forest produce traditionally collected within the forest area.

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 3 — 1, 2 and 4

Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTGs) are a special category within Scheduled Tribes that was created during the Fourth Five-Year Plan to identify groups at a lower level of development. Currently, 75 PVTGs are officially notified across 18 states and one Union Territory in India.

✅ Statement 1 – Correct: PVTGs are indeed spread over 18 states and one Union Territory (Andaman & Nicobar Islands) in India.
✅ Statement 2 – Correct: A stagnant or declining population is one of the five criteria for determining PVTG status, along with pre-agricultural level of technology, extremely low literacy, subsistence-level economy, and geographical isolation.
❌ Statement 3 – Incorrect: There are 75 PVTGs officially notified in the country, not 95.
✅ Statement 4 – Correct: Both Irular (found in Tamil Nadu and Kerala) and Konda Reddi (found in Andhra Pradesh) tribes are included in the list of PVTGs.

📝 Short Notes: Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTGs)

• Origin: The concept was introduced during the Fourth Five-Year Plan to identify tribal groups at lower levels of development among Scheduled Tribes.
• Official Count: 75 PVTGs have been officially notified in India.
• Geographical Spread: Found in 18 states and 1 Union Territory (Andaman & Nicobar Islands).
• Five Criteria for PVTG Status:
  (i) Pre-agricultural level of technology
  (ii) Stagnant or declining population
  (iii) Extremely low literacy rates
  (iv) Subsistence-level economy
  (v) Geographical isolation
• Examples: Chenchu, Birhor, Bonda, Great Andamanese, Irular, Konda Reddi, Sahariya, Asur, etc.
• Development Scheme: Ministry of Tribal Affairs implements schemes like Development of Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (DPVTG) for their socio-economic development.

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 2 — 2 only

Statement 1 is incorrect because the 44th Amendment (1978) actually restored judicial review of elections of the President, Vice President, Prime Minister, and Speaker, which had been removed by the 39th Amendment. Statement 2 is correct as the Supreme Court struck down the 99th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2014, which established the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), holding that it violated the independence of the judiciary—a basic feature of the Constitution.

❌ Statement 1 – Incorrect: The 44th Amendment restored judicial review of the Prime Minister's election, not placed it beyond review (the 39th Amendment had removed such review).

✅ Statement 2 – Correct: The 99th Amendment (2014) establishing NJAC was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2015 for violating judicial independence.

📝 Short Notes: Constitutional Amendments and Judicial Review

• Basic Structure Doctrine: Established in Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), it holds that certain fundamental features of the Constitution cannot be amended by Parliament, including judicial independence.
• Collegium System: A system of appointing judges evolved through judicial pronouncements (Second and Third Judges Cases), where senior SC judges recommend appointments.
• NJAC Composition: Included CJI, two senior SC judges, Union Law Minister, and two eminent persons—SC held this compromised judicial primacy in appointments.
• Judicial Independence: Core element ensuring judiciary remains free from executive and legislative interference, essential for constitutional democracy.

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 2 — Fifth Schedule

The Fifth Schedule of the Indian Constitution provides special provisions for the administration and control of Scheduled Areas with significant tribal populations. Under this Schedule, the Governor has the power to declare any law related to the transfer of tribal land as null and void if it violates the interests of tribal communities, thus preventing unauthorized transfer of tribal land to private parties for mining or other purposes.

📝 Short Notes: Fifth Schedule of the Constitution

• Purpose: Provides for the administration and control of Scheduled Areas and Scheduled Tribes in states other than Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, and Mizoram.
• Scheduled Areas: Declared by the President, these are areas with predominantly tribal population requiring special administrative arrangements.
• Tribes Advisory Council (TAC): Mandatory in states having Scheduled Areas, consisting of up to 20 members (3/4th should be tribal MLAs) to advise on tribal welfare matters.
• Governor's Special Powers: Can direct that any particular Act of Parliament or State Legislature shall not apply to a Scheduled Area or apply with specified modifications; can make regulations for peace and good government of Scheduled Areas (subject to President's approval).
• Land Protection: Governors can prohibit or regulate the transfer of land from tribals to non-tribals, and declare such transfers null and void to protect tribal land rights.
• States Covered: Applies to 10 states including Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, and Rajasthan.
• Key Distinction: Fifth Schedule for mainland tribal areas; Sixth Schedule for tribal areas in Northeast (except Nagaland).

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 2 — Article 21

Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, which has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to include the right to marry a person of one's choice as part of personal liberty and autonomy. Landmark judgments like Shafin Jahan vs. Asokan K.M. (Hadiya case, 2018) and Lata Singh vs. State of U.P. (2006) have affirmed that the choice of a life partner is an integral part of personal liberty under Article 21.

📝 Short Notes: Right to Marry and Article 21

• Article 21: Guarantees right to life and personal liberty; interpreted expansively to include various unenumerated rights including right to marry, right to privacy, right to livelihood, etc.
• Shafin Jahan vs. Asokan K.M. (Hadiya case, 2018): Supreme Court held that the right to marry a person of one's choice is integral to Article 21; an adult has the freedom to make personal choices regarding marriage without interference from state or family.
• Lata Singh vs. State of U.P. (2006): SC upheld inter-caste marriages and stated that choosing a life partner is a fundamental right; no one can interfere with such choices.
• Shakti Vahini vs. Union of India (2018): Affirmed that liberty of choice in marriage is a fundamental right; condemned honor killings and khap panchayat interventions.
• Personal Liberty: Includes autonomy in intimate personal decisions, dignity, and freedom to choose one's life partner irrespective of caste, religion, or social approval.

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 2 — The Supreme Court of India is not constrained in the exercise of its powers by laws made by the Parliament.

Article 142 of the Constitution grants the Supreme Court plenary power to pass any decree or order necessary for doing 'complete justice' in any cause or matter pending before it. This extraordinary power is not subject to limitations or prohibitions contained in ordinary laws (statutes) enacted by Parliament. The Supreme Court has consistently held that while Article 142 cannot override express constitutional provisions, it is not restricted by statutory provisions.

Why other options are incorrect:
❌ Option 1: Article 329 places certain restrictions on court interference in electoral matters, but it does not grant the Election Commission absolute immunity from judicial review, nor does it relate to Article 142's plenary powers.
❌ Option 3: Under Article 74, the President must act on the 'aid and advice' of the Council of Ministers in all matters, including the declaration of Financial Emergency under Article 360; the President cannot act independently without Cabinet counsel.
❌ Option 4: This describes the federal distribution of legislative powers under the Seventh Schedule and provisions like Article 252, which governs inter-governmental legislative relations, not the Supreme Court's judicial powers under Article 142.

📝 Short Notes: Article 142 - Plenary Powers of Supreme Court

• Constitutional Basis: Article 142(1) empowers the Supreme Court to pass any decree or make any order necessary for doing 'complete justice' in any cause or matter pending before it.
• Scope: This is a residuary power that supplements all other powers of the Supreme Court and can be exercised when existing legal provisions are inadequate to do complete justice.
• Not Subject to Statutory Limitations: The power under Article 142 is not constrained by ordinary laws made by Parliament, as confirmed in landmark cases like Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India and Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India.
• Constitutional Limitations Apply: While not bound by statutory laws, Article 142 cannot override express constitutional provisions or fundamental rights guaranteed under Part III.
• Examples of Use: Granting anticipatory bail in non-bailable offences, ordering inter-country adoption, dissolving marriage without the one-year waiting period, and environmental protection measures.
• Article 142(2): Empowers the Supreme Court to investigate and punish any person for contempt of itself.

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 3 — Sarkaria Commission 1983

The Sarkaria Commission (1983-88) was established to examine Centre-State relations and made specific recommendations regarding the appointment of Governors. It suggested that the Governor should be an eminent person from outside the State, should be a detached figure without intense political links, and should not have taken part in active politics in the recent past. This recommendation aimed to ensure the Governor's neutrality and impartiality in State administration.

📝 Short Notes: Recommendations on Governor's Appointment by Various Commissions

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 1 — Jawaharlal Nehru

The Ninth Schedule was introduced through the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951, during the prime ministership of Jawaharlal Nehru. This amendment was enacted to protect land reform and other socio-economic legislation from judicial review on grounds of violating fundamental rights, particularly the right to property under Article 31. Prime Minister Nehru personally introduced this amendment bill in the Lok Sabha to safeguard progressive legislative measures aimed at social and economic transformation.

📝 Short Notes: Ninth Schedule

• Introduction: Added by the First Constitutional Amendment Act, 1951 during Nehru's tenure as Prime Minister.
• Purpose: To protect laws placed in it from judicial review on grounds of violation of fundamental rights, especially Article 14, 19, and the erstwhile Article 31.
• Initial Focus: Primarily contained laws related to land reforms and abolition of zamindari system.
• Supreme Court Verdict (I.R. Coelho case, 2007): Laws in the Ninth Schedule can be subject to judicial review if they violate the basic structure of the Constitution, particularly after April 24, 1973.
• Current Status: Contains over 280 Acts and Regulations protecting various state and central laws.
• Key Legislation Protected: Land ceiling acts, abolition of intermediaries, reservation laws, and other socio-economic reform measures.

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 3 — 3 and 4 only

This question tests knowledge about the constitutional provisions and procedural framework governing the impeachment of judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts in India. Only statements 3 and 4 are correct, as they accurately describe the role of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, and the constitutional voting requirements for impeachment.

❌ Statement 1 – Incorrect: The Speaker of the Lok Sabha (or the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha) has the discretion to admit or reject an impeachment motion if it is not in order or is deemed frivolous, as per the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.

❌ Statement 2 – Incorrect: The Constitution does not define or provide details of what constitutes 'incapacity and proved misbehaviour'; these terms are not explicitly defined in the Constitution.

✅ Statement 3 – Correct: The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, provides detailed procedural framework for the investigation and impeachment process of Supreme Court and High Court judges.

✅ Statement 4 – Correct: Article 124(4) of the Constitution requires that an impeachment motion must be supported by a majority of the total membership of each House and by not less than two-thirds of members present and voting.

📝 Short Notes: Impeachment of Judges in India

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 1 — 1 and 2

In India, independent regulators in sectors like telecommunications, insurance, and electricity are primarily reviewed by Parliamentary mechanisms. Ad Hoc Committees (including Joint Parliamentary Committees) are set up for specific investigations or reviews of regulatory bodies, while Department Related Standing Committees (DRSCs) regularly examine the annual reports, budgets, and performance of regulators under their respective ministries, ensuring executive accountability.

✅ Statement 1 – Correct: Ad Hoc Committees, including Joint Parliamentary Committees (JPCs), are established by Parliament to review specific regulatory bodies or investigate irregularities in their functioning.
✅ Statement 2 – Correct: Parliamentary Department Related Standing Committees (DRSCs) systematically review the performance, annual reports, and budgetary allocations of independent regulators falling under their respective ministries.
❌ Statement 3 – Incorrect: The Finance Commission (Article 280) primarily deals with distribution of financial resources between the Union and States, not with reviewing sectoral regulators.
❌ Statement 4 – Incorrect: The Financial Sector Legislative Reforms Commission (FSLRC) was a temporary body created to recommend legal reforms in the financial sector; it does not conduct ongoing reviews of regulators.
❌ Statement 5 – Incorrect: NITI Aayog is a policy think tank providing strategic advice but lacks statutory authority to formally review or oversee independent regulators.

📝 Short Notes: Parliamentary Oversight of Regulators

• Ad Hoc Committees: Temporary parliamentary committees established for specific purposes, such as investigating irregularities or examining the functioning of particular institutions or regulators (e.g., JPCs).
• Department Related Standing Committees (DRSCs): 24 permanent committees (16 for Lok Sabha, 8 for Rajya Sabha) that examine bills, budgets, and annual reports of ministries and their attached regulators.
• Parliamentary Accountability: Independent regulators, despite autonomy, remain accountable to Parliament through committee scrutiny, questions, and debates.
• Examples of Regulators: TRAI (Telecom), IRDAI (Insurance), SEBI (Securities), CERC (Electricity), etc.
• Finance Commission: Constitutional body (Article 280) focused on fiscal federalism—distribution of taxes and grants between Centre and States.
• NITI Aayog: Policy commission replacing Planning Commission; provides strategic inputs but has no regulatory oversight mandate.

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 1 — 1 and 3 only

This question tests the understanding of the constitutional and legal framework governing minor minerals in India, particularly the division of powers between the Centre and States under the MMDR Act, 1957.

✅ Statement 1 – Correct: Sand is classified as a 'minor mineral' under Section 3(e) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, along with other minerals like gravel, clay, marble, and limestone.

❌ Statement 2 – Incorrect: The power to frame rules regarding the grant of minor minerals lies with State Governments, not the Central Government. Section 15 of the MMDR Act empowers State Governments to make rules for regulating the grant of quarry leases, mining leases, and other mineral concessions in respect of minor minerals.

✅ Statement 3 – Correct: State Governments have the power to frame rules to prevent illegal mining of minor minerals under Section 15 of the MMDR Act, which includes measures for regulation, enforcement, and prevention of unauthorized extraction.

📝 Short Notes: Minor Minerals Management in India

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 4 — Opportunity to develop oneself fully

Liberty in political philosophy is not merely the absence of restraint or unlimited freedom to act as one wishes, but rather the opportunity for individuals to realize their full potential within a framework of law and social responsibility. This definition captures the positive aspect of liberty, emphasizing personal development, self-realization, and the ability to pursue one's goals while respecting the rights of others.

Why other options are insufficient:
• Option 1 (Protection against tyranny): While protection from oppression is an important aspect, it represents only the negative dimension of liberty (freedom from) rather than the complete concept.
• Option 2 (Absence of restraint): Absolute absence of restraint would lead to anarchy and conflict, as individuals' actions would inevitably clash without any regulatory framework.
• Option 3 (Do whatever one likes): Unrestricted freedom ignores the social contract and the need to balance individual liberty with collective welfare and others' rights.

📝 Short Notes: Concept of Liberty

• Negative Liberty: Freedom from external interference, restrictions, or coercion by the state or other individuals (e.g., freedom from arbitrary arrest, censorship).
• Positive Liberty: Freedom to pursue one's goals and realize one's potential; the capacity for self-determination and personal development (e.g., right to education, employment opportunities).
• Liberty vs. License: Liberty operates within legal and moral boundaries, whereas license implies unrestricted freedom without accountability.
• Constitutional Safeguards: The Indian Constitution guarantees six fundamental freedoms under Article 19, balanced by reasonable restrictions to maintain public order, morality, and security.
• J.S. Mill's Harm Principle: Individuals should be free to act as they wish unless their actions harm others, establishing a rational limit to liberty.
• Balance Required: True liberty requires balancing individual freedom with social responsibility, equality, and justice for all members of society.

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 1 — 1 and 2 only

The Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959 exempts certain offices from disqualification under Article 102(1)(a), and has been amended five times to expand this list. However, the term 'Office of Profit' is not defined in the Constitution and its meaning has evolved through judicial interpretation.

✅ Statement 1 – Correct: The Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959 exempts several posts (like Ministers of State, Deputy Ministers, etc.) from disqualification on grounds of holding an 'Office of Profit' under the Government.
✅ Statement 2 – Correct: The Act has been amended five times (in 1960, 1993, 1999, 2000, and 2006) to expand the list of exempted offices.
❌ Statement 3 – Incorrect: The term 'Office of Profit' is mentioned in Articles 102 and 191 but is not defined in the Constitution; its interpretation has been left to judicial pronouncements.

📝 Short Notes: Office of Profit

• Constitutional Provisions: Articles 102(1)(a) for MPs and 191(1)(a) for MLAs disqualify persons holding an 'Office of Profit' under the Government from being members of Parliament or State Legislature respectively.
• No Statutory Definition: Neither the Constitution nor the Representation of the People Act, 1951 defines 'Office of Profit'; the concept has evolved through judicial interpretation.
• Key Judicial Tests: Courts consider factors like whether the office carries remuneration, whether it is held at the pleasure of the government, and whether the government exercises control over the office.
• Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959: This Act lists offices that are exempted from disqualification, such as Ministers, Deputy Ministers, and various other specified posts under the Union and State Governments.
• Amendments: The Act has been amended in 1960, 1993, 1999, 2000, and 2006 to include more offices in the exemption list as per evolving needs.

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 4 — None of the above

Both statements are incorrect. High Courts have the constitutional power to declare central laws unconstitutional under Article 226, exercising their jurisdiction to protect fundamental rights and uphold the Constitution. Similarly, while Parliament has wide amending powers, the Supreme Court can examine whether a constitutional amendment violates the 'basic structure' of the Constitution, as established in the landmark Kesavananda Bharati case (1973).

❌ Statement 1 – Incorrect: High Courts possess the jurisdiction to declare central laws unconstitutional if they violate constitutional provisions, particularly fundamental rights under Article 226.
❌ Statement 2 – Incorrect: The Supreme Court can review constitutional amendments and strike them down if they violate the basic structure doctrine, as established in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973).

📝 Short Notes: Judicial Review of Laws and Constitutional Amendments

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 3 — Both 1 and 2

Both statements regarding the Legislative Assembly of a State in India are correct. Article 176(1) mandates the Governor's customary address at the commencement of the first session after each general election and the first session of each year, outlining the government's policies and legislative agenda. Additionally, State Legislatures follow a long-standing convention dating back to colonial times where they adopt Lok Sabha rules for matters on which they have no specific rules of their own.

✅ Statement 1 – Correct: Article 176(1) of the Constitution mandates that the Governor shall address the State Legislature at the commencement of the first session after each general election and at the commencement of the first session of each year.
✅ Statement 2 – Correct: When a State Legislature does not have a specific rule on a particular matter, it follows the Lok Sabha rule on that matter, as per a convention established since colonial times.

📝 Short Notes: Governor's Role in State Legislature

• Constitutional Provisions: Article 176 deals with the Governor's address to the State Legislature, similar to the President's address under Article 87.
• Timing of Address: The Governor addresses at the commencement of the first session after each general election and at the start of the first session of each year.
• Content: The address outlines government policies, legislative agenda, and key priorities for the year.
• Procedural Rules: State Legislatures can frame their own rules of procedure under Article 208, but in the absence of specific rules, they follow Lok Sabha procedures.
• Historical Convention: The practice of following Lok Sabha rules dates back to colonial times when provincial legislatures followed the Imperial Legislative Council's procedures.