You have already completed the quiz before. Hence you can not start it again.
Quiz is loading...
You must sign in or sign up to start the quiz.
You have to finish following quiz, to start this quiz:
Results
0 of 5 questions answered correctly
Your time:
Time has elapsed
You have reached 0 of 0 points, (0)
Average score
Your score
Categories
Not categorized0%
Your result has been entered into leaderboard
Loading
1
2
3
4
5
Answered
Review
Question 1 of 5
1. Question
2 points
Consider the following statements:
1. The Parliament cannot discuss the Conduct of the judges even during the impeachment motion is
under consideration.
2. The expenses of the Supreme Court including the administrative expenses are charged on the
Consolidated Fund of India.
3. The Parliament can curtail the jurisdiction and powers of the Supreme Court only if the Chief Justice
of India has requested to do so.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Correct
Correct Answer: A
Explanation
• Statements 1 and 3 are incorrect. Statement 2 is correct. Except during the impeachment motion
under consideration, conduct of judges cannot be discussed in parliament. Otherwise SC will be without
checks and balances.
• Statement 2 is correct. The expenses like salaries, allowances and pensions of judges and staff as well
as all the administrative expenses of Supreme Court are charged on Consolidated fund of India. In case
of high courts, the expenses excluding the pensions are charged on Consolidated fund of States.
• Statement 3 is incorrect. Parliament is not authorized to curtail the jurisdiction and powers of SC.
However, parliament can extend the constitutionally guaranteed provisions with respect SC’ jurisdiction.
Incorrect
Correct Answer: A
Explanation
• Statements 1 and 3 are incorrect. Statement 2 is correct. Except during the impeachment motion
under consideration, conduct of judges cannot be discussed in parliament. Otherwise SC will be without
checks and balances.
• Statement 2 is correct. The expenses like salaries, allowances and pensions of judges and staff as well
as all the administrative expenses of Supreme Court are charged on Consolidated fund of India. In case
of high courts, the expenses excluding the pensions are charged on Consolidated fund of States.
• Statement 3 is incorrect. Parliament is not authorized to curtail the jurisdiction and powers of SC.
However, parliament can extend the constitutionally guaranteed provisions with respect SC’ jurisdiction.
Question 2 of 5
2. Question
2 points
Consider the following statements with regard to Writ jurisdiction:
1. Writ jurisdiction of High court is narrower than that of the Supreme Court.
2. While Supreme Court can refuse to exercise its writ jurisdiction, but high courts cannot do so.
Which of the following statements is/are correct?
Correct
Correct Answer: D
Explanation
• Both the statements are incorrect. High Courts have powers to issue writs under Article-226. To
enforce Fundamental Rights or any other right. It is the duty of the Supreme Court to issue an
appropriate writ to enforce any of the Fundamental Rights under Article 32. It can be compared that the
High Courts can issue writs even to enforce any other legal rights also, whereas the Supreme Court can
enforce only Fundamental rights. This means writ jurisdiction of high court is wider than Supreme Court.
Hence, statement 1 is incorrect.
• Statement 2 is incorrect. Supreme Court and High Courts both can issue some writs provided by the
Constitution, such as-Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Certiorari, or quo warranto. However, it is
noticeable that a person can avail of the right under Article-32 as of a right because it is a fundamental
right whereas Article-226 do not confer any duty upon the High Courts to issue a writ. It is simply
dependent upon discretionary power of High Courts. This means Supreme Court cannot refuse to issue
writs.
Incorrect
Question 3 of 5
3. Question
2 points
Which of the following is not an exclusive part of the ‘original jurisdiction’ of the Supreme Court?
1. Inter-state water disputes
2. Dispute between the Centre on one side and two states on the other
3. Suit brought by a private citizen against the Centre
4. Dispute with regard to recovery of damages by a state against the Centre
Select the incorrect answer using the code given below:
Correct
Correct Answer: B
Explanation
• Options 2 is correct. Options -1,3 and 4 are incorrect. Under ‘Original Jurisdiction’ the Supreme Court
decides the disputes between different units of the Indian Federation. More elaborately, any dispute
between:
a) The Centre and one or more states; or
b) The Centre and any state or states on one side and one or more states on the other; or
c) Between two or more states
• In the above stated federal disputes, the Supreme Court has exclusive original jurisdiction. Thus option
2 comes under original jurisdiction.
• This jurisdiction of the Supreme Court does not extend to the following:
a) A dispute arising out of any pre-Constitution treaty, agreement, covenant, engagement, sanad or
other similar instruments.
b) A dispute arising out of any treaty, agreement, etc., which specifically provides that the said
jurisdiction does not extend to such a dispute
c) Inter-state water disputes. Thus, statement 1 is incorrect
d) Matters referred to the Finance Commission.
e) Adjustment of certain expenses and pensions between the Centre and the states.
f) Ordinary dispute of Commercial nature between the Centre and the states.
g) Recovery of damages by a state against the Centre
h) Also, any suit brought before the Supreme Court by a private citizen against the Centre or a state
cannot be entertained under original jurisdiction
Incorrect
Correct Answer: B
Explanation
• Options 2 is correct. Options -1,3 and 4 are incorrect. Under ‘Original Jurisdiction’ the Supreme Court
decides the disputes between different units of the Indian Federation. More elaborately, any dispute
between:
a) The Centre and one or more states; or
b) The Centre and any state or states on one side and one or more states on the other; or
c) Between two or more states
• In the above stated federal disputes, the Supreme Court has exclusive original jurisdiction. Thus option
2 comes under original jurisdiction.
• This jurisdiction of the Supreme Court does not extend to the following:
a) A dispute arising out of any pre-Constitution treaty, agreement, covenant, engagement, sanad or
other similar instruments.
b) A dispute arising out of any treaty, agreement, etc., which specifically provides that the said
jurisdiction does not extend to such a dispute
c) Inter-state water disputes. Thus, statement 1 is incorrect
d) Matters referred to the Finance Commission.
e) Adjustment of certain expenses and pensions between the Centre and the states.
f) Ordinary dispute of Commercial nature between the Centre and the states.
g) Recovery of damages by a state against the Centre
h) Also, any suit brought before the Supreme Court by a private citizen against the Centre or a state
cannot be entertained under original jurisdiction
Question 4 of 5
4. Question
2 points
With reference to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), consider the following statements:
1. It was established on the recommendations of the Santhanam Committee.
2. It operates under the administrative control of the Ministry of Home Affairs.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Correct
Correct Answer: A
• Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect. The establishment of the CBI was recommended by
the Santhanam Committee on Prevention of Corruption (1962-1964).
• Statement 2 is incorrect. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) was set up in 1963 by a resolution
of the Ministry of Home Affairs. Later, it was transferred to the Ministry of Personnel and now it enjoys
the status of an attached office. The Special Police Establishment (which looked into vigilance cases)
setup in 1941 was also merged with the CBI.
• Hence, It operates under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions.
Incorrect
Correct Answer: A
• Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect. The establishment of the CBI was recommended by
the Santhanam Committee on Prevention of Corruption (1962-1964).
• Statement 2 is incorrect. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) was set up in 1963 by a resolution
of the Ministry of Home Affairs. Later, it was transferred to the Ministry of Personnel and now it enjoys
the status of an attached office. The Special Police Establishment (which looked into vigilance cases)
setup in 1941 was also merged with the CBI.
• Hence, It operates under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions.
Question 5 of 5
5. Question
2 points
Consider the following statements:
1. The removal procedure of the Chairman and members of a State Public Service Commission is similar
to that of the removal procedure of the Chairman of the Union Public Service Commission.
2. In context to the grounds of removable of the Chairman or any other member of a State Public
Service Commission, the Constitution has not defined the term ‘misbehaviour’.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Correct
Correct Answer: A
Statement 1 is correct and statement 2 is incorrect. Unlike the chairman and members of the Union
Public Service Commission, the Chairman and members of a State Public Service Commission are
appointed by the Governor. But, they can be removed only by the president (and not by the governor).
• The President can remove them on the same grounds and in the same manner as he can remove a
chairman or a member of the UPSC.
• Thus, he can remove him under the following circumstances:
a) If he is adjudged an insolvent (i.e., has gone bankrupt); or
b) If he engages, during his term of office, in any paid employment outside the duties of his office;
or
c) If he is, in the opinion of the president, unfit to continue in office by reason of infirmity of mind or
body
• The President can also remove the chairman or any other member of SPSC for misbehaviour. The
Constitution has also defined the term ‘misbehaviour’ in this context.
• The Constitution states that the chairman or any other member of a SPSC is deemed to be guilty of
misbehaviour, if he (a) is concerned or interested in any contract or agreement made by the
Government of India or the government of a state, or (b) participates in any way in the profit of such
contract or agreement or in any benefit therefrom otherwise than as a member and in common with
other members of an incorporated company.
Incorrect
Correct Answer: A
Statement 1 is correct and statement 2 is incorrect. Unlike the chairman and members of the Union
Public Service Commission, the Chairman and members of a State Public Service Commission are
appointed by the Governor. But, they can be removed only by the president (and not by the governor).
• The President can remove them on the same grounds and in the same manner as he can remove a
chairman or a member of the UPSC.
• Thus, he can remove him under the following circumstances:
a) If he is adjudged an insolvent (i.e., has gone bankrupt); or
b) If he engages, during his term of office, in any paid employment outside the duties of his office;
or
c) If he is, in the opinion of the president, unfit to continue in office by reason of infirmity of mind or
body
• The President can also remove the chairman or any other member of SPSC for misbehaviour. The
Constitution has also defined the term ‘misbehaviour’ in this context.
• The Constitution states that the chairman or any other member of a SPSC is deemed to be guilty of
misbehaviour, if he (a) is concerned or interested in any contract or agreement made by the
Government of India or the government of a state, or (b) participates in any way in the profit of such
contract or agreement or in any benefit therefrom otherwise than as a member and in common with
other members of an incorporated company.
