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 10 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
6
7
8
9
10
Answered
Review
Question 1 of 10
1. Question
2 points
Consider the following statements :
1. The idea of a constituent assembly for India was first put forward by Jawaharlal Nehru.
2. British principally accepted the idea of constituent assembly for the first time through Cripps Proposal.
3. Muslim league accepted the idea of Cripps Proposals.
Which of the above statements is/are correct?
Correct
Solution: d)
The idea of a constituent assembly for India was first put forward by M.N Roy.
The demand for constituent assembly was finally accepted in principle by the British Government in what is known as the ‘August Offer’ of 1940.
In 1942, Sir Stafford Cripps, a member of the cabinet, came to India with a draft proposal of the British Government on the framing of an independent Constitution to be adopted after the World War II.
The Cripps Proposals were rejected by the Muslim League which wanted India to be divided into two autonomous states with two separate Constituent Assemblies.
Finally, a Cabinet Mission was sent to India. While it rejected the idea of two Constituent Assemblies, it put forth a scheme for the Constituent Assembly which more or less satisfied the Muslim League
Incorrect
Question 2 of 10
2. Question
2 points
Which of the following were the major points of the Objectives Resolution introduced in the Constituent Assembly?
1. Territories forming the Union shall be autonomous units and exercise all powers and functions of the Government except those assigned to the Union
2. All powers and authority of sovereign and independent India shall flow from its Constitution
3. All people of India shall be guaranteed and secured equality of status and opportunities along with equality before law
Select the correct answer code:
Correct
Solution: b)
Territories forming the Union shall be autonomous units and exercise all powers and functions of the Government except those assigned to the Union. The states thus derive power directly from the constitution.
All powers and authority of sovereign and independent India shall flow from its people based on the doctrine of popular sovereignty.
As per the resolution, all people of India shall be guaranteed and secured social, economic and political justice; equality of status and opportunities and equality before law; and fundamental freedoms – of speech, expression, belief, faith, worship, vocation, association and action – subject to law and public morality.
Incorrect
Question 3 of 10
3. Question
2 points
Article 1 of our Constitution says – “India that is Bharat, shall be a Union of states”. This declaration signifies
1. That the Union of India has resulted out of an agreement between the states.
2. The component units/states have no right to secede from the Union.
Which of the above statements is/are incorrect?
Correct
Solution: a)
Article 1 describes India, that is, Bharat as a ‘Union of States’ rather than a ‘Federation of States’. According to Dr B R Ambedkar, the phrase ‘Union of States’ has been preferred to ‘Federation of States’ for two reasons: one, the Indian Federation is not the result of an agreement among the states like the American Federation; and two, the states have no right to secede from the federation.
Incorrect
Question 4 of 10
4. Question
2 points
Consider the following statements with reference to the Preamble of the Constitution?
1. Taking inspiration from the American model, India has chosen to begin its constitution with a preamble.
2. Values that inspired and guided the freedom struggle are embedded in the Preamble of the Indian Constitution.
3. It is the soul of the Indian Constitution.
4. It provides a standard to examine and evaluate any law and action of government.
Which of the above statement is/are correct?
Correct
Solution: d)
Values that inspired and guided the freedom struggle and were in turn nurtured by it, formed the foundation for India’s democracy. These values are embedded in the Preamble of the Indian Constitution. They guide all the articles of the Indian Constitution. Taking inspiration from American model, most countries in the contemporary world have chosen to begin their constitutions with a preamble. It contains the philosophy on which the entire Constitution has been built. It provides a standard to examine and evaluate any law and action of government, to find out whether it is good or bad. It is the soul of the Indian Constitution.
Incorrect
Question 5 of 10
5. Question
2 points
Consider the following statements.
1. Parliament shall have the power to make any provision with respect to the acquisition and termination of Indian citizenship.
2. Naturalised citizen who has rendered distinguished service to the science, philosophy, art, literature, world peace or human progress may not take an oath of allegiance to the Constitution of India.
3. The Constitution prohibits discrimination against any citizen on grounds of religion, race, residence, caste, sex or place of birth. Which of the above statements is/are incorrect?
Correct
Solution: b)
Parliament shall have the power to make any provision with respect to the acquisition and termination of citizenship and all other matters relating to citizenship (Article 11). The Government of India may waive all or any of the conditions for naturalisation in the case of a person who has rendered distinguished service to the science, philosophy, art, literature, world peace or human progress. Every naturalised citizen must take an oath of allegiance to the Constitution of India.The Constitution (under Article 15) prohibits discrimination against any citizen on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth and not on the ground of residence. This means that the state can provide special benefits or give preference to its residents in matters that do not come within the purview of the rights given by the Constitution to the Indian citizens. For example, a state may offer concession in fees for education to its residents.
Incorrect
Question 6 of 10
6. Question
2 points
The Indian constitution is a written one unlike in some of the other democracies. What does it imply?
1. The form of government in India has been codified in the constitution to reduce political and administrative conflicts.
2. All the laws made by Parliament are to be written down as a part of the constitution.
3. Only because of a written constitution, citizens are able to enjoy fundamental rights.
Select the correct answer code:
Correct
Solution: d)
Constitution specifies the structure, organisation, powers and functions of both the Central and state governments and prescribes the limits within which they must operate. Thus, it avoids the misunderstandings and disagreements between the two. All the laws made in India are codified separate from the constitution and maintained in a law book. They need not be a part of the constitution. Even in the UK where there is no written constitution, people enjoy several fundamental rights. However, only because our fundamental rights are written in the constitution, it is difficult to amend and change them as per the wishes of the political executive.
Incorrect
Question 7 of 10
7. Question
2 points
Consider the following statements regarding Fundamental Rights.
1. They promote the idea of social and economic democracy.
2. They are sacrosanct and permanent.
3. Most of them are directly enforceable while a few are enforced by a law made by the parliament and state legislatures.
Which of the above statements is/are incorrect?
Correct
Solution: d)
Fundamental Rights are not absolute and subject to reasonable restrictions. Further, they are not sacrosanct and can be curtailed or repealed by the Parliament through a constitutional amendment act. They promote the idea of political democracy. DPSP promote the idea of social and economic democracy. Most of them are directly enforceable (self-executory) while a few of them can be enforced on the basis of a law made for giving effect to them. Such a law can be made only by the Parliament and not by state legislatures so that uniformity throughout the country is maintained (Article 35).
Incorrect
Question 8 of 10
8. Question
2 points
With reference to Right to Constitutional Remedies guaranteed under Article 32, consider the following statements:
1. The Supreme Court has ruled that Article 32 is a basic feature of the constitution.
2. Fundamental rights and other statutory rights can be enforced under Article 32.
3. The Supreme Court has both exclusive and original jurisdiction in case of enforcement of Fundamental Rights.
4. Article 32 cannot be invoked to determine the constitutionality of an executive order or a legislation unless it directly infringes on any Fundamental Rights.
Which of the above statements is/are correct?
Correct
Solution: a)
• Statement 1 – The Supreme Court has ruled that Article 32 is a basic feature of the Constitution. Hence, it cannot be abridged or taken away even by way of an amendment to the Constitution.
• Statement 2 – Only the Fundamental Rights guaranteed by the Constitution can be enforced under Article 32 and not any other right like non-fundamental constitutional rights, statutory rights, customary rights and so on.
• Statement 3 – In case of the enforcement of Fundamental Rights, the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is original but not exclusive. It is concurrent with the jurisdiction of the high court under Article 226.
• Statement 4 – Article 32 cannot be invoked simply to determine the constitutionality of an executive order or a legislation unless it directly infringes any of the fundamental rights.
Incorrect
Question 9 of 10
9. Question
2 points
Apart from the Minerva Mills case, which of the following cases deal with the primacy of fundamental rights vis-à-vis directive principles or vice versa?
1. Champakam Dorairajan (1951)
2. Golak Nath case (1967)
3. Kesavananda Bharati Case (1973)
4. ADM Jabalpur case (1976)
Select the correct answer code:
Correct
Solution: c)
In the Champakam Dorairajan case (1951), the Supreme Court ruled that in case of any conflict between the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles, the former would prevail. It declared that the Directive Principles have to conform to and run as subsidiary to the Fundamental Rights. The above situation underwent a major change in 1967 following the Supreme Court’s judgement in the Golaknath case (1967). In that case, the Supreme Court ruled that the Parliament cannot take away or abridge any of the Fundamental Rights, which are ‘sacrosanct’ in nature. In other words, the Court held that the Fundamental Rights cannot be amended for the implementation of the Directive Principles. In the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), the Supreme Court declared a particular provision of Article 31C as unconstitutional and invalid on the ground that judicial review is a basic feature of the Constitution and hence, cannot be taken away.
(ADM Jabalpur v Shivakant Shukla Case) – 1976: In this landmark judgment, the Supreme Court declared that the rights of citizens to move the court for violation of Articles 14, 21 and 22 would remain suspended during emergencies.
Incorrect
Question 10 of 10
10. Question
2 points
The Directive Principles are non-justiciable in nature.
This implies that
1. A citizen cannot move the court if the government fails to legally enforce the directive principles or even violate them in some instances.
2. The government cannot enact laws to implement directive principles.
Select the correct answer code:
Correct
Solution: a)
If they are violated one cannot approach the court and seek their enforcement. Therefore, the government (Central, state and local) cannot be compelled to implement them. The Directive Principles, though non-justiciable in nature, help the courts in examining and determining the constitutional validity of a law. The Supreme Court has ruled many a times that in determining the constitutionality of any law, if a court finds that the law in question seeks to give effect to a Directive Principle, it may consider such law to be ‘reasonable’ in relation to Article 14 (equality before law) or Article 19 (six freedoms) and thus save such law from unconstitutionality.
