Constitution Of India - Study Mode
[#3496] Ordinance promulgated by President under Article 123 of the Constitution of India shall cease to operate after . . . . . . . .
Correct Answer
(C) 6 weeks
Explanation
Solution: An ordinance is a temporary law that is promulgated by the President of India under Article 123 of the Constitution when the Parliament is not in session. It has the same force and effect as an Act of Parliament but must be approved by the legislature within a specific time frame to remain valid. Explanation: According to Article 123(2)(a) of the Constitution of India, an ordinance issued by the President must be laid before both Houses of Parliament when they reconvene. The ordinance will cease to operate at the expiration of six weeks from the date of reassembly unless it is approved by Parliament before that period ends. The six-week period is calculated from the date when both Houses of Parliament reconvene. If one House meets at a different time than the other, the countdown starts from the later date. If Parliament does not approve the ordinance within this period, it automatically lapses. Why not other options? Option A: 3 months – Incorrect, as the Constitution specifies 6 weeks , not 3 months. Option B: 6 months – Incorrect, as an ordinance does not remain valid for 6 months. Instead, it ceases to operate 6 weeks after Parliament reconvenes. Option D: 15 days – Incorrect, as there is no provision in the Constitution stating that an ordinance will lapse in 15 days. Thus, the correct answer is Option C: 6 weeks.
[#3497] The Speaker of the Lok Sabha enjoys
Correct Answer
(A) The right to vote only in case of tie
Explanation
Solution: The Speaker of the Lok Sabha is the presiding officer of the lower house of Parliament in India. The Speaker is responsible for maintaining order and ensuring that parliamentary proceedings are conducted smoothly. The Speaker is elected by the members of the Lok Sabha and remains impartial while discharging duties. Explanation: Under Article 100(1) of the Constitution of India, the Speaker does not cast a vote in the first instance like other members of the House. However, if there is a tie in votes, the Speaker has the power to cast a deciding vote to break the tie. This vote is known as the casting vote . The purpose of this provision is to maintain the Speaker's neutrality in the House. By refraining from voting during the initial voting process, the Speaker ensures impartiality, and the casting vote is used only when necessary to resolve a deadlock. Why not other options? Option B: The right to vote like other members of the House – Incorrect, because the Speaker does not have a normal voting right. The Speaker votes only in case of a tie. Option C: No right to vote – Incorrect, because the Speaker has the right to vote, but only in case of a tie. Option D: Two votes - one in ordinary course and other in case of tie – Incorrect, as the Speaker does not vote like regular members and has only one vote, which is exercised only in case of a tie. Thus, the correct answer is Option A: The right to vote only in case of tie.
[#3498] Financial emergency may be declared by the President under:
Correct Answer
(D) Article 360
Explanation
Solution: A Financial Emergency is a special provision under the Indian Constitution that allows the central government to take control of the country's financial stability in times of crisis. It is declared by the President of India under Article 360 when the financial stability or credit of India or any part of its territory is threatened. Explanation: Under Article 360 , if the President is satisfied that a financial emergency exists, they may declare a Financial Emergency. Once proclaimed, this emergency remains in operation unless revoked by the President. Parliamentary approval is required within two months . During a Financial Emergency, the central government gains extensive control over state finances, including: 1. Reduction of government salaries: The salaries of government employees, including judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts, can be reduced. 2. Control over financial matters: The President can direct states to follow certain financial policies to restore economic stability. 3. Allocation of resources: The financial autonomy of states is significantly curtailed as the central government takes charge of financial decisions. Why not other options? Option A: Article 352 – Incorrect, as Article 352 deals with a National Emergency due to war, external aggression, or armed rebellion. Option B: Article 356 – Incorrect, as Article 356 provides for President’s Rule in a state when its constitutional machinery fails. Option C: Article 359 – Incorrect, as Article 359 allows the President to suspend Fundamental Rights during a National Emergency, but it does not deal with a Financial Emergency. Thus, the correct answer is Option D: Article 360.
[#3499] In case any question arises as to age of a Judge of a High Court, decision of which of the following authority shall be final as per the Constitution of India:
Correct Answer
(A) President of India
Explanation
Solution: According to the Constitution of India , the tenure and retirement age of High Court judges are clearly defined. If any dispute arises regarding the age of a High Court judge, the authority to make a final decision lies with the Chief Justice of India (CJI) . This provision ensures that judicial independence is maintained and prevents unnecessary executive interference. Explanation: As per Article 217(3) of the Constitution of India , if any question arises about the age of a High Court Judge, the decision of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) shall be final. This provision is important to: 1. Maintain judicial autonomy: The judiciary should remain free from political and executive influence, and the CJI, being the head of the judiciary, is entrusted with this responsibility. 2. Prevent disputes affecting judicial appointments: Ensuring clarity in a judge's tenure prevents unnecessary legal challenges or uncertainties. 3. Avoid potential bias: If the executive were to decide on a judge's age, it could lead to conflicts of interest or political misuse. By entrusting this power to the CJI, the Constitution ensures fairness. Why not other options? Option A: President of India – Incorrect, because while the President appoints High Court judges, disputes regarding their age are specifically decided by the CJI as per Article 217(3). Option C: Chief Justice of High Court – Incorrect, as the Chief Justice of a High Court does not have constitutional authority to make a final decision on a judge's age. The decision rests solely with the CJI. Option D: Collegium of Supreme Court – Incorrect, as the Collegium is responsible for recommending judicial appointments but does not decide disputes regarding the age of judges. Option E: None of the above – Incorrect, because Article 217(3) explicitly states that the CJI's decision is final. Thus, the correct answer is Option B: Chief Justice of India.
[#3500] "Right to Work" in the Constitution can be traced in
Correct Answer
(B) Directive Principles of State Policy
Explanation
Solution: The "Right to Work" refers to an individual's right to employment and livelihood. In the Indian Constitution, it is not a fundamental right but a directive principle that guides the state in ensuring economic justice. Explanation: The Right to Work is enshrined in Article 41 of the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) . Article 41 states that the state shall make effective provisions for securing the right to work, education, and public assistance in cases of unemployment, old age, sickness, and disablement. However, this right is not justiciable, meaning that individuals cannot directly enforce it through the courts. Why is it part of DPSP? The Directive Principles of State Policy are guidelines for governance that aim to establish socio-economic justice. While they are not legally enforceable, they serve as a framework for government policies. The inclusion of the Right to Work in DPSP emphasizes the state's responsibility to promote employment and economic well-being. Why not other options? Option A: Fundamental Rights – Incorrect, because the Right to Work is not explicitly mentioned as a fundamental right under Part III of the Constitution. Fundamental Rights are justiciable, whereas DPSPs are not. Option C: Preamble of the Constitution – Incorrect, because while the Preamble mentions "Justice—Social, Economic, and Political," it does not explicitly include the Right to Work. The Preamble sets the ideological foundation but does not confer enforceable rights. Option D: None of the above – Incorrect, as the Right to Work is clearly mentioned under DPSP in Article 41. Thus, the correct answer is Option B: Directive Principles of State Policy.