Objective of this series is make sure that you are able to do 30% question which comes from PYQ.
How it will happen?
1.This
series give you an idea on where you need to focus.
2.Along
with question I will share Trick which will help you
in
solving question in real exam.
Note
I will take a fees from
you???
This
is a series of video of all the PYQ which
came from 2011[Pattern changed]
to 2022 for Polity.
Playlist for Polity Year wise question
Part 1 2022 and 2021
"Consider the following statements :
1. Pursuant to the report of H.N. Sanyal Committee, the Contempt
of Courts Act, 1971 was passed.
2. The Constitution of
India empowers the Supreme Court and the High Courts to punish for
contempt of themselves.
3. The Constitution of
India defines
Civil Contempt and Criminal Contempt.
4. In India, the Parliament
is vested with the powers to make laws on Contempt of
Court.
Which
of the statements given above is/are correct ?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 1, 2 and 4
(c) 3 and 4 only
(d) 3 only
Solution
B
|
Concept |
Dimension |
|
Contempt of Courts |
Law |
|
|
Committee |
|
|
Legislature |
|
|
Judiciary |
|
|
Types |
|
|
Constitution define |
Trick
Usually Constitution do not define things because it is a broad
concept.
Statement
3 is wrong
THE
CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 Define is the Civil Contempt and Criminal
Contempt.
Option
C and D eliminated.
Now
you are in 50:50 stage now you have to solve this question even if you are not
100% sure
Common sense
Both
A and B have Statement 1 it means there must be a law and if there is law then
it means
Statement
4 is right- the Parliament is vested with the powers to make laws on Contempt
of Court -
Therefore
by elimination and Common sense the
answer is B.
For
More on this question - https://upscmmpyq.blogspot.com/2023/03/contempt-of-court-explained-in-simple.html
===============================================
Name
the committee on whose report Contempt of Courts Act,
1971 was passed.
================================================
This
question is an example of how tough question can be solved using common sense
you just need to focus on each and every word.
Even
as a IAS when you read files this skill is important of reading each word
constiously because you will take decision based on that or you will approve
it.
So
, you will be held responsible.
"With reference to
India, consider the following statements :
1.
Government law officers and legal firms are recognised as
advocates, but corporate lawyers and patent attorneys are excluded from
recognition as advocates.
2. Bar Councils have
the power to lay down the rules relating to legal
education and recognition of law colleges.
Which
of the statements given above is/are correct ?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
Solution
B
Common sense - Legal Firms
can not be a advocate.--- Now 50-50.
Advocates
are the only recognized class of persons entitled to Practice the profession of
Law. Legal firms are not recognized as advocates.
Statement
2 is correct: The Bar Council of India regulates the law education in India.
Solution
B
For
More on this https://upscmmpyq.blogspot.com/2023/03/advocates-and-bar-council-upsc-pre-2022.html
==================================================
Consider the following
statements :
1.
A bill amending the Constitution requires a prior
recommendation of the President of India.
2. When a Constitution Amendment Bill is presented to
the President of India, it is obligatory for the
President of India to give his/her assent.
3. A Constitution Amendment Bill must be passed
by both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha by a special
majority and there is no provision for joint
sitting.
Which
of the statements given above are correct ?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1,2 and 3
Solution
B
This
is a direct question on Constitution Amendment Procedure
Statement
1 is wrong: CABs do not require President's recommendation.
Note - Money Bill require Prior approval of President
For
more
https://upscmmpyq.blogspot.com/2023/03/everything-you-need-to-about-amendment.html
Majority types
|
Special
|
Simple |
|
majority of total
membership of the House and majority of two-thirds of members of House present and voting. |
a majority of members of House present and voting. |
Note-
In president impeachment two-thirds of total membership in both houses.
===============================
Name a Bill which require prior President Approval ?
================================
Consider
the following statements :
1.
The Constitution
of India classifies the ministers into four ranks viz. Cabinet Minister,
Minister of State with Independent Charge, Minister of State and Deputy
Minister.
2.
The total number of ministers in the Union Government, including the Prime
Minister, shall
not exceed 15 percent of the total number of members in the Lok Sabha.
Which
of the statements given above is/are correct ?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
Solution
- B
Constitution
not go in much detail which are not important.
It
provides the framework.
Statement
1 is wrong: Article 74: There shall be a Council
of Ministers headed by Prime Minister to aid and advice president
But
different types of ministers and not mentioned in the constitution.
Statement
2 is correct: as per 91st CAA, 2003
Article 352 defines Cabinet--- as the Council consisting of the Prime Minister and
other Ministers of Cabinet rank under Article 75.
For
More - https://upscmmpyq.blogspot.com/2023/03/article-74-and-91st-caa-2003-upsc-pre.html
================================
Which of the following is/are the exclusive power(s) of Lok Sabha ?
1.To
ratify the declaration of Emergency
2.To
pass a motion of no-confidence against the
Council of Ministers
3.To
impeach the President of India
Select
the correct answer using the code given below :
(a) 1 and 2
(b) 2
only
(c) 1 and 3
(d) 3 only
Solution
B
Statement
1 is wrong: Article 352: Every Emergency
Proclamation issued needs to be laid
before each House of Parliament
Statement 2 is correct: Article 75(3): The Council of Ministers shall be collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha. So
no-confidence motion requires approval of Lok Sabha only.
Statement 3 is wrong: Article
61: If a President is to be impeached, the charge shall be framed by
either House of Parliament.
|
A.358 |
Deals with A.19 only |
For
More - https://upscmmpyq.blogspot.com/2023/03/national-emergency-impeachment-no.html
==============================
With reference to anti-defection
law in India, consider the following statements :
1. The law specifies that a nominated legislator cannot join any political party within six months of being appointed to the House.
2.
The law does not
provide any time-frame within which the presiding officer has to decide
a defection case.
Which
of the statements given above is/are correct ?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
Solution
B
Schedule 10: If a nominated member joins any political party
after the expiry of six months from joining then he’ll be disqualified.
|
91st Amendment Act, of 2003 |
Strengthened Anti defection law |
For
more - https://upscmmpyq.blogspot.com/2023/03/everything-yo-need-to-know-about-anti.html
========================================
"Consider
the following statements :
1. Attorney General of India and Solicitor General of
India are the only officers of the Government who are allowed to
participate in the meetings of the Parliament of India.
2. According to the Constitution of India,
the Attorney General of India submits his resignation
when the Government which appointed him resigns.
Which
of the statements given above is/are correct ?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
Solution
D
Article 88: Attorney General of India shall have the right to
speak and participate in either House but without right to vote. No mention of
Solicitor General of India.
Article 76: The Attorney General shall hold
office during the pleasure of the President. So Attorney General need not resign
if the government resigns.
https://upscmmpyq.blogspot.com/2023/03/attorney-general-of-india-and-advocate.html
===========================
With reference to the writs
issued by the Courts in India, consider the following statements :
1. Mandamus will
not lie against a private organisation unless it is entrusted with a public
duty.
2. Mandamus will
not lie against a Company even though it may be a Government Company.
3. Any public minded person can be a petitioner
to move the Court to obtain the writ of Quo Warranto.
Which
of the statements given above are correct ?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3
Solution
C
Statement 2 is wrong- Basic info about Mandamus.
Mandamus
literally means “Command”. It is thus an order of a superior court commanding a
person holding a public office or a public authority.
Quo Warranto is a writ or legal action
requiring a person to show by what warrant an office or franchise is held,
claimed, or exercised. Any public minded person can file this petition."
For
more
https://upscmmpyq.blogspot.com/2023/03/writ-and-article-32-explained-in-simple.html
====================
With
reference to
Deputy Speaker of Lok Sabha, consider the following statements :
1. As per the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of
Business in Lok Sabha, the election of Deputy Speaker shall be held on such date as the
Speaker may fix.
2. There is a mandatory
provision that the election of a candidate as Deputy Speaker of Lok
Sabha shall be from either the principal opposition party or the ruling party.
3. The Deputy Speaker has the same power as of
the Speaker when presiding over the sitting of
the House and no appeal lies against his rulings.
4. The well established parliamentary practice
regarding the appointment of Deputy Speaker is that the motion is moved by the
Speaker and duly seconded
by Prime Minister.
Which
of the statements given above are correct ?
(a) 1 and 3 only
(b) 1, 2 and 3
(c) 3 and 4 only
(d) 2 and 4 only"
Solution
A
For
More
https://upscmmpyq.blogspot.com/2023/03/deputy-speaker-upsc-pre-2022.html
===================================
If
a particular area is brought under the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution of India, which
one of the following statements best reflects the consequence of it ?
(a)
This would prevent the transfer of land of
tribal people to non-tribal people.
(b)This
would create a local self-governing body in that
area.
(c)
This would convert that area into a Union Territory.
(d) The State having such areas would be declared
a Special Category State.
Solution
A
Option B can be a confusing option because it is basically talking
about Schedule 6 Under which district and regional council are created which
has sizeable amount of autonomy
But in case of Schedule 5 Tribal advisory council created which
advise on welfare and advice of Scheduled tribes.
For
more
https://upscmmpyq.blogspot.com/2023/03/deputy-speaker-upsc-pre-2022.html
Comments
Post a Comment