Polity · MPSC Prep

Polity · The Constitution · Topic 1 of 11

Making of the Constitution (Acts of 1773–1935, Constituent Assembly, sources)

Mark as done

Think of it like…

A housing society writing its own bye-laws

Think of a new housing society in Pune. At first the builder runs everything: he decides the rules, appoints the watchman and keeps the accounts. Residents complain, so the builder issues a fresh set of rules every few years. One set lets him send an inspector to check his own manager. Another lets residents sit on an advisory panel, but only nominated ones. A later one lets residents elect a few members, but in separate groups for different wings. Then he hands over a few departments (garden, water) to elected residents while keeping the important ones (money, security) with himself. Finally he gives each wing almost full control of its own affairs, while still holding the keys to the main gate.

At last the residents say: we will write our own bye-laws. The general body meets, elects a president, passes a resolution stating its goals, and appoints a small drafting sub-committee under its most learned member. That committee does not invent everything from scratch: it borrows the best clauses from the old builder’s rules and from model bye-laws of other well-run societies, then adapts them. The general body debates every clause, adopts the bye-laws on one date and brings them fully into force on a symbolic date two months later. That is exactly the story of India’s Constitution, from the Regulating Act of 1773 to 26 January 1950.

In everyday life	In the exam topic
Builder issuing a new set of rules every few years	British Parliament’s Acts: 1773, 1784, Charter Acts, 1858, 1861, 1892, 1909, 1919, 1935
Wing-wise elections in separate groups	Separate electorates (Muslims in 1909, extended in 1919)
Some departments to elected residents, key ones kept by builder	Dyarchy in provinces (1919): transferred vs reserved subjects
Each wing running its own affairs, builder keeps the main gate	Provincial autonomy under the Government of India Act 1935
Residents’ general body and its drafting sub-committee	Constituent Assembly (1946) and Drafting Committee under Dr B.R. Ambedkar (1947)
Clauses borrowed from other societies’ model bye-laws	Borrowed features: Britain, USA, Ireland, Canada, Australia, USSR, Weimar Germany, Japan, South Africa, France

The concept

The Company and the Crown (1773–1858). The Regulating Act 1773 was the British Parliament’s first step to control the East India Company: the Governor of Bengal became the Governor-General of Bengal (Warren Hastings) and a Supreme Court was set up at Calcutta (1774). Pitt’s India Act 1784 created the Board of Control, giving a system of “double government” (Company’s Court of Directors for commerce, Board of Control for political affairs). The Charter Act 1813 ended the Company’s trade monopoly in India (except trade in tea and with China); the Charter Act 1833 made the Governor-General of Bengal the Governor-General of India (Lord William Bentinck) and ended the Company’s commercial role; the Charter Act 1853 separated legislative from executive functions and opened the civil services to open competition. After the revolt of 1857, the Government of India Act 1858 transferred power to the Crown, created the Secretary of State for India and renamed the Governor-General as Viceroy (Lord Canning).

Slow Indianisation (1861–1935). The Indian Councils Act 1861 began associating Indians with law-making (nominated non-officials) and recognised Canning’s portfolio system. The 1892 Act allowed discussion of the budget and indirect election. The Indian Councils Act 1909 (Morley–Minto) introduced separate electorates for Muslims (hence Lord Minto is called the father of communal electorate) and S.P. Sinha became the first Indian in the Viceroy’s Executive Council. The Government of India Act 1919 (Montagu–Chelmsford) brought dyarchy in the provinces (transferred subjects under ministers, reserved subjects under the Governor), a bicameral central legislature, direct elections and a Public Service Commission (set up 1926). The Government of India Act 1935, the longest, proposed an All-India Federation (it never came into being), gave provincial autonomy, divided powers into Federal, Provincial and Concurrent lists, provided dyarchy at the Centre (never implemented), and set up a Federal Court (1937). Much of our Constitution’s administrative machinery is lifted from this Act.

The Constituent Assembly. M.N. Roy first proposed the idea (1934); the Congress formally demanded it in 1935. It was formed under the Cabinet Mission Plan (1946) with 389 seats: 296 for British India (292 from the provinces, 4 from chief commissioners’ provinces) and 93 for princely states. The British-India members were indirectly elected by the provincial assemblies (princely-state members were to be nominated by the rulers); nobody was chosen by adult franchise. After Partition its strength fell to 299. It first met on 9 December 1946 with Dr Sachchidananda Sinha as temporary chairman; Dr Rajendra Prasad was elected permanent president on 11 December 1946. Nehru moved the Objectives Resolution on 13 December 1946 (adopted 22 January 1947); it later became the Preamble. The Drafting Committee (seven members, chairman Dr B.R. Ambedkar) was set up on 29 August 1947; B.N. Rau was the constitutional adviser. The Constitution was adopted on 26 November 1949 (now Constitution Day), when provisions on citizenship, elections and the provisional Parliament came into force at once, and the rest came into force on 26 January 1950, chosen because the Congress had celebrated 26 January 1930 as Purna Swaraj Day. The Assembly took 2 years, 11 months and 18 days over 11 sessions; the original text had 395 articles, 22 parts and 8 schedules.

Sources (a “borrowed but adapted” Constitution). From the 1935 Act: federal scheme, office of Governor, judiciary, public service commissions, emergency provisions. Britain: parliamentary government, rule of law, single citizenship, cabinet system, prerogative writs, bicameralism. USA: Fundamental Rights, independence of judiciary, judicial review, impeachment of the President, removal of Supreme Court and High Court judges, post of Vice-President. Ireland: Directive Principles, nomination of members to the Rajya Sabha, method of electing the President. Canada: federation with a strong Centre, residuary powers with the Centre, appointment of state Governors by the Centre, advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Australia: Concurrent List, freedom of trade and commerce, joint sitting. Weimar Germany: suspension of Fundamental Rights during emergency. USSR: Fundamental Duties and the ideal of social, economic and political justice. France: republic and liberty, equality, fraternity. South Africa: procedure for amendment and election of Rajya Sabha members. Japan: “procedure established by law”.

Key points & formulas

Regulating Act 1773: first Governor-General of Bengal (Warren Hastings); Supreme Court at Calcutta (1774)
Charter Act 1833: first Governor-General of India (William Bentinck); Charter Act 1853: open competition for civil services
GoI Act 1858: Crown rule, Secretary of State, Viceroy; Indian Councils Act 1861: portfolio system
1909 Morley–Minto: separate electorate for Muslims; 1919 Montagu–Chelmsford: provincial dyarchy, bicameral Centre
GoI Act 1935: provincial autonomy, three lists, Federal Court (1937), proposed All-India Federation (never formed)
Constituent Assembly: 389 seats under the Cabinet Mission Plan, 299 after Partition; indirectly elected
First sitting 9 Dec 1946 (Sachchidananda Sinha, temporary); Rajendra Prasad president from 11 Dec 1946
Objectives Resolution: moved by Nehru 13 Dec 1946, adopted 22 Jan 1947
Drafting Committee: 29 Aug 1947, seven members, chairman B.R. Ambedkar; adviser B.N. Rau
Adopted 26 Nov 1949; in force 26 Jan 1950; original 395 articles, 22 parts, 8 schedules
Dr Ambedkar entered the Assembly from Bengal in 1946; when the Partition plan put that seat in East Pakistan, he was elected from Bombay on 14 July 1947 in the seat vacated by M.R. Jayakar

Worked example

Match the borrowed feature with its source: (a) Directive Principles, (b) residuary powers with the Centre, (c) procedure established by law, (d) Concurrent List.

Show solution

Directive Principles: the Irish Constitution (1937) had “Directive Principles of Social Policy”, so (a) → Ireland.
Residuary powers with the Centre: Canada’s federation keeps leftover subjects with Ottawa, unlike the USA where they stay with the states, so (b) → Canada.
“Procedure established by law” (Art. 21) was taken from Japan’s Constitution, not the American “due process of law”, so (c) → Japan.
The Concurrent List, where both Centre and states can legislate, comes from Australia, so (d) → Australia.

Answer: (a) Ireland, (b) Canada, (c) Japan, (d) Australia

Exam shortcut

Acts in order: “Regular Pitt Charters Give Councils More Montagu Government” → Regulating 1773, Pitt’s 1784, Charters 1793–1853, GoI 1858, Councils 1861/1892, Morley–Minto 1909, Montagu–Chelmsford 1919, GoI 1935. For sources: Ireland gives Directions, Canada keeps the Residue, Australia Concurs, USSR gives Duties.

Common traps

The Constituent Assembly was not directly elected by the people; provincial assemblies elected its members indirectly.
The Constitution was adopted on 26 November 1949 but came fully into force on 26 January 1950; some provisions (citizenship, elections) began on 26 November 1949 itself.
Sachchidananda Sinha (temporary chairman) presided over the first meeting, not Rajendra Prasad.
“Due process of law” is American; India adopted “procedure established by law” from Japan (though Maneka Gandhi 1978 read fairness into it).
The 1935 Act’s All-India Federation and central dyarchy were never implemented; only provincial autonomy came into effect (1937).

Practice · tap an option to check

Q1. Arrange the following in chronological order:
1. The Act that introduced dyarchy in the provinces
2. The Act that ended the East India Company’s trade monopoly in India (except tea and trade with China)
3. The Act that created the Board of Control
4. The Act that recognised the portfolio system

Q2. Who presided over the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly on 9 December 1946?

Q3. Which of the following pairs of borrowed feature and source is incorrectly matched?

Q4. Consider the following statements:
1. Members of the Constituent Assembly were directly elected on the basis of adult franchise.
2. The Objectives Resolution was moved by Jawaharlal Nehru.
3. The Constitution was adopted on 26 January 1950.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

↑ Back to topic list

Polity · The Constitution · Topic 2 of 11

Preamble, Salient Features and Amending the Constitution (Art. 368, basic structure)

Mark as done

Think of it like…

Renovating the ancestral wada

A joint family owns a two-hundred-year-old wada in a Satara village. Carved over its main door is the family’s declaration: “This house belongs to all of us, and in it every member shall have food, respect and a fair share.” That carving does not give anyone the power to do anything, but whenever there is a dispute about what a rule in the family deed means, the elders look up at the carving to find the intention. That carving is the Preamble.

Over the years the house needs changes. Small changes (repainting, a new tap) need only a simple majority of the family meeting. Bigger changes (rebuilding a room) need two-thirds of those present and more than half of all members. Changes that affect the portions each brother lives in (the shared walls between their sections) also need the agreement of at least half the brothers’ households. Yet one rule stands above all: however large the majority, nobody may remove the central wooden pillars that hold the roof, because without them it is no longer the same wada. The family elders (the court) decide what counts as a central pillar. This is how Article 368 and the basic structure doctrine work together.

In everyday life	In the exam topic
Declaration carved over the main door	Preamble: states source of authority, nature of the State and objectives; guides interpretation, not enforceable
Small change by simple majority of the family meeting	Amendment by simple majority (outside Art. 368, e.g. Art. 2, 3, 169)
Bigger change by two-thirds present and more than half of all members	Special majority of each House under Art. 368(2)
Shared walls between brothers’ portions also need half the households	Federal provisions: special majority plus ratification by half the state legislatures
Central pillars that no majority can remove	Basic structure (Kesavananda Bharati, 1973)
Elders who decide what counts as a pillar	Judicial review by the Supreme Court

The concept

The Preamble is based on Nehru’s Objectives Resolution. It reveals four things: the source of authority (“We, the people of India”), the nature of the Indian State (Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic, Republic), the objectives (Justice — social, economic and political; Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; Equality of status and of opportunity; Fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation) and the date of adoption (26 November 1949). In Berubari Union (1960) the Supreme Court said the Preamble is not part of the Constitution; in Kesavananda Bharati (1973) it reversed this and held that it is a part, can be amended, but not so as to destroy basic features. It is neither a source of power nor a limit on power, and is not enforceable in court. It has been amended only once, by the 42nd Amendment (1976), which added Socialist, Secular and Integrity; in November 2024 the Supreme Court dismissed petitions challenging that insertion.

Salient features. It is the lengthiest written constitution in the world (395 articles, 22 parts and 8 schedules originally; four schedules have since been added: the Ninth by the 1st Amendment, the Tenth by the 52nd, the Eleventh by the 73rd, the Twelfth by the 74th). It blends rigidity and flexibility, is federal with a unitary bias (Art. 1 calls India a “Union of States”; the word “federation” is not used), sets up parliamentary government, balances parliamentary sovereignty with judicial supremacy, has an integrated and independent judiciary, Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles, Fundamental Duties, a secular State, universal adult franchise (voting age lowered from 21 to 18 by the 61st Amendment, 1988), single citizenship, independent constitutional bodies, emergency provisions and three tiers of government (after the 73rd and 74th Amendments).

Amendment under Article 368 (Part XX). A constitutional amendment bill can be introduced in either House, by a minister or a private member, without the President’s prior permission. It must be passed in each House by a special majority: a majority of the total membership of the House and two-thirds of members present and voting. There is no joint sitting if the Houses disagree. If the bill touches the federal structure, it must also be ratified by half of the state legislatures by simple majority (no time limit is prescribed). These federal provisions include the election of the President (Art. 54, 55), extent of executive power of Union and states, the Supreme Court and High Courts, distribution of legislative powers and the Seventh Schedule, representation of states in Parliament, the GST Council (Art. 279A) and Article 368 itself. Since the 24th Amendment (1971), the President must give assent. Some provisions (creating new states under Art. 3, creating or abolishing legislative councils under Art. 169, Fifth and Sixth Schedules) are changed by a simple majority law and are expressly not amendments under Art. 368.

The basic structure saga. In Shankari Prasad (1951) and Sajjan Singh (1965) the Court said Parliament can amend Fundamental Rights. In Golaknath (1967) it said Parliament cannot. Parliament responded with the 24th Amendment (1971). In Kesavananda Bharati (24 April 1973, 13 judges, 7:6) the Court upheld the 24th Amendment but held that Parliament cannot alter the basic structure. When the 42nd Amendment (1976) tried to make amending power unlimited, Minerva Mills (1980) struck down those clauses, declaring limited amending power and the balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles to be basic features. Waman Rao (1981) applied the doctrine to amendments made after 24 April 1973. Other basic features recognised by the Court include supremacy of the Constitution, secularism, federalism, separation of powers, judicial review, rule of law, free and fair elections (Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain, 1975) and independence of the judiciary (NJAC case, 2015).

Key points & formulas

Preamble ideals: Liberty, Equality, Fraternity from France; social, economic and political justice from the Russian Revolution
Preamble amended once: 42nd Amendment 1976 added Socialist, Secular, Integrity
Berubari (1960): Preamble not a part; Kesavananda (1973) and LIC of India (1995): it is a part
Art. 368 is in Part XX; amendment bill in either House, no President’s prior recommendation, no joint sitting
Special majority = majority of total membership + two-thirds of members present and voting, in each House separately
State ratification: half the states, simple majority, no time limit; needed for federal provisions and Art. 368 itself
24th Amendment (1971): President’s assent to an amendment bill is obligatory
Case chain: Shankari Prasad 1951 → Sajjan Singh 1965 → Golaknath 1967 → Kesavananda 1973 → Minerva Mills 1980 → Waman Rao 1981
Art. 1: India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States
61st Amendment (1988): voting age 21 → 18

Worked example

Which of the following amendments need ratification by half of the state legislatures? (1) Changing the manner of election of the President (2) Abolishing the Legislative Council of a state (3) Changing the representation of states in Parliament (4) Amending the right to freedom of speech.

Show solution

(1) Election of the President (Art. 54, 55) is a federal provision listed in the proviso to Art. 368(2), because state MLAs vote in it. Ratification needed.
(2) Abolition of a Legislative Council is done under Art. 169 by an ordinary law of Parliament, after a special-majority resolution of the state assembly. It is deemed not to be an amendment under Art. 368, so no ratification.
(3) Representation of states in Parliament is a federal provision. Ratification needed.
(4) Fundamental Rights are amended by special majority of Parliament alone (subject to basic structure); states are not asked.

Answer: Only (1) and (3)

Exam shortcut

Ask: “Do the states lose or gain something?” If yes (President’s election, Union–state powers, Seventh Schedule, courts, seats in Parliament, GST Council, Art. 368 itself), half the states must ratify. Fundamental Rights and DPSP are amended by Parliament alone.

Common traps

The Preamble is part of the Constitution (Kesavananda) but is not enforceable and is not a source of power.
“Integrity” (not “unity”) was added in 1976; “unity of the Nation” was already there.
There is no joint sitting for constitutional amendment bills; joint sittings (Art. 108) are only for ordinary bills.
Art. 3 (new states) and Art. 169 (legislative councils) changes are by simple majority and are expressly not Art. 368 amendments.
Golaknath said Parliament could not amend Fundamental Rights; Kesavananda said it can, but not the basic structure.

Practice · tap an option to check

Q1. Which words were added to the Preamble by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976?

Q2. Arrange the following Supreme Court cases in chronological order:
1. Golaknath
2. Kesavananda Bharati
3. Minerva Mills
4. Shankari Prasad

Q3. An amendment to which of the following requires ratification by at least half of the state legislatures?

Q4. Consider the following statements about Article 368:
1. A constitutional amendment bill can be introduced in either House of Parliament.
2. If the two Houses disagree, the President can summon a joint sitting.
3. The President cannot withhold assent to a duly passed constitutional amendment bill.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

↑ Back to topic list

Polity · The Constitution · Topic 3 of 11

Fundamental Rights and Writs (Art. 12–35)

Mark as done

Think of it like…

The headmaster’s five orders

In a large Zilla Parishad school, the printed rulebook promises every pupil certain things: no pupil may be punished without a hearing, every pupil may speak in the debate, nobody may be made to work in the canteen without pay, and so on. Teachers, clerks and the school committee (the “State”) must all obey it. If any of them breaks a promise, the pupil can walk straight into the headmaster’s office, and the right to walk in is itself one of the promises (Article 32).

The headmaster has exactly five kinds of orders. If a teacher has locked a pupil in a storeroom, he says: “Bring the child before me and tell me why” (habeas corpus). If the clerk refuses to issue a leaving certificate that is his duty to issue, he says: “I command you to do your duty” (mandamus). If a class monitor has started holding a “trial” over a matter beyond his authority, he says: “Stop right now” (prohibition). If the monitor has already given a wrong verdict, he calls for the file and cancels it (certiorari). If someone is sitting in the sports captain’s chair without ever being selected, he asks: “By what authority do you hold this post?” (quo warranto). The headmaster of one school building (High Court) can issue these orders even for ordinary legal rights; the headmaster of the whole district (Supreme Court) uses them for the rulebook promises.

In everyday life	In the exam topic
Rulebook promises binding teachers, clerks and committee	Fundamental Rights binding the “State” (Art. 12) and laws (Art. 13)
Right to walk into the headmaster’s office	Art. 32: right to constitutional remedies, itself a Fundamental Right
“Bring the child before me”	Habeas corpus: produce the detained person
“Do your duty”	Mandamus: command to a public official to perform a public duty
“Stop the trial” / “Cancel the verdict”	Prohibition (pending proceedings) / Certiorari (decision already given)
“By what authority do you sit in that chair?”	Quo warranto: challenge to illegal occupation of a public office

The concept

Part III (Art. 12–35) is called the Magna Carta of India. Fundamental Rights are justiciable (enforceable in court), but not absolute: the State can impose reasonable restrictions. Art. 12 defines “State” to include the Government and Parliament of India, state governments and legislatures, local authorities and other authorities (courts have included statutory bodies and government-controlled corporations). Art. 13 declares void any law inconsistent with Fundamental Rights; this is the express basis of judicial review. Six rights remain: Equality (Art. 14–18), Freedom (Art. 19–22), against Exploitation (Art. 23–24), Freedom of Religion (Art. 25–28), Cultural and Educational (Art. 29–30) and Constitutional Remedies (Art. 32). The right to property (Art. 19(1)(f) and Art. 31) was deleted by the 44th Amendment (1978); it is now only a legal right under Art. 300A (Part XII).

The key articles. Art. 14: equality before law (British idea) and equal protection of laws (American idea). Art. 15: no discrimination on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth; 15(4) (1st Amendment, 1951) allows special provisions for backward classes, 15(5) (93rd, 2005) reservation in educational institutions including private ones, 15(6) (103rd, 2019) up to 10% for economically weaker sections (EWS). Art. 16: equality of opportunity in public employment; 16(4A) (77th, 1995) reservation in promotion for SC/ST; 16(6) EWS. Art. 17 abolishes untouchability; Art. 18 abolishes titles. Art. 19 now guarantees six freedoms: speech and expression, assembly without arms, associations or unions or co-operative societies (97th Amendment, 2011), movement, residence, and profession. Art. 20: no ex post facto criminal law, no double jeopardy, no self-incrimination. Art. 21: life and personal liberty, expanded by courts to include privacy (Puttaswamy, 2017), livelihood, clean environment and more. Art. 21A (86th Amendment, 2002): free and compulsory education for children of 6–14 years. Art. 22: protection against arbitrary arrest and detention (produce before a magistrate within 24 hours). Art. 23 bans human trafficking and forced labour (begar); Art. 24 bans employing children below 14 in factories, mines or hazardous work. Art. 25–28 protect religious freedom; Art. 29–30 protect minorities’ culture and their right to run educational institutions.

Who can claim what, and when. Art. 15, 16, 19, 29 and 30 are available only to citizens; the rest are available to all persons. During a National Emergency, Art. 358 automatically suspends Art. 19 when the emergency is on the ground of war or external aggression (not armed rebellion), and Art. 359 lets the President suspend enforcement of other rights, except Art. 20 and 21 (protected by the 44th Amendment). Parliament can restrict rights of the armed forces and police (Art. 33) and during martial law (Art. 34).

Writs: Art. 32 vs Art. 226. The Supreme Court issues writs under Art. 32 only to enforce Fundamental Rights; a High Court under Art. 226 can issue them for Fundamental Rights and “for any other purpose” (legal rights), so High Court writ jurisdiction is wider. Art. 32 is itself a Fundamental Right (Ambedkar called it the “heart and soul” of the Constitution); Art. 226 is not, and the High Court has discretion to refuse. Habeas corpus (“to have the body”) can be issued against both public authorities and private individuals. Mandamus (“we command”) cannot be issued against a private individual, the President or a Governor. Prohibition (“to forbid”) is issued by a higher court to a lower court or tribunal during proceedings; certiorari (“to be certified”) quashes an order already passed, and is now also available against administrative authorities affecting rights. Quo warranto (“by what authority”) can be sought by any person, not only the aggrieved one, and lies only against a substantive public office created by law, not a ministerial or private office.

Key points & formulas

Equality 14–18; Freedom 19–22; Exploitation 23–24; Religion 25–28; Cultural & Educational 29–30; Remedies 32
Art. 12 defines “State”; Art. 13 makes inconsistent laws void (judicial review)
Right to property removed by 44th Amendment (1978); now Art. 300A, a legal right
Citizens only: Art. 15, 16, 19, 29, 30
Art. 21A (86th, 2002): education 6–14 years; Art. 15(6) and 16(6) (103rd, 2019): EWS up to 10%
Art. 19(1)(c) “co-operative societies” added by 97th Amendment (2011)
Art. 20 and 21 cannot be suspended even in a National Emergency (44th Amendment)
Art. 358 suspends Art. 19 only in a war / external aggression emergency; Art. 359 suspends enforcement of others
Writs: habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, quo warranto; SC under Art. 32, HC under Art. 226 (wider)
Art. 32 “heart and soul of the Constitution” (Ambedkar)

Worked example

A person is appointed Vice-Chancellor of a state university although he does not meet the qualifications prescribed by the university Act. A student wants to challenge the appointment. Which writ is appropriate, and can the student file it though he is not personally harmed?

Show solution

The complaint is not that someone is detained (habeas corpus) or that an official refused a duty (mandamus).
It is not about a lower court exceeding its jurisdiction (prohibition or certiorari).
The question is: by what authority does this person hold a public office created by statute? That is quo warranto.
Quo warranto is an exception to the usual locus standi rule: any interested person may seek it, not only an aggrieved one.

Answer: Quo warranto; yes, any person can file it

Exam shortcut

Timeline of a wrong decision: before or during it → Prohibition (stop); after it → Certiorari (cancel). Who is the target? A detained body → Habeas corpus; a lazy official → Mandamus; a usurper of office → Quo warranto.

Common traps

Art. 32 (Supreme Court) is a Fundamental Right; Art. 226 (High Court) is not, yet Art. 226 covers more ground (“any other purpose”).
Mandamus cannot be issued against a private person, the President or a Governor; habeas corpus can be against a private person.
Prohibition is preventive (pending case), certiorari is corrective (decided case); both go only to judicial or quasi-judicial bodies in the classic form.
Art. 19 is suspended automatically only for war or external aggression, not for armed rebellion; Art. 20 and 21 are never suspended.
Right to property is still a constitutional right (Art. 300A) but not a Fundamental Right; you cannot go directly to the Supreme Court under Art. 32 for it.

Practice · tap an option to check

Q1. A tribunal has already passed an order in a case that was outside its jurisdiction. Which writ will the High Court issue to quash that order?

Q2. Which of the following groups of Fundamental Rights is available only to citizens of India?

Q3. Consider the following statements:
1. The right to property was removed from Part III by the 44th Amendment, 1978.
2. Article 21A was inserted by the 86th Amendment.
3. During a National Emergency, the enforcement of Articles 20 and 21 can be suspended.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q4. Match the writ with its literal meaning:
a. Habeas corpus b. Mandamus c. Quo warranto d. Certiorari
i. By what authority ii. To have the body iii. To be certified (informed) iv. We command

↑ Back to topic list

Polity · The Constitution · Topic 4 of 11

Directive Principles and Fundamental Duties

Mark as done

Think of it like…

The sugar cooperative’s goals and its members’ duties

A cooperative sugar factory in Ahilyanagar district has two kinds of rules. Its bye-laws are enforceable: if the board refuses to pay a member the price fixed for his cane, he can go to the cooperative court and win. Those are like Fundamental Rights. But at the first general meeting the members also adopted a list of goals: “The factory shall run a school for members’ children, start a hospital, pay fair wages, protect the river from effluent, and make sure no single family controls all the shares.” No member can drag the board to court because the hospital is not built yet. Yet at every board election, members ask: what have you done about our goals? A board that ignores them loses. Those goals are the Directive Principles: not enforceable in court, but “fundamental in the governance” of the institution.

The bye-laws also list what members owe: supply your cane to the factory, do not damage its machinery, attend the general meeting, help in a crisis. Nobody is jailed for missing a meeting, but these duties remind members that the cooperative works only if they play their part. Those are the Fundamental Duties. And when the factory’s lawyers have to interpret a bye-law, the court reads it in the light of the goals, so the two work together rather than against each other.

In everyday life	In the exam topic
Enforceable bye-laws (cane price, hearing before expulsion)	Fundamental Rights: justiciable (Part III)
Goals adopted at the general meeting (school, hospital, fair wages)	Directive Principles (Part IV, Art. 36–51)
Cannot sue the board, but judge it at the next election	Art. 37: not enforceable by courts, yet fundamental in governance; political sanction
What each member owes the cooperative	Fundamental Duties, Art. 51A (Part IVA)
Court reads bye-laws in the light of the goals	Harmony between FRs and DPSP is a basic feature (Minerva Mills, 1980)

The concept

Directive Principles of State Policy (Part IV, Art. 36–51) were borrowed from the Irish Constitution and resemble the “Instrument of Instructions” of the 1935 Act. Art. 37 says they are not enforceable by any court, but are fundamental in the governance of the country and the State must apply them in making laws. Ambedkar called them a “novel feature”. Their aim is a welfare state and social and economic democracy, whereas Fundamental Rights secure political democracy. Rights are negative (they stop the State from doing something); directives are positive (they ask the State to act).

Classification (not in the text, but asked in exams). Socialistic: Art. 38 (welfare state; 38(2), added by the 44th Amendment, to minimise inequalities in income), Art. 39 (adequate livelihood, distribution of resources for the common good, prevention of concentration of wealth, equal pay for equal work, protection of children), 39A (equal justice and free legal aid), 41 (right to work, education and public assistance), 42 (just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief), 43 (living wage), 43A (workers’ participation in management), 47 (nutrition and public health). Gandhian: Art. 40 (village panchayats), 43 (cottage industries), 43B (co-operative societies), 46 (interests of SC, ST and weaker sections), 47 (prohibition of intoxicating drinks and drugs), 48 (prohibit slaughter of cows and calves). Liberal-intellectual: Art. 44 (Uniform Civil Code), 45 (early childhood care and education below 6 years), 48 (scientific agriculture and animal husbandry), 48A (environment, forests and wildlife), 49 (monuments), 50 (separate judiciary from executive), 51 (international peace).

Amendments and the conflict with rights. The 42nd Amendment (1976) added 39A, 43A and 48A, and recast Art. 39(f) to add children’s healthy development. The 44th (1978) added Art. 38(2). The 86th (2002) replaced Art. 45 (now early childhood care up to 6 years, since education for 6–14 became Art. 21A). The 97th (2011) added Art. 43B (co-operative societies). On conflict: in Champakam Dorairajan (1951) the Court held Fundamental Rights prevail, prompting the 1st Amendment. The 25th Amendment (1971) inserted Art. 31C, protecting laws giving effect to Art. 39(b) and (c) from challenge under Art. 14 and 19. The 42nd Amendment tried to extend this to all directives, but Minerva Mills (1980) struck that down: the Constitution rests on the balance between Parts III and IV. Laws implementing directives include the Legal Services Authorities Act 1987 (Art. 39A), the 73rd Amendment (Art. 40) and MGNREGA 2005 (Art. 41).

Fundamental Duties (Part IVA, Art. 51A) were added by the 42nd Amendment (1976) on the recommendation of the Swaran Singh Committee; the idea comes from the Constitution of the erstwhile USSR. There were ten originally; the eleventh, 51A(k) (parents or guardians to provide opportunities for education to their child aged 6–14), was added by the 86th Amendment (2002). They apply only to citizens and are not directly enforceable, though courts use them to judge the reasonableness of laws. They include: abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals, the National Flag and the National Anthem; cherish the ideals of the freedom struggle; uphold sovereignty, unity and integrity; defend the country; promote harmony and renounce practices derogatory to women; preserve the composite culture; protect the natural environment; develop scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry; safeguard public property and abjure violence; strive for excellence. The Verma Committee (1999) reviewed how to operationalise them.

Key points & formulas

DPSP: Part IV, Art. 36–51; source Ireland; Art. 37 non-justiciable but fundamental in governance
Gandhian: Art. 40, 43, 43B, 46, 47, 48 (cow slaughter); Art. 44 Uniform Civil Code is liberal-intellectual
42nd Amendment added DPSP: 39A, 43A, 48A (and recast 39(f))
44th added 38(2); 86th substituted 45; 97th added 43B
Art. 50: separation of judiciary from executive; Art. 51: international peace and security
Art. 31C (25th Amendment, 1971) protects laws under Art. 39(b) and (c)
Minerva Mills (1980): harmony between FRs and DPSP is a basic feature
Fundamental Duties: Part IVA, Art. 51A; 42nd Amendment 1976; Swaran Singh Committee; USSR source
Originally 10 duties; 11th (51A(k), education of child 6–14) by 86th Amendment 2002
Duties apply only to citizens; the National Song is not mentioned in Art. 51A

Worked example

Classify these laws or schemes by the Directive Principle they implement: (1) free legal aid through Legal Services Authorities (2) MGNREGA (3) the 73rd Amendment (4) a ban on liquor in a state.

Show solution

Free legal aid is the promise of equal justice in Art. 39A (added by the 42nd Amendment).
MGNREGA guarantees wage employment, implementing the right to work in Art. 41.
The 73rd Amendment gave constitutional status to panchayats, implementing Art. 40 (organise village panchayats), a Gandhian principle.
Prohibition of intoxicating drinks is in Art. 47, another Gandhian principle.

Answer: (1) Art. 39A, (2) Art. 41, (3) Art. 40, (4) Art. 47

Exam shortcut

For “added by the 42nd” questions, remember the family “39A–43A–48A” (every “A” article in the 39–48 range; 43B is the 97th’s cooperatives). For Gandhian directives, think of a Gandhian village: panchayat (40), charkha (43), cooperative (43B), weaker sections (46), no liquor (47), protect the cow (48).

Common traps

Art. 44 (Uniform Civil Code) is liberal-intellectual, not Gandhian.
Art. 43B (cooperatives) was added by the 97th Amendment (2011), not the 42nd.
Fundamental Duties are for citizens only, unlike many Fundamental Rights; the Swaran Singh Committee suggested eight, the 42nd Amendment adopted ten.
The duty is to respect the National Flag and National Anthem; the National Song is not in Art. 51A.
Art. 45 today concerns early childhood care up to age 6; free and compulsory education for 6–14 is the Fundamental Right in Art. 21A.

Practice · tap an option to check

Q1. Which of the following Directive Principles is classified as Gandhian?

Q2. Which of the following sets of Directive Principles was added by the 42nd Amendment, 1976?

Q3. Consider the following statements about Fundamental Duties:
1. They were added on the recommendation of the Swaran Singh Committee.
2. They apply to citizens as well as foreigners residing in India.
3. The eleventh duty was added by the 86th Amendment, 2002.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q4. Which of the following is NOT a Fundamental Duty under Article 51A?

↑ Back to topic list

Polity · Union government · Topic 5 of 11

President, Vice-President, Prime Minister and Council of Ministers

Mark as done

Think of it like…

The temple trust chairman and the managing committee

A large temple trust in Maharashtra has a chairman. Every appointment letter, every contract and every notice is issued in the chairman’s name, and he cuts the ribbon at every festival. But the decisions are taken by the managing committee, led by its secretary, which answers to the general body of devotees and must resign if it loses their confidence. The chairman is chosen not by the whole town but by a special electoral body of trustees from all the branch temples.

When the committee sends him a file, the chairman has limited choices. He can sign it. Very rarely he refuses outright, usually when the committee that sent it has itself changed or the proposal came from an individual trustee rather than the committee. He can send it back once with a note asking them to reconsider; if the committee sends it again, he must sign. Or, because the trust rules set no deadline, he can simply keep it in his drawer. He cannot, however, sign only after a higher majority overrides him, because no such procedure exists. The trust also has a vice-chairman whose main job is to preside over the meetings of the senior trustees. That is the Indian Union executive: President, Prime Minister and Council of Ministers, and the Vice-President who chairs the Rajya Sabha.

In everyday life	In the exam topic
Chairman in whose name every order is issued	President: executive power of the Union vests in him (Art. 53), but he acts on ministerial advice (Art. 74)
Managing committee led by the secretary	Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister: the real executive
Committee answers to the general body and resigns if it loses confidence	Collective responsibility to the Lok Sabha (Art. 75(3))
Sign / refuse outright / send back once / keep in the drawer	Assent / absolute veto / suspensive veto / pocket veto
Special electoral body of trustees from all branches	Electoral college of elected MPs and elected MLAs (Art. 54)
Vice-chairman who presides over senior trustees	Vice-President, ex officio Chairman of the Rajya Sabha (Art. 64)

The concept

The President (Art. 52–62). The President is elected indirectly by an electoral college of the elected members of both Houses of Parliament and the elected members of the Legislative Assemblies of the states and of the Union territories of Delhi and Puducherry (added by the 70th Amendment, 1992). Nominated members of Parliament and of assemblies, and members of legislative councils, do not vote. Voting is by proportional representation by single transferable vote, by secret ballot (Art. 55); the value of each MLA’s vote depends on the state’s population. Qualifications: citizen, at least 35 years, qualified to be a Lok Sabha member, no office of profit. Term: five years; resignation is addressed to the Vice-President. Disputes about the election are decided by the Supreme Court. The President is removed by impeachment (Art. 61) for “violation of the Constitution”: a resolution signed by one-fourth of the members of a House, after 14 days’ notice, must be passed by two-thirds of the total membership of that House, and then the other House investigates and passes it by the same majority. Nominated MPs take part in impeachment though they did not vote in the election; state MLAs do not. No President has been impeached.

Powers. The President summons and prorogues Parliament, dissolves the Lok Sabha, gives assent to bills and issues ordinances (Art. 123) when Parliament is not in session (an ordinance lapses six weeks after Parliament reassembles unless approved). Under Art. 72 the President can grant pardon, commutation, remission, respite and reprieve, including in death sentences and court-martial cases; the Governor’s parallel power (Art. 161) covers only offences against laws on matters to which the state’s executive power extends, and does not reach court-martial sentences. Veto powers: absolute veto (withholding assent; used by Rajendra Prasad in 1954 on the PEPSU Appropriation Bill and by R. Venkataraman in 1991 on a bill on MPs’ salaries and pensions), suspensive veto (returning a bill once for reconsideration; if re-passed, with or without changes, assent must be given; not available for money bills), and pocket veto (keeping the bill pending, possible because the Constitution prescribes no time limit; used by Zail Singh in 1986 on the Indian Post Office (Amendment) Bill). There is no qualified veto (override by a higher majority, as in the USA). For a constitutional amendment bill the President has no veto at all (24th Amendment).

Council of Ministers (Art. 74, 75, 78). Art. 74 says there shall be a Council of Ministers headed by the PM to aid and advise the President. The 42nd Amendment made this advice binding; the 44th Amendment allowed the President to send it back once for reconsideration, after which the reconsidered advice binds. The President appoints the PM (normally the leader of the majority in the Lok Sabha) and other ministers on the PM’s advice. Ministers are collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha (Art. 75(3)) and individually hold office during the President’s pleasure. A non-member can be a minister for six months. The 91st Amendment (2003) capped the total number of ministers, including the PM, at 15% of the total strength of the Lok Sabha (Art. 75(1A)). The Council has three ranks: Cabinet ministers, ministers of state and deputy ministers; the word “Cabinet” appears in the Constitution only in Art. 352, inserted by the 44th Amendment. Under Art. 78 the PM must keep the President informed of all decisions.

The Vice-President (Art. 63–71). The Vice-President is the ex officio Chairman of the Rajya Sabha (Art. 64) and acts as President when the office is vacant (for at most six months, within which a new President must be elected). He is elected by an electoral college of all members of both Houses of Parliament, elected and nominated; state legislators have no role. Qualifications: citizen, 35 years, qualified for election to the Rajya Sabha. Term five years; resignation is addressed to the President. Removal (Art. 67): a resolution of the Rajya Sabha passed by a majority of all its then members and agreed to by the Lok Sabha, after 14 days’ notice. No ground is specified, and there is no impeachment.

Key points & formulas

Art. 52 President; Art. 53 executive power; Art. 54 electoral college; Art. 55 STV method
Electoral college: elected MPs + elected MLAs of states and of Delhi and Puducherry (70th Amendment)
Minimum age: President 35, Vice-President 35; term 5 years for both
Impeachment (Art. 61): only ground “violation of the Constitution”; two-thirds of total membership of each House
Art. 72 pardon (includes death sentence and court-martial); Art. 123 ordinance
Vetoes: absolute, suspensive, pocket; no qualified veto; no veto on constitutional amendment bills
Art. 74: advice binding (42nd); can be returned once (44th)
Art. 75(3): collective responsibility to Lok Sabha; 75(1A): ministers ≤ 15% of Lok Sabha strength (91st, 2003)
Vice-President: ex officio RS Chairman (Art. 64); elected by all MPs incl. nominated; removed by RS majority of all members, agreed by LS
President resigns to Vice-President; Vice-President resigns to President

Worked example

Parliament passes an ordinary bill. The President returns it with a message suggesting changes. Parliament re-passes it without accepting any change. What must the President do? Would the answer differ for a money bill?

Show solution

Returning a bill for reconsideration is the suspensive veto (Art. 111 proviso).
Art. 111 says that if the Houses pass the bill again, with or without amendment, the President “shall not withhold assent therefrom”.
So the President must sign; the veto only suspends the bill once.
A money bill cannot be returned at all: it is introduced with the President’s prior recommendation, so he can only assent or withhold assent (in practice he assents).

Answer: He must give assent; a money bill cannot be returned in the first place

Exam shortcut

Who votes for whom? President: “elected people from both levels” (elected MPs + elected MLAs). Vice-President: “only Parliament, everyone in it” (all MPs, elected and nominated). Impeachment of the President: all MPs including nominated, no MLAs.

Common traps

Nominated MPs do not vote in the President’s election but do take part in his impeachment and in the Vice-President’s election.
Members of state legislative councils (MLCs) have no vote in the President’s election.
The President cannot return a money bill or a constitutional amendment bill; the suspensive veto is only for ordinary bills.
The 15% cap is on the strength of the Lok Sabha only, not both Houses; for states the cap is 15% of the assembly, with a minimum of 12.
The Vice-President is removed by a resolution starting in the Rajya Sabha; it is not called impeachment and no ground is stated.

Practice · tap an option to check

Q1. Which of the following does NOT take part in the election of the President of India?

Q2. Consider the following statements about the Vice-President of India:
1. He is the ex officio Chairman of the Rajya Sabha.
2. He is elected by an electoral college of members of both Houses of Parliament, including nominated members.
3. He can be removed by a resolution of the Rajya Sabha passed by a majority of all its then members and agreed to by the Lok Sabha.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q3. Which of the following is an instance of the President exercising the pocket veto?

Q4. Under the 91st Amendment, the total number of ministers, including the Prime Minister, in the Union Council of Ministers shall not exceed:

↑ Back to topic list

Polity · Union government · Topic 6 of 11

Parliament: Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha and How a Bill Becomes Law (money bill, joint sitting)

Mark as done

Think of it like…

The wedding committee and the elders’ council

For a big wedding in a Kolhapur family, two bodies take decisions. The wedding committee is large and is chosen afresh by all the relatives for each wedding season; it holds the purse. The elders’ council is smaller and permanent: it never dissolves, a third of its members are replaced every two years, and each branch of the family sends its own representatives. Most decisions (the guest list, the rituals) need the agreement of both. If they disagree, the head of the family calls a joint meeting, where the committee, being larger, usually wins, and its chairperson presides.

Money is different. A proposal that is purely about money (collecting contributions, spending on the hall) can be started only in the committee, and the elders get just fourteen days to suggest changes, which the committee may ignore. If the elders sit on it longer, it is treated as approved. Who decides whether a proposal is “purely money”? The committee chairperson, and that ruling cannot be questioned. A proposal that mixes money with other things (the hall booking plus a change in the rituals) also starts in the committee, but because it is not purely about money, the elders have full say on it, and a joint meeting can settle a deadlock. That is the money bill versus finance bill distinction in Parliament.

In everyday life	In the exam topic
Large committee chosen afresh by all relatives; holds the purse	Lok Sabha: directly elected, 5-year term, controls money bills and the Council of Ministers
Permanent elders’ council, a third replaced every two years, one voice per family branch	Rajya Sabha: permanent body (Art. 83(1)), one-third retire every second year, represents states
Joint meeting chaired by the committee head, larger body usually wins	Joint sitting (Art. 108), presided over by the Speaker
Purely money proposal: starts in committee, elders get 14 days	Money bill (Art. 109, 110): only in Lok Sabha; Rajya Sabha must return in 14 days
Committee chairperson rules whether it is “purely money”	Speaker’s decision that a bill is a money bill is final (Art. 110(3))
Mixed money-and-other proposal, elders have full say	Financial bill (Art. 117): elders can amend or reject; joint sitting possible

The concept

Composition. Parliament consists of the President, the Rajya Sabha and the Lok Sabha (Art. 79). The Rajya Sabha (Art. 80) can have at most 250 members: up to 238 representatives of states and Union territories, elected by the elected members of the state assemblies (and of the Delhi and Puducherry assemblies for those UTs) by proportional representation (single transferable vote), and 12 nominated by the President for literature, science, art and social service. It is a permanent body; members serve six years, with one-third retiring every second year. The Lok Sabha (Art. 81) can have at most 550 elected members (530 from states, 20 from UTs); its present strength is 543. The two seats for nominated Anglo-Indians (Art. 331) ended with the 104th Amendment (2019). Its term is five years, extendable by one year at a time during a National Emergency. Minimum age: 25 for the Lok Sabha, 30 for the Rajya Sabha (Art. 84). Maharashtra sends 48 members to the Lok Sabha and 19 to the Rajya Sabha. The gap between two sessions cannot exceed six months (Art. 85); the quorum is one-tenth of the total membership (Art. 100). Anti-defection rules are in the Tenth Schedule (52nd Amendment, 1985; the 91st Amendment, 2003 removed the “split” exception, leaving only mergers backed by two-thirds of the legislature party).

Ordinary bills go through first reading (introduction), second reading (general discussion, committee stage, clause-by-clause consideration) and third reading (passing) in one House, then the same in the other House, and then go to the President. If the other House rejects it, does not act for six months, or makes amendments the first House does not accept, the President may summon a joint sitting (Art. 108), presided over by the Speaker; the bill is passed by a majority of members present and voting of both Houses together, so the larger Lok Sabha usually prevails. There is no joint sitting for money bills or constitutional amendment bills. Joint sittings have been held only three times: the Dowry Prohibition Bill (1961), the Banking Service Commission (Repeal) Bill (1978) and the Prevention of Terrorism Bill (2002).

Money bill vs financial bill. A money bill (Art. 110) contains only matters such as imposing, abolishing or changing a tax, government borrowing, custody of the Consolidated or Contingency Fund, and appropriation from the Consolidated Fund. A bill is not a money bill merely because it provides for fines or fees. It can be introduced only in the Lok Sabha, only on the President’s recommendation. The Rajya Sabha cannot reject or amend it; it can only make recommendations and must return it within 14 days, failing which it is deemed passed (Art. 109). The Lok Sabha may accept or reject those recommendations. The Speaker certifies it as a money bill and that decision is final. The President cannot return a money bill. A Financial Bill (I) under Art. 117(1) contains money-bill matters plus other matters: it too starts only in the Lok Sabha on the President’s recommendation, but after that it is treated like an ordinary bill (Rajya Sabha can amend or reject; joint sitting possible). A Financial Bill (II) under Art. 117(3) merely involves spending from the Consolidated Fund; it can start in either House and is an ordinary bill except that the President’s recommendation is needed before it is considered. All money bills are financial bills, but not every financial bill is a money bill. The annual Finance Bill, which carries the tax proposals of the Budget, is normally certified as a money bill.

Budget and special powers. The word “budget” is not used; Art. 112 calls it the Annual Financial Statement. Demands for grants are voted only by the Lok Sabha (Art. 113); charged expenditure (President’s emoluments, salaries of Supreme Court judges, CAG, interest on debt) is discussed but not voted. The Appropriation Bill (Art. 114) authorises withdrawal; a vote on account (Art. 116) covers the interim period. The Rajya Sabha has two exclusive powers: under Art. 249 it can authorise Parliament to legislate on a State List subject in the national interest, and under Art. 312 it can authorise new All-India Services, both by two-thirds of members present and voting. The 106th Amendment (2023), the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam, reserves one-third of seats for women in the Lok Sabha (Art. 330A), state assemblies (Art. 332A) and the Delhi assembly, including within SC/ST seats, for 15 years (Art. 334A). It does not cover the Rajya Sabha or legislative councils, The Act itself was brought into force on 16 April 2026, but the reservation takes effect only after a delimitation based on the first census taken after that commencement, so it was not yet operational as of November 2026 (a 2026 bill to advance it, the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, failed to get a special majority in the Lok Sabha).

Key points & formulas

Art. 79: Parliament = President + Rajya Sabha + Lok Sabha
Rajya Sabha max 250 (238 + 12 nominated); permanent; 6-year term; one-third retire every 2 years
Lok Sabha max 550 elected; present 543; Anglo-Indian nomination ended by 104th Amendment
Maharashtra: 48 Lok Sabha seats, 19 Rajya Sabha seats
Joint sitting Art. 108, presided by Speaker; held thrice: 1961, 1978, 2002
Money bill Art. 110; special procedure Art. 109; RS must return in 14 days; Speaker’s decision final
Financial bills Art. 117(1) and 117(3); Annual Financial Statement Art. 112; Appropriation Bill Art. 114
RS exclusive powers: Art. 249 (State List in national interest), Art. 312 (All-India Services)
Tenth Schedule (anti-defection): 52nd Amendment 1985; 91st Amendment 2003 removed split clause
106th Amendment 2023: one-third seats for women in LS and assemblies (Art. 330A, 332A), not RS or councils

Worked example

A bill contains provisions changing income tax rates and also amending the rules of a government corporation. Where can it be introduced, can the Rajya Sabha reject it, and can a joint sitting resolve a deadlock?

Show solution

It contains a tax matter (an Art. 110 subject) but also an unrelated matter, so it is not a money bill: a money bill must contain only Art. 110 matters.
It is therefore a Financial Bill (I) under Art. 117(1).
Like a money bill, it can be introduced only in the Lok Sabha and only on the President’s recommendation.
After introduction it follows the ordinary procedure: the Rajya Sabha can amend or reject it, and the President can summon a joint sitting under Art. 108.

Answer: Only in the Lok Sabha; yes, the Rajya Sabha can reject it; yes, a joint sitting is possible

Exam shortcut

Count the “nos” of a money bill: no introduction in RS, no amendment or rejection by RS, no joint sitting, no return by the President, no appeal against the Speaker’s certificate. A Financial Bill (I) keeps only the first “no”.

Common traps

The Chairman of the Rajya Sabha has no role in certifying a money bill; only the Speaker does.
The joint sitting is presided over by the Speaker, not the President or the Vice-President.
“Finance Bill” (the annual tax bill) is usually a money bill, but “financial bill” under Art. 117 is a different, wider category.
The 106th Amendment does not reserve seats in the Rajya Sabha or the legislative councils; the Act came into force on 16 April 2026, but the reservation will operate only after the post-census delimitation.
The Rajya Sabha is not dissolved, but its members do not serve for life: each serves six years.

Practice · tap an option to check

Q1. Which of the following statements about a money bill is correct?

Q2. Joint sittings of Parliament have been held on which of the following?
1. Dowry Prohibition Bill, 1961
2. Banking Service Commission (Repeal) Bill, 1978
3. Prevention of Terrorism Bill, 2002
4. The GST Constitution Amendment Bill, 2016

Q3. Consider the following statements about the 106th Constitutional Amendment, 2023:
1. It reserves one-third of seats for women in the Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies.
2. The reservation extends to the Rajya Sabha and state legislative councils.
3. It takes effect after delimitation based on the first census conducted after its commencement.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q4. Within how many days must the Rajya Sabha return a money bill to the Lok Sabha?

↑ Back to topic list

Polity · Union government · Topic 7 of 11

Supreme Court, High Courts and Judicial Review

Mark as done

Think of it like…

Umpires, the third umpire and the rulebook

Cricket in Maharashtra runs on a ladder: taluka tournaments, district associations, the state association and finally the national board. One rulebook, the Laws of Cricket, governs every match from a gully game to a Test at the Wankhede. When a captain (however powerful) appeals a decision, the third umpire checks the replay against the rulebook, and if the on-field call breaks the Laws, it is overturned. Nobody is above the rulebook, not the captain and not the organiser.

A ruling of the national board’s rules committee binds every umpire in the country. If two state associations quarrel with each other or with the board, the dispute goes straight to the national board, not through district bodies. Sometimes the board asks its rules committee for an opinion on a tricky question before a series; the committee may give it, but it is advice, not a verdict. Umpires are protected: they cannot be sacked by a captain they ruled against, only through a strict inquiry. Indian courts work in exactly this way, with one Constitution as the rulebook, an integrated ladder of courts, the Supreme Court’s rulings binding all, and judicial review as the third umpire.

In everyday life	In the exam topic
Laws of Cricket that bind every match	The Constitution: supreme law; any law or action inconsistent with it is void
Third umpire overturning a call that breaks the Laws	Judicial review (Art. 13, 32, 226): striking down unconstitutional laws and orders
Taluka → district → state → national ladder	Integrated judiciary: subordinate courts → High Courts → Supreme Court
National board’s ruling binds every umpire	Art. 141: law declared by the Supreme Court binds all courts
Dispute between two state associations goes straight to the board	Original jurisdiction (Art. 131): Centre–state and inter-state disputes
Board seeks rules committee’s opinion; advice, not verdict	Advisory jurisdiction (Art. 143): opinion on President’s reference, not binding

The concept

The Supreme Court (Art. 124–147) was inaugurated on 28 January 1950. It began with a Chief Justice and seven judges; Parliament has raised the strength several times: to 34 including the Chief Justice in 2019, and most recently to 38 including the Chief Justice by the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Act, 2026 (effective 16 May 2026). Judges are appointed by the President; since the Second Judges case (1993) and the Third Judges case (1998), recommendations come from a collegium of the Chief Justice and four senior-most judges. The 99th Amendment (2014) replaced the collegium with a National Judicial Appointments Commission, but the Supreme Court struck it down in 2015 as violating judicial independence, a basic feature. Qualifications: citizen and either five years as a High Court judge, or ten years as a High Court advocate, or a distinguished jurist in the President’s opinion. Judges retire at 65. A judge can be removed only on grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity (Art. 124(4)), by an order of the President after each House passes an address by a special majority (majority of total membership and two-thirds of those present and voting) in the same session; the procedure is in the Judges (Inquiry) Act 1968. No judge has ever been removed (the motion against Justice V. Ramaswami failed in 1993).

Jurisdictions. Original (Art. 131): disputes between the Centre and states or among states; only the Supreme Court can hear them. Writ (Art. 32): enforcement of Fundamental Rights. Appellate (Art. 132–134): constitutional, civil and criminal appeals from High Courts. Special leave (Art. 136): discretion to hear an appeal from any court or tribunal in India (except military tribunals). Advisory (Art. 143): the President may refer a question of law or fact; the Court may decline under 143(1), but must answer disputes under 143(2) about pre-Constitution treaties. It is a court of record (Art. 129) and can punish for contempt; it can review its own judgments (Art. 137); its law binds all courts (Art. 141); and Art. 142 lets it pass any order for “complete justice”. Constitutional questions must be heard by at least five judges (Art. 145(3)).

High Courts (Art. 214–231). Every state has a High Court, but Parliament can set up a common High Court for two or more states and UTs (Art. 231). The Bombay High Court (established 1862) has jurisdiction over Maharashtra, Goa, and Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu; its principal seat is Mumbai, with benches at Nagpur, Aurangabad (Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar) and Panaji, and a circuit bench at Kolhapur that began sitting on 18 August 2025. High Court judges are appointed by the President after consulting the Chief Justice of India and the Governor; they need ten years of judicial office or ten years as a High Court advocate (there is no “distinguished jurist” route); they retire at 62; and they are removed in the same way as Supreme Court judges. The High Court has wider writ jurisdiction under Art. 226 and superintendence over all subordinate courts in its territory (Art. 227).

Judicial review is the power to examine whether laws and executive actions conform to the Constitution and to declare them void if they do not. The idea comes from the US (Marbury v. Madison, 1803). In India it rests on Art. 13, 32, 131–136, 143, 226 and 227, and Kesavananda Bharati extended it to constitutional amendments through the basic structure test. It is itself a basic feature (Minerva Mills; L. Chandra Kumar, 1997), so Parliament cannot take it away even by amendment. Because India follows “procedure established by law” rather than “due process”, review was originally narrower than in the US, but since Maneka Gandhi (1978) courts also ask whether the procedure is fair, just and reasonable. Public interest litigation, which relaxed locus standi from the late 1970s, widened access further.

Key points & formulas

Supreme Court: Art. 124; sanctioned strength 38 including the CJI (2026 Act; it was 34 from 2019)
Retirement: Supreme Court 65, High Court 62
Removal: proved misbehaviour or incapacity; special majority of each House in the same session; Judges (Inquiry) Act 1968
Collegium: Second Judges case 1993, Third Judges case 1998; NJAC (99th Amendment) struck down 2015
Art. 129 court of record; 131 original; 136 special leave; 137 review; 141 binding law; 142 complete justice; 143 advisory
Constitution bench: at least five judges (Art. 145(3))
Art. 231: common High Court for two or more states
Bombay High Court: Maharashtra, Goa, DNH & DD; benches at Nagpur, Aurangabad, Panaji; Kolhapur circuit bench from August 2025
Judicial review is a basic feature (Minerva Mills 1980; L. Chandra Kumar 1997)

Worked example

Classify each case by the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction: (1) Maharashtra sues Karnataka over a boundary-related legal right (2) a citizen files a petition saying his freedom of speech has been violated (3) the President asks whether a proposed law would be valid (4) a litigant asks the Court to hear an appeal against a tribunal’s order.

Show solution

A legal dispute between two states is original jurisdiction under Art. 131 (it begins in the Supreme Court itself).
Enforcement of a Fundamental Right is writ jurisdiction under Art. 32.
A Presidential reference on a question of law is advisory jurisdiction under Art. 143; the opinion is not binding on the President.
An appeal from a tribunal at the Court’s discretion is special leave under Art. 136.

Answer: (1) Art. 131, (2) Art. 32, (3) Art. 143, (4) Art. 136

Exam shortcut

Supreme Court article ladder: 124 establish → 129 record → 131 original → 136 special leave → 137 review → 141 binding → 142 complete justice → 143 advice. Ages: “SC 65, HC 62” — the higher court retires later.

Common traps

Inter-state river water disputes go to tribunals under Art. 262, and Parliament has barred the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction over them, so they are not a normal Art. 131 case.
Advisory opinions under Art. 143 do not bind the President, and the Court can decline to give one under 143(1).
High Court judges cannot be appointed as “distinguished jurists”; that route exists only for the Supreme Court.
The Bombay High Court has no bench at Pune; Kolhapur has a circuit bench (from 2025).
The Constitution does not use the word “impeachment” for judges; it speaks of removal by an address of both Houses.

Practice · tap an option to check

Q1. What is the present sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court of India?

Q2. A dispute between the Government of India and one or more states falls within which jurisdiction of the Supreme Court?

Q3. Consider the following statements:
1. A judge of a High Court holds office until the age of 62.
2. A Supreme Court judge can be removed only on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity.
3. The writ jurisdiction of a High Court under Article 226 is narrower than that of the Supreme Court under Article 32.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q4. Which of the following is NOT a seat of a bench of the Bombay High Court?

↑ Back to topic list

Polity · States and local government · Topic 8 of 11

Governor, Chief Minister and the State Legislature (Maharashtra’s bicameral legislature)

Mark as done

Think of it like…

The hostel mess committee and its rector

A university hostel in Pune has a mess. Its daily running (menu, staff, spending) is decided by a mess committee elected by the members and led by a secretary. The hostel also has a rector, appointed by the university and holding the post as long as the university wants. Every notice goes out in the rector’s name, and normally he signs whatever the committee advises. In a few matters he uses his own judgement, and if the committee collapses into chaos he reports to the university, which may take over the mess for a while.

Decisions are made by the general body of all members, which also votes on money. There is also a smaller seniors’ panel: some of its members are elected by the general body, some by the alumni, some by the hostel teachers, some by the nearby mess vendors’ associations, and a few are nominated by the rector for their experience. The panel can examine a decision and delay it, but if the general body insists, its view wins: there is no joint meeting. On money, the panel gets only fourteen days. Once a decision is passed, the rector may sign it, refuse, send it back once, or forward it to the university for a decision. That is Maharashtra’s Governor, Chief Minister, Vidhan Sabha (288) and Vidhan Parishad (78).

In everyday life	In the exam topic
Rector appointed by the university, holds office at its pleasure	Governor: appointed by the President (Art. 155), holds office during the President’s pleasure (Art. 156)
Elected mess committee led by its secretary	Council of Ministers headed by the Chief Minister (Art. 163, 164), responsible to the assembly
Rector reports collapse to the university	Governor’s report leading to President’s Rule (Art. 356)
General body that decides and votes on money	Vidhan Sabha: directly elected; final say on bills; money bills only here
Seniors’ panel: elected by members, alumni, teachers, vendors; some nominated	Vidhan Parishad (Art. 171): MLAs, graduates, teachers, local authorities; nominated by Governor
Rector signs, refuses, returns once, or forwards to the university	Governor’s options on a bill (Art. 200): assent, withhold, return, reserve for the President

The concept

The Governor (Art. 153–162). Every state has a Governor; the 7th Amendment (1956) allows one person to be Governor of two or more states. The Governor is appointed by the President by warrant (Art. 155), a feature borrowed from Canada, and holds office during the pleasure of the President (Art. 156); the normal term is five years, but there is no security of tenure (though B.P. Singhal, 2010, held that removal cannot be arbitrary). Qualifications: citizen and at least 35 years of age. The oath is administered by the Chief Justice of the High Court. The Governor has a dual role: constitutional head of the state and the link with the Centre. Under Art. 161 the Governor can pardon, commute or remit sentences for offences against laws on matters within the state’s executive power, but has no power over court-martial sentences, which only the President (Art. 72) can deal with. The Governor can issue ordinances (Art. 213) when the legislature is not in session. On a bill (Art. 200) the Governor can assent, withhold assent, return it once for reconsideration (not a money bill), or reserve it for the President; reservation is compulsory if the bill would endanger the position of the High Court. Unlike the President, the Governor has some constitutional discretion (Art. 163), for example in reserving bills and in reporting under Art. 356.

Chief Minister and Council of Ministers (Art. 163–167). The Governor appoints the Chief Minister and, on the CM’s advice, the other ministers. Ministers are collectively responsible to the Legislative Assembly (Art. 164(2)). The 91st Amendment (2003) capped the number of ministers at 15% of the assembly’s total strength, with a minimum of 12 (Art. 164(1A)); for Maharashtra’s 288-member assembly the cap is 43. Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha must have a minister for tribal welfare. The Advocate General (Art. 165) is the state’s chief law officer. Under Art. 167 the CM must communicate cabinet decisions to the Governor.

The state legislature (Art. 168–212). Six states are bicameral: Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Telangana and Uttar Pradesh. Under Art. 169, a council is created or abolished by a law of Parliament (simple majority) after the state assembly passes a resolution by a special majority; such a law is not an amendment under Art. 368. The assembly (Art. 170) has 60 to 500 members (with exceptions for small states). The council (Art. 171) may not exceed one-third of the assembly and may not have fewer than 40 members. Its members are elected by local authorities, by graduates of three years’ standing, by teachers (secondary school and above) of three years’ standing, and by MLAs from among non-members, with the rest nominated by the Governor for literature, science, art, the co-operative movement and social service. The assembly’s term is five years; the council is permanent, with one-third of its members retiring every second year (six-year term). Minimum age: 25 for the assembly, 30 for the council.

Maharashtra in particular, and the council’s limited power. The Maharashtra Vidhan Sabha has 288 elected members. The Vidhan Parishad has 78 members: 30 elected by MLAs, 22 by local-authority constituencies, 7 by graduates and 7 by teachers (seven constituencies each: Mumbai, Konkan, Nashik, Pune, Aurangabad, Amravati and Nagpur), and 12 nominated by the Governor (78 is within the ceiling of one-third of 288, i.e. 96). The legislature meets at Vidhan Bhavan, Mumbai, and holds its winter session in Nagpur under the Nagpur Pact (1953). The council is much weaker than the Rajya Sabha. On an ordinary bill, the council can delay it for at most three months the first time; if the assembly re-passes it, the council can hold it only for one more month, after which it is deemed passed in the assembly’s form (Art. 197). There is no joint sitting in states. On a money bill, the council has 14 days and can only recommend (Art. 198). A bill that originates in the council and is rejected by the assembly simply ends.

Key points & formulas

Governor: Art. 153; appointed by President (Art. 155); holds office during President’s pleasure (Art. 156); age 35
7th Amendment 1956: one Governor for two or more states
Art. 161 pardon: only offences against laws on matters within the state’s executive power; no power over court-martial sentences; Art. 213 ordinance; Art. 200 assent
Art. 164(1A): ministers ≤ 15% of assembly, minimum 12 (91st Amendment)
Bicameral states (6): Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Telangana, Uttar Pradesh
Art. 169: council created/abolished by Parliament after assembly’s special-majority resolution
Art. 171: council ≤ one-third of assembly, minimum 40
Maharashtra: Vidhan Sabha 288; Vidhan Parishad 78 = 30 (MLAs) + 22 (local bodies) + 7 (graduates) + 7 (teachers) + 12 (nominated)
Council can delay an ordinary bill 3 months + 1 month; money bill 14 days; no joint sitting in states
Nagpur Pact 1953: winter session of the Maharashtra legislature at Nagpur

Worked example

The Maharashtra Legislative Assembly passes an ordinary bill. The Legislative Council rejects it. Trace what can happen next.

Show solution

Under Art. 197, the assembly may pass the bill again, with or without the council’s amendments.
When it goes back, the council can hold it for at most one month (the first round allows up to three months).
If the council again rejects it, or proposes amendments the assembly does not accept, or does not pass it within one month, the bill is deemed passed by both Houses in the form the assembly passed it.
There is no joint sitting in a state legislature, so the assembly simply prevails, and the bill goes to the Governor under Art. 200.

Answer: The assembly re-passes it, the council can delay it only one more month, and then it is deemed passed in the assembly’s form

Exam shortcut

Maharashtra Council: “30–22–7–7–12 = 78” (MLAs, local bodies, graduates, teachers, nominated). Delay power: Rajya Sabha up to 6 months then joint sitting; Vidhan Parishad 3 + 1 = 4 months maximum, no joint sitting.

Common traps

There are no joint sittings in state legislatures; the assembly’s view prevails.
The Governor’s pardoning power (Art. 161) does not extend to court-martial sentences; only the President’s (Art. 72) does.
Members of the Legislative Council do not vote in the President’s election.
The council is created or abolished by Parliament on the assembly’s request, not by the state alone and not by a constitutional amendment.
Nominated MLCs in Maharashtra number 12; the 30 elected by MLAs are the largest group.

Practice · tap an option to check

Q1. What is the total strength of the Maharashtra Legislative Council?

Q2. How many members of the Maharashtra Legislative Council are elected by local-authority constituencies?

Q3. Consider the following statements:
1. The same person can be appointed Governor of two or more states.
2. The Governor can grant a pardon to a person sentenced by a court-martial.
3. A state Legislative Council can be abolished by Parliament if the state assembly passes a resolution to that effect by a special majority.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q4. An ordinary bill passed by the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly is rejected by the Legislative Council. Which of the following is correct?

↑ Back to topic list

Polity · States and local government · Topic 9 of 11

Panchayati Raj and Urban Local Bodies (73rd/74th Amendments; Maharashtra’s three tiers)

Mark as done

Think of it like…

Water flowing from the dam to the field channel

Water from a dam in Marathwada does not reach a farmer’s field directly. It flows into the main canal that serves the whole district, then into distributaries that serve a cluster of villages, and finally into field channels along each village’s fields. Each level has its own staff and its own job. At the village end, all the farmers whose fields lie on the channel meet and decide whose turn comes when; no farmer is left out of that meeting.

Before each season, an allocation committee decides how much of the dam’s water each canal gets, and an independent officer supervises the fair rotation of turns. Earlier, the dam engineers released water to the canals whenever they felt like it, and some canals stayed dry for years. Then a new rule made it compulsory: every canal must get water at fixed intervals, the allocation must be reviewed every five years by a committee, and the farmers’ meetings must be held regularly. That new rule is what the 73rd and 74th Amendments did for local government: they made three tiers, regular elections, a Gram Sabha and a State Finance Commission compulsory.

In everyday life	In the exam topic
The dam holding all the water	The state government, which holds funds and powers and devolves them
Main canal serving the district	Zilla Parishad (district level)
Distributary serving a cluster of villages	Panchayat Samiti (block / intermediate level)
Field channel along the village’s fields	Gram Panchayat (village level)
Meeting of all farmers on the channel	Gram Sabha: all registered voters of the village (Art. 243A)
Committee fixing each canal’s share every five years	State Finance Commission (Art. 243I), constituted every 5 years

The concept

Committees before 1992. The Balwantrai Mehta Committee (1957) recommended “democratic decentralisation” through a three-tier system; Rajasthan was first to adopt it (Nagaur, 2 October 1959). The Ashok Mehta Committee (1977) proposed a two-tier system and party participation; the G.V.K. Rao Committee (1985) and the L.M. Singhvi Committee (1986), which recommended constitutional status, followed. Maharashtra set up the Vasantrao Naik Committee in 1960; on its recommendations the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961 was passed and Zilla Parishads started functioning on 1 May 1962. Maharashtra made the Zilla Parishad (not the Panchayat Samiti) the strongest tier.

The 73rd Amendment (1992), in force from 24 April 1993 (now National Panchayati Raj Day), added Part IX (Art. 243 to 243-O) and the Eleventh Schedule (29 subjects). Compulsory provisions: a Gram Sabha in every village (Art. 243A); a three-tier structure (Art. 243B), although states with a population not above 20 lakh may skip the intermediate tier; direct election of members of all tiers; reservation of seats for SC/ST in proportion to population and at least one-third for women (Art. 243D), including posts of chairpersons; a five-year term, with fresh elections within six months of a dissolution (Art. 243E); minimum age 21; a State Finance Commission every five years (Art. 243I); and a State Election Commission to conduct elections (Art. 243K). Voluntary provisions include reservation for backward classes, devolution of the 29 subjects and financial powers (Art. 243G, 243H). Part IX does not apply automatically to Fifth Schedule areas; the PESA Act, 1996 extends it to them with special Gram Sabha powers.

The 74th Amendment (1992), in force from 1 June 1993, added Part IXA (Art. 243P to 243ZG) and the Twelfth Schedule (18 subjects), such as urban planning, water supply, public health and fire services. It provides three types of urban bodies (Art. 243Q): a Nagar Panchayat for an area in transition from rural to urban, a Municipal Council for a smaller urban area and a Municipal Corporation for a larger one. Ward committees are compulsory in municipalities with a population of three lakh or more (Art. 243S). The same State Election Commission (Art. 243ZA) and State Finance Commission (Art. 243Y) cover urban bodies. A District Planning Committee (Art. 243ZD) consolidates rural and urban plans for each district, and a Metropolitan Planning Committee (Art. 243ZE) is set up for areas with ten lakh or more people. Most Maharashtra corporations work under the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949, while Mumbai’s corporation has its own 1888 Act.

Maharashtra’s three tiers. Maharashtra has 34 Zilla Parishads for its 36 districts (Mumbai City and Mumbai Suburban have no rural area and no ZP). A Zilla Parishad has 50 to 75 directly elected councillors, and the chairpersons of all Panchayat Samitis in the district are ex officio members. Its elected head is the President (Adhyaksha), with a Vice-President, each for a term of two and a half years; its administrative head is the Chief Executive Officer appointed by the state government (usually an IAS officer), and the Deputy CEO is its secretary. At the block level, the Panchayat Samiti is headed by an elected Sabhapati (chairperson), with the Block Development Officer as the administrative officer. At the village level, the Gram Panchayat under the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act (1959) is headed by the Sarpanch and Upa-Sarpanch, with a state-appointed secretary. The Gram Sabha must meet at least four times in each financial year, and a meeting of the women members of the Gram Sabha must be held before every regular Gram Sabha meeting; its recommendations must be considered. Maharashtra reserves 50% of seats for women in its panchayats and municipal bodies (since 2011), above the constitutional minimum of one-third. Local body elections in the state are conducted by the Maharashtra State Election Commission, not by the Election Commission of India.

Key points & formulas

Balwantrai Mehta 1957 (three tiers); Ashok Mehta 1977 (two tiers); G.V.K. Rao 1985; L.M. Singhvi 1986
Rajasthan first: Nagaur, 2 October 1959
Maharashtra: Vasantrao Naik Committee (1960) → ZP and PS Act 1961 → ZPs from 1 May 1962
73rd: Part IX, Art. 243–243-O, Eleventh Schedule (29 subjects), in force 24 April 1993
74th: Part IXA, Art. 243P–243ZG, Twelfth Schedule (18 subjects), in force 1 June 1993
Art. 243A Gram Sabha; 243D reservation (≥ one-third women); 243E 5-year term; 243I State Finance Commission; 243K State Election Commission
Art. 243Q three urban bodies; 243S ward committees (3 lakh+); 243ZD DPC; 243ZE MPC (10 lakh+)
Maharashtra: 34 ZPs; 50–75 councillors + PS chairpersons ex officio; President’s term 2½ years; CEO is administrative head
Panchayat Samiti: Sabhapati + BDO; Gram Panchayat: Sarpanch + Upa-Sarpanch
Maharashtra Gram Sabha: at least 4 meetings per financial year; women’s meeting before each regular Gram Sabha; 50% seats for women in local bodies

Worked example

Consider the following about a state with a population of 15 lakh: (1) it must have a Gram Sabha in every village (2) it must have a Panchayat Samiti tier (3) it must constitute a State Finance Commission every five years (4) it must reserve seats for OBCs in panchayats. Which are mandatory under the 73rd Amendment?

Show solution

Gram Sabha (Art. 243A) is a compulsory provision, so (1) is mandatory.
Art. 243B lets a state whose population does not exceed 20 lakh skip the intermediate level; with 15 lakh, the Panchayat Samiti tier is optional, so (2) is not mandatory.
A State Finance Commission every five years (Art. 243I) is compulsory, so (3) is mandatory.
Reservation for backward classes is left to the state (Art. 243D(6)), a voluntary provision, so (4) is not mandatory.

Answer: Only (1) and (3)

Exam shortcut

Numbers that pair up: 73 → Part IX → Eleventh Schedule → 29 subjects (rural, bigger list); 74 → Part IXA → Twelfth Schedule → 18 subjects (urban). Population thresholds: 20 lakh (skip middle tier), 3 lakh (ward committees), 10 lakh (metropolitan planning).

Common traps

Panchayat and municipal elections are conducted by the State Election Commission (Art. 243K, 243ZA), not the Election Commission of India.
The 73rd Amendment requires at least one-third reservation for women; Maharashtra goes further, with 50%.
In Maharashtra the Zilla Parishad is the strongest tier; its administrative head is the CEO, while the President (Adhyaksha) is the elected head.
The Gram Sabha is not the same as the Gram Panchayat: the Sabha is all registered voters of the village, the Panchayat is the elected body.
Eleventh Schedule = 29 (panchayats), Twelfth Schedule = 18 (municipalities); students often swap them.

Practice · tap an option to check

Q1. On the recommendations of which committee were Zilla Parishads established in Maharashtra?

Q2. How many subjects are listed in the Eleventh Schedule of the Constitution?

Q3. Consider the following statements about local government in Maharashtra:
1. The administrative head of a Zilla Parishad is the Chief Executive Officer appointed by the state government.
2. The chairpersons of all Panchayat Samitis in a district are ex officio members of the Zilla Parishad.
3. The Gram Sabha must meet at least four times in each financial year.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q4. Match the Article with its subject:
a. Art. 243A b. Art. 243I c. Art. 243K d. Art. 243ZD
i. State Election Commission ii. District Planning Committee iii. Gram Sabha iv. State Finance Commission

↑ Back to topic list

Polity · Federalism and constitutional bodies · Topic 10 of 11

Centre–State Relations and Emergency Provisions (Art. 352, 356, 360)

Mark as done

Think of it like…

A joint family with separate chulhas

A large joint family in a Vidarbha village lives in one compound, but each brother’s household has its own chulha (kitchen), its own daily budget and its own way of running the house. The karta (family head) manages the things that concern everyone: the main farm, the well, dealings with the bank. Some matters, like the children’s education, are decided by both, but if they clash, the karta’s word prevails. Anything new that nobody thought of when the arrangement was made (a tractor, a solar pump) is the karta’s business by default.

The karta sells the crop and so collects most of the income; every few years a respected uncle advises how it should be shared among the households, and the karta also gives extra help to a household in trouble. In normal times the brothers are independent. But in a flood the karta takes charge of every kitchen at once. If one brother’s household collapses into chaos, the karta takes over just that household for a while. And if the whole family runs out of money, the karta can cut everyone’s spending, even the allowance of the family’s own elders. That is India: federal in normal times, with a unitary bias, and almost unitary in an emergency.

In everyday life	In the exam topic
Each brother’s own chulha and budget	State List: subjects where states legislate (Seventh Schedule, Art. 246)
Karta manages farm, well and bank dealings	Union List: defence, foreign affairs, currency, railways
Both decide on education; karta wins a clash	Concurrent List; Union law prevails on repugnancy (Art. 254)
New things belong to the karta by default	Residuary powers with Parliament (Art. 248), as in Canada
Uncle advising how to share the crop money	Finance Commission (Art. 280) recommends sharing of central taxes
Flood: karta runs every kitchen / one chaotic household / family out of money	National Emergency (Art. 352) / President’s Rule (Art. 356) / Financial Emergency (Art. 360)

The concept

Federal with a unitary bias. India has the classic federal features: two sets of government, a written and rigid constitution, division of powers, an independent judiciary and a bicameral Parliament. But Art. 1 calls India a “Union of States” (Ambedkar: the Union is indestructible, the states are not). Unitary features include a strong Centre with more subjects and residuary powers, Parliament’s power to change state boundaries without consent (Art. 3), a single constitution and single citizenship, an integrated judiciary, All-India Services, Governors appointed by the Centre, unequal representation of states in the Rajya Sabha, an integrated election machinery and audit, and the emergency provisions. K.C. Wheare called the Constitution “quasi-federal”. In S.R. Bommai (1994) the Supreme Court held federalism to be part of the basic structure.

Legislative relations (Art. 245–255). The Seventh Schedule has three lists: Union, State and Concurrent (originally 97, 66 and 47 entries). The 42nd Amendment (1976) moved five subjects from the State List to the Concurrent List: education, forests, weights and measures, protection of wild animals and birds, and administration of justice (except the Supreme Court and High Courts). Residuary powers belong to Parliament (Art. 248). Parliament can legislate on State List subjects when the Rajya Sabha so resolves in the national interest (Art. 249), during a National Emergency (Art. 250), when two or more states request (Art. 252), and to implement international agreements (Art. 253). In a conflict on a Concurrent subject the Union law prevails, unless the state law was reserved for and received the President’s assent (Art. 254). Administrative relations (Art. 256–263) let the Centre give directions to states; Art. 262 deals with inter-state river disputes and Art. 263 with the Inter-State Council (set up in 1990 on the Sarkaria Commission’s advice). Financial relations (Art. 264–293) include tax sharing, grants-in-aid (Art. 275), discretionary grants (Art. 282) and the Finance Commission (Art. 280). The 101st Amendment (2016) introduced GST from 1 July 2017: Art. 246A gives Parliament and states concurrent power to tax goods and services, Art. 269A covers inter-state supplies, and Art. 279A creates the GST Council chaired by the Union Finance Minister, where the Centre has one-third of the votes, states two-thirds, and decisions need three-fourths of the weighted votes. The Sarkaria Commission (1983) and the Punchhi Commission (2007) reviewed Centre–state relations.

National Emergency (Art. 352). It can be proclaimed on grounds of war, external aggression or armed rebellion, even before the actual event if there is imminent danger. The 44th Amendment (1978) replaced “internal disturbance” with “armed rebellion”, required the written advice of the Union Cabinet, cut the time for parliamentary approval from two months to one month, required approval by a special majority of each House, and allowed the Lok Sabha to revoke it by a simple-majority resolution (a special sitting can be demanded by one-tenth of Lok Sabha members). Once approved it lasts six months and can be extended indefinitely, six months at a time. During it, the Centre can direct states on any matter, Parliament can legislate on State List subjects, the Lok Sabha’s term can be extended by one year at a time, and Fundamental Rights are affected (Art. 358, 359; Art. 20 and 21 stay protected). It has been proclaimed three times: 1962 (Chinese aggression), 1971 (war with Pakistan) and 1975 (internal disturbance). The 38th Amendment (1975) had barred judicial review of a proclamation; the 44th removed that bar.

President’s Rule (Art. 356) and Financial Emergency (Art. 360). President’s Rule follows a failure of constitutional machinery in a state, on the Governor’s report or otherwise (Art. 365 adds failure to comply with Union directions). It must be approved within two months by a simple majority of each House, lasts six months at a time and at most three years; extension beyond one year needs a National Emergency in force and the Election Commission’s certificate that elections cannot be held (44th Amendment). During it, the President takes over the state executive and Parliament (or the President) makes the state’s laws; the High Court is untouched. In S.R. Bommai (1994) the Court held a proclamation is open to judicial review, the assembly should not be dissolved until Parliament approves, and majority must be tested on the floor of the House. Maharashtra has been under President’s Rule three times: 1980, 2014 and November 2019. A Financial Emergency (Art. 360) can be proclaimed if India’s financial stability or credit is threatened; it must be approved within two months by a simple majority and, once approved, continues until revoked with no maximum period. The Centre can then order reduction of salaries of all government servants, including Supreme Court and High Court judges, and require state money bills to be reserved for the President. It has never been proclaimed.

Key points & formulas

Art. 1 “Union of States”; federalism is a basic feature (S.R. Bommai, 1994)
Seventh Schedule: Union, State, Concurrent lists (originally 97, 66, 47 entries); residuary powers with Parliament (Art. 248)
42nd Amendment moved education, forests, weights and measures, wildlife protection, administration of justice to Concurrent List
Art. 249 (RS resolution), 250 (emergency), 252 (states’ request), 253 (treaties): Parliament on State subjects
Art. 263 Inter-State Council (1990); Sarkaria 1983, Punchhi 2007
101st Amendment 2016: Art. 246A, 269A, 279A (GST Council); GST from 1 July 2017
Art. 352: war, external aggression, armed rebellion; approval in 1 month by special majority; 6-month extensions; proclaimed 1962, 1971, 1975
Art. 356: approval in 2 months by simple majority; max 3 years; beyond 1 year only with emergency + EC certificate
Art. 360: approval in 2 months; continues until revoked; never used
Maharashtra under President’s Rule: 1980, 2014, 2019

Worked example

Identify the emergency from the clue: (1) approved within one month by special majority (2) can last at most three years (3) once approved, no time limit, and judges’ salaries can be cut (4) the Lok Sabha alone can force its revocation.

Show solution

One month and special majority are the 44th Amendment’s safeguards for the National Emergency (Art. 352).
A three-year ceiling applies only to President’s Rule (Art. 356).
No maximum period after approval and power over judges’ salaries describe the Financial Emergency (Art. 360).
A Lok Sabha resolution by simple majority to disapprove continuance is a feature of the National Emergency (Art. 352(7)–(8)).

Answer: (1) Art. 352, (2) Art. 356, (3) Art. 360, (4) Art. 352

Exam shortcut

“352 – 1 month – special; 356 – 2 months – simple – 3 years; 360 – 2 months – simple – forever.” The national one is the most serious, so it gets the strictest approval.

Common traps

“Internal disturbance” is no longer a ground for National Emergency; since the 44th Amendment it is “armed rebellion”.
President’s Rule does not affect the High Court, and the state’s laws are made by Parliament, not by the Governor alone.
A Financial Emergency has never been declared, although it is a frequent exam option.
Art. 246A gives the concurrent power to levy GST; the GST Council itself is Art. 279A.
Agriculture was not moved to the Concurrent List; it remains a State subject.

Practice · tap an option to check

Q1. The 44th Amendment replaced which ground for proclaiming a National Emergency under Article 352?

Q2. Consider the following statements:
1. A proclamation under Article 352 must be approved by both Houses within one month.
2. A proclamation under Article 356 must be approved by both Houses within two months.
3. A Financial Emergency, once approved, continues until revoked, with no maximum period.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q3. Which of the following subjects was NOT transferred from the State List to the Concurrent List by the 42nd Amendment?

Q4. The GST Council is a constitutional body created under:

↑ Back to topic list

Polity · Federalism and constitutional bodies · Topic 11 of 11

Constitutional Bodies: Election Commission, CAG, Finance Commission, UPSC and State PSCs

Mark as done

Think of it like…

The neutral referees of a village jatra

Every year a village near Satara holds a big jatra (fair) run by a committee. To keep it honest, the village has four neutral referees. A respected retired teacher conducts the election of the jatra committee: he prepares the list of voters, fixes the date and counts the votes. An outside auditor checks every rupee the committee spends and reports, not to the committee, but to the whole village assembly. Every five years a panel of elders recommends how the jatra’s collection should be shared between the main temple and the hamlets’ smaller temples. And a selection panel holds a written test and interview to hire the temple’s staff, so that jobs do not go to the committee’s relatives.

What makes them neutral is not their wisdom alone but their protection: the committee cannot sack the election officer or the auditor just because it dislikes their findings, their pay cannot be cut, and the auditor cannot take a job with the committee afterwards. Two of the referees (the auditor and the election officer) can be removed only by the same strict process used to remove a judge. The Election Commission, the CAG, the Finance Commission and the Public Service Commissions are the Republic’s neutral referees, and their independence is written into the Constitution.

In everyday life	In the exam topic
Retired teacher conducting the committee election	Election Commission of India (Art. 324): elections to Parliament, state legislatures, President and Vice-President
Auditor reporting to the village assembly, not to the committee	CAG (Art. 148–151): reports on Union accounts go to the President, who lays them before Parliament
Elders dividing the collection every five years	Finance Commission (Art. 280): recommends sharing of central taxes between Centre and states
Selection panel hiring staff by test and interview	UPSC and State PSCs (Art. 315–323): recruitment to civil services
Cannot be sacked for unwelcome findings; removed only like a judge	Security of tenure: CEC and CAG removed in the manner of a Supreme Court judge
Auditor cannot take a job with the committee afterwards	CAG and UPSC chairman barred from further government office

The concept

Constitutional, statutory and executive bodies. A constitutional body is created by the Constitution itself (Election Commission, CAG, Finance Commission, UPSC and State PSCs, Attorney General, National Commissions for SCs (Art. 338), STs (Art. 338A, 89th Amendment, 2003) and Backward Classes (Art. 338B, 102nd Amendment, 2018), the GST Council (Art. 279A)). A statutory body is created by an Act of Parliament (NHRC, Central Vigilance Commission, Lokpal). An executive body is created by a government resolution (NITI Aayog, which replaced the Planning Commission in 2015). Only constitutional bodies need a constitutional amendment to be abolished or restructured in their essentials.

Election Commission (Part XV, Art. 324–329). The Election Commission of India was set up on 25 January 1950 (now National Voters’ Day). It superintends, directs and controls elections to Parliament, state legislatures and the offices of President and Vice-President. It has been multi-member since 1993 (briefly also in 1989–90): a Chief Election Commissioner and two Election Commissioners. Under the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, they are appointed by the President on the recommendation of a selection committee of the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the PM; they serve six years or until 65. The CEC can be removed only like a Supreme Court judge; other ECs can be removed only on the CEC’s recommendation (Art. 324(5)). Art. 325 provides a single electoral roll with no exclusion on grounds of religion, race, caste or sex; Art. 326 provides adult suffrage (18 years since the 61st Amendment). Elections to panchayats and municipalities are not its job: they are conducted by State Election Commissions (Art. 243K, 243ZA).

CAG (Art. 148–151) and Finance Commission (Art. 280). The Comptroller and Auditor General is appointed by the President by warrant, holds office for six years or until 65, can be removed only like a Supreme Court judge, and is not eligible for any further office under the Union or a state government (Art. 148(4)). The CAG audits the accounts of the Union, the states and UTs with legislatures, and of bodies substantially financed by them. Reports on Union accounts go to the President, who lays them before Parliament; reports on state accounts go to the Governor (Art. 151). The Public Accounts Committee examines them, and the CAG is called its “friend, philosopher and guide”. Ambedkar called the CAG the most important officer under the Constitution. The Finance Commission is constituted by the President every five years or earlier, with a chairman and four other members; qualifications are laid down by the Finance Commission (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1951. It recommends the division of central taxes between the Centre and states and among states (vertical and horizontal devolution) and the principles of grants-in-aid (Art. 275). Its recommendations are advisory. The first was chaired by K.C. Neogy (1951); the 16th, chaired by Arvind Panagariya, covers 2026–31. Each state has its own State Finance Commission for local bodies (Art. 243I, 243Y).

Public Service Commissions (Art. 315–323). A Public Service Commission was first set up in 1926 under the 1919 Act; the 1935 Act created a Federal PSC, which became the UPSC in 1950. The UPSC chairman and members are appointed by the President and serve six years or until 65; State PSC members are appointed by the Governor and serve six years or until 62 (raised from 60 by the 41st Amendment, 1976). Members of both can be removed only by the President (not the Governor): for misbehaviour after an inquiry by the Supreme Court (Art. 317), or for insolvency, paid outside employment or infirmity. The Governor can only suspend a State PSC member pending such an inquiry. The UPSC chairman cannot take any further government employment; a UPSC member can become UPSC chairman or a State PSC chairman, and a State PSC chairman can become UPSC chairman or member. A Joint State PSC for two or more states is created by Parliament at the states’ request (a statutory body). The PSCs’ advice on recruitment and discipline is not binding, and they are not consulted on reservation (Art. 320(4)). The UPSC reports to the President and a State PSC to the Governor (Art. 323). The Maharashtra Public Service Commission (MPSC) is the State PSC set up under Art. 315, and it conducts the Rajyaseva examination.

Key points & formulas

Election Commission: Art. 324; set up 25 January 1950; multi-member (CEC + 2 ECs) since 1993
CEC Act 2023: selection by PM, Leader of Opposition (LS), a Cabinet Minister; term 6 years or 65
CEC removed like an SC judge; other ECs only on CEC’s recommendation
Panchayat and municipal elections: State Election Commission (Art. 243K, 243ZA), not ECI
CAG: Art. 148–151; 6 years or 65; no further office; Union reports to President, state reports to Governor
Finance Commission: Art. 280; every 5 years; chairman + 4 members; advisory; 1st K.C. Neogy; 16th Arvind Panagariya (2026–31)
UPSC/SPSC: Art. 315–323; UPSC 6 years or 65, SPSC 6 years or 62 (41st Amendment)
Removal of PSC members only by President; misbehaviour needs a Supreme Court inquiry (Art. 317)
NCSC Art. 338; NCST Art. 338A (89th); NCBC Art. 338B (102nd)
Non-constitutional: NITI Aayog (executive, 2015), NHRC and CVC (statutory)

Worked example

Classify each as constitutional, statutory or executive: (1) Finance Commission (2) NITI Aayog (3) National Human Rights Commission (4) National Commission for Backward Classes.

Show solution

The Finance Commission is provided for in Art. 280, so it is constitutional.
NITI Aayog was set up by a Union Cabinet resolution in January 2015, so it is an executive (non-constitutional, non-statutory) body.
The NHRC was created by the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, so it is statutory.
The NCBC was first statutory (1993 Act), but the 102nd Amendment (2018) gave it constitutional status under Art. 338B, so today it is constitutional.

Answer: (1) constitutional, (2) executive, (3) statutory, (4) constitutional

Exam shortcut

Article ladder: 148 CAG → 280 Finance Commission → 315 PSCs → 324 Election Commission → 338 SCs. Retirement ages: everything central is 65 (CAG, CEC, UPSC, SC judges); SPSC members and HC judges retire at 62.

Common traps

State PSC members are appointed by the Governor but can be removed only by the President.
The CAG’s report on Union accounts goes to the President, not directly to the Speaker or the PAC.
The Election Commission of India does not conduct panchayat or municipal elections; the State Election Commission does.
Finance Commission recommendations are advisory, not binding on the government.
NITI Aayog is not a constitutional or statutory body; the Planning Commission was not one either.

Practice · tap an option to check

Q1. To whom does the Comptroller and Auditor General submit audit reports relating to the accounts of the Union?

Q2. Consider the following statements:
1. Members of a State Public Service Commission are appointed by the Governor but can be removed only by the President.
2. The Chairman of the UPSC is eligible for further employment under the Government of India.
3. Members of a State Public Service Commission hold office for six years or until the age of 62, whichever is earlier.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q3. Which of the following is NOT a constitutional body?

Q4. Elections to panchayats and municipal bodies in Maharashtra are conducted by:

↑ Back to topic list