All Exams >
UPSC >
Famous Books for UPSC Exam (Summary & Tests) >
All Questions
All questions of Judicial Review, Activism & PIL for UPSC CSE Exam
What was the main reason for the insertion of Article 32A in the Indian Constitution?- a)To provide more power to the High Courts
- b)To limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
- c)To ensure uniformity in judicial decisions
- d)To expedite the resolution of constitutional cases
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
To provide more power to the High Courts
b)
To limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
c)
To ensure uniformity in judicial decisions
d)
To expedite the resolution of constitutional cases
|
Sarthak Goyal answered |
Reason for the insertion of Article 32A in the Indian Constitution:
To limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court:
Article 32A was inserted to limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in certain matters. It was added through the Constitution (Forty-Second Amendment) Act, 1976, during the period of Emergency in India. The main aim of this provision was to reduce the burden on the Supreme Court and to ensure that certain types of cases are dealt with by High Courts instead.
Context during the Emergency:
During the Emergency period, there was a significant increase in the number of cases being filed directly in the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution. This led to a backlog of cases and delays in the disposal of important matters. To address this issue, Article 32A was introduced to divert some cases to the High Courts, thereby easing the workload of the Supreme Court.
Impact on judicial efficiency:
By limiting the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and empowering the High Courts to handle certain types of cases, Article 32A aimed to expedite the resolution of constitutional cases. This provision ensured that cases could be heard and decided at the appropriate level of the judiciary, thus streamlining the legal process and promoting judicial efficiency.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the insertion of Article 32A in the Indian Constitution was primarily driven by the need to limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and ensure that certain cases are dealt with by High Courts. This provision was introduced during the Emergency period to address the backlog of cases and improve the efficiency of the judicial system.
To limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court:
Article 32A was inserted to limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in certain matters. It was added through the Constitution (Forty-Second Amendment) Act, 1976, during the period of Emergency in India. The main aim of this provision was to reduce the burden on the Supreme Court and to ensure that certain types of cases are dealt with by High Courts instead.
Context during the Emergency:
During the Emergency period, there was a significant increase in the number of cases being filed directly in the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution. This led to a backlog of cases and delays in the disposal of important matters. To address this issue, Article 32A was introduced to divert some cases to the High Courts, thereby easing the workload of the Supreme Court.
Impact on judicial efficiency:
By limiting the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and empowering the High Courts to handle certain types of cases, Article 32A aimed to expedite the resolution of constitutional cases. This provision ensured that cases could be heard and decided at the appropriate level of the judiciary, thus streamlining the legal process and promoting judicial efficiency.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the insertion of Article 32A in the Indian Constitution was primarily driven by the need to limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and ensure that certain cases are dealt with by High Courts. This provision was introduced during the Emergency period to address the backlog of cases and improve the efficiency of the judicial system.
What was the outcome of the "Shreya Singhal vs. Union of India" case?- a)Right to a healthy environment recognized
- b)Section 66A, curbing free speech, was quashed
- c)Implementation of Constitutional provisions ensured
- d)Prisoners gained access to free legal aid
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Right to a healthy environment recognized
b)
Section 66A, curbing free speech, was quashed
c)
Implementation of Constitutional provisions ensured
d)
Prisoners gained access to free legal aid
|
Master Training Institute answered |
The Supreme Court's decision in "Shreya Singhal vs. Union of India" resulted in the striking down of Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, which was considered arbitrary and violated freedom of speech.
Which article of the Indian Constitution confers original jurisdiction upon the Supreme Court to enforce fundamental rights?- a)Article 124
- b)Article 32
- c)Article 146
- d)Article 125
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Article 124
b)
Article 32
c)
Article 146
d)
Article 125
|
Keerthana Shah answered |
Article 32 of the Indian Constitution:
Article 32 of the Indian Constitution confers original jurisdiction upon the Supreme Court to enforce fundamental rights. This means that individuals can directly approach the Supreme Court if they believe that their fundamental rights have been violated.
Key Points:
- Original Jurisdiction: Article 32 grants the Supreme Court the power to directly hear petitions related to the violation of fundamental rights. This is a unique feature of the Indian Constitution and is essential for protecting the rights of citizens.
- Fundamental Rights: The fundamental rights are enshrined in Part III of the Indian Constitution and include rights such as the right to equality, right to freedom of speech, right to life and personal liberty, etc.
- Enforcement: The Supreme Court has the authority to issue writs such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and certiorari to enforce fundamental rights.
- Safeguard: Article 32 acts as a safeguard against arbitrary actions by the state and ensures that individuals have a mechanism to seek redressal in case of rights violations.
- Public Interest Litigation (PIL): Article 32 has also been used to initiate Public Interest Litigation cases where the court can take suo moto cognizance of matters affecting public interest.
In conclusion, Article 32 of the Indian Constitution plays a crucial role in upholding and enforcing fundamental rights in the country. It empowers the Supreme Court to act as a protector of citizens' rights and ensures that the principles of justice and equality are upheld.
Article 32 of the Indian Constitution confers original jurisdiction upon the Supreme Court to enforce fundamental rights. This means that individuals can directly approach the Supreme Court if they believe that their fundamental rights have been violated.
Key Points:
- Original Jurisdiction: Article 32 grants the Supreme Court the power to directly hear petitions related to the violation of fundamental rights. This is a unique feature of the Indian Constitution and is essential for protecting the rights of citizens.
- Fundamental Rights: The fundamental rights are enshrined in Part III of the Indian Constitution and include rights such as the right to equality, right to freedom of speech, right to life and personal liberty, etc.
- Enforcement: The Supreme Court has the authority to issue writs such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and certiorari to enforce fundamental rights.
- Safeguard: Article 32 acts as a safeguard against arbitrary actions by the state and ensures that individuals have a mechanism to seek redressal in case of rights violations.
- Public Interest Litigation (PIL): Article 32 has also been used to initiate Public Interest Litigation cases where the court can take suo moto cognizance of matters affecting public interest.
In conclusion, Article 32 of the Indian Constitution plays a crucial role in upholding and enforcing fundamental rights in the country. It empowers the Supreme Court to act as a protector of citizens' rights and ensures that the principles of justice and equality are upheld.
Under which article of the Indian Constitution can a High Court issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights and for any other purpose?- a)Article 226
- b)Article 142
- c)Article 124
- d)Article 137
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Article 226
b)
Article 142
c)
Article 124
d)
Article 137
|
Prasad Basu answered |
The correct answer is option 'A', Article 226.
Explanation:
Article 226 of the Indian Constitution empowers the High Courts to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights as well as for any other purpose.
Writs are judicial orders issued by the courts to protect the rights of individuals and to ensure that the government and its agencies function within the limits of the law. These writs are powerful tools that help in safeguarding the rights of citizens and providing them with an effective remedy in case of any violation.
The High Courts have the power to issue five types of writs, namely:
1. Habeas Corpus: This writ is issued to ensure the production of a person who has been unlawfully detained, and it directs the authorities to produce the detained person before the court to determine the legality of the detention.
2. Mandamus: This writ is issued to public officials or authorities to perform their official duties that they have refused or failed to perform. It essentially commands the concerned authority to do a particular act.
3. Prohibition: This writ is issued to lower courts or tribunals to prevent them from exceeding their jurisdiction or acting in excess of their powers.
4. Certiorari: This writ is issued to quash the orders or decisions of lower courts or tribunals that are found to be without jurisdiction or in violation of the principles of natural justice.
5. Quo Warranto: This writ is issued to inquire into the legality of a person holding a public office and to determine whether they have the authority or right to hold that office.
The High Courts can issue these writs not only for the enforcement of fundamental rights but also for any other purpose, which includes cases of public interest and the protection of individual rights. Article 226 grants the High Courts wide discretionary powers to issue these writs and ensure justice and fairness in the administration of law.
In conclusion, Article 226 of the Indian Constitution empowers the High Courts to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights and for any other purpose. These writs serve as essential tools in protecting the rights of individuals and ensuring that the government functions within the boundaries of the law.
Explanation:
Article 226 of the Indian Constitution empowers the High Courts to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights as well as for any other purpose.
Writs are judicial orders issued by the courts to protect the rights of individuals and to ensure that the government and its agencies function within the limits of the law. These writs are powerful tools that help in safeguarding the rights of citizens and providing them with an effective remedy in case of any violation.
The High Courts have the power to issue five types of writs, namely:
1. Habeas Corpus: This writ is issued to ensure the production of a person who has been unlawfully detained, and it directs the authorities to produce the detained person before the court to determine the legality of the detention.
2. Mandamus: This writ is issued to public officials or authorities to perform their official duties that they have refused or failed to perform. It essentially commands the concerned authority to do a particular act.
3. Prohibition: This writ is issued to lower courts or tribunals to prevent them from exceeding their jurisdiction or acting in excess of their powers.
4. Certiorari: This writ is issued to quash the orders or decisions of lower courts or tribunals that are found to be without jurisdiction or in violation of the principles of natural justice.
5. Quo Warranto: This writ is issued to inquire into the legality of a person holding a public office and to determine whether they have the authority or right to hold that office.
The High Courts can issue these writs not only for the enforcement of fundamental rights but also for any other purpose, which includes cases of public interest and the protection of individual rights. Article 226 grants the High Courts wide discretionary powers to issue these writs and ensure justice and fairness in the administration of law.
In conclusion, Article 226 of the Indian Constitution empowers the High Courts to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights and for any other purpose. These writs serve as essential tools in protecting the rights of individuals and ensuring that the government functions within the boundaries of the law.
What is the primary concern associated with Judicial Activism?- a)Undermining the principle of judicial review.
- b)Weakening the independence of the Judiciary.
- c)Interference in the domains of the Executive and Legislature.
- d)Curtailing the power of Public Interest Litigation.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Undermining the principle of judicial review.
b)
Weakening the independence of the Judiciary.
c)
Interference in the domains of the Executive and Legislature.
d)
Curtailing the power of Public Interest Litigation.
|
|
Priya Ahuja answered |
The primary concern associated with Judicial Activism is interference in the domains of the Executive and Legislature. Judicial activism refers to the tendency of judges to interpret laws and the Constitution in a way that promotes their own personal beliefs and values, rather than strictly adhering to the original intent of the law or the Constitution. This can lead to judges making decisions that go beyond their proper role as interpreters of the law and encroach upon the powers of the other two branches of government.
Interference in the domains of the Executive and Legislature
One of the main concerns with judicial activism is that it can undermine the separation of powers and the checks and balances that are fundamental to a democratic system of government. The Executive branch is responsible for implementing and enforcing laws, while the Legislature is responsible for making laws. When judges engage in activism, they can make decisions that effectively rewrite or invalidate laws passed by the Legislature or executive actions taken by the Executive. This can lead to a situation where the judiciary is effectively legislating from the bench, which is not its intended role.
Weakening the independence of the Judiciary
Another concern is that judicial activism can weaken the independence of the judiciary. The judiciary is meant to be an independent and impartial branch of government, tasked with upholding the rule of law. When judges engage in activism, it can give the impression that they are acting based on their personal biases and preferences, rather than on the basis of the law. This can undermine public confidence in the judiciary and erode its independence.
Undermining the principle of judicial review
Judicial activism can also undermine the principle of judicial review, which is the power of the judiciary to review the constitutionality of laws and executive actions. Judicial review is an important aspect of the separation of powers and serves as a check on the other branches of government. However, when judges engage in activism, they can use the power of judicial review to strike down laws or executive actions based on their own personal beliefs, rather than on a genuine constitutional violation. This can lead to the erosion of the principle of judicial review and undermine the balance of power between the branches of government.
In conclusion, the primary concern associated with judicial activism is interference in the domains of the Executive and Legislature. This can lead to the undermining of the separation of powers, the weakening of the independence of the judiciary, and the erosion of the principle of judicial review. It is important for judges to exercise restraint and adhere to the proper role of interpreting the law, rather than engaging in activism that encroaches upon the powers of the other branches of government.
Interference in the domains of the Executive and Legislature
One of the main concerns with judicial activism is that it can undermine the separation of powers and the checks and balances that are fundamental to a democratic system of government. The Executive branch is responsible for implementing and enforcing laws, while the Legislature is responsible for making laws. When judges engage in activism, they can make decisions that effectively rewrite or invalidate laws passed by the Legislature or executive actions taken by the Executive. This can lead to a situation where the judiciary is effectively legislating from the bench, which is not its intended role.
Weakening the independence of the Judiciary
Another concern is that judicial activism can weaken the independence of the judiciary. The judiciary is meant to be an independent and impartial branch of government, tasked with upholding the rule of law. When judges engage in activism, it can give the impression that they are acting based on their personal biases and preferences, rather than on the basis of the law. This can undermine public confidence in the judiciary and erode its independence.
Undermining the principle of judicial review
Judicial activism can also undermine the principle of judicial review, which is the power of the judiciary to review the constitutionality of laws and executive actions. Judicial review is an important aspect of the separation of powers and serves as a check on the other branches of government. However, when judges engage in activism, they can use the power of judicial review to strike down laws or executive actions based on their own personal beliefs, rather than on a genuine constitutional violation. This can lead to the erosion of the principle of judicial review and undermine the balance of power between the branches of government.
In conclusion, the primary concern associated with judicial activism is interference in the domains of the Executive and Legislature. This can lead to the undermining of the separation of powers, the weakening of the independence of the judiciary, and the erosion of the principle of judicial review. It is important for judges to exercise restraint and adhere to the proper role of interpreting the law, rather than engaging in activism that encroaches upon the powers of the other branches of government.
Which case is considered the first PIL case in India?- a)DC Wadhwa vs. State of Bihar
- b)Shreya Singhal vs. Union of India
- c)People’s Union for Democratic Rights vs. Union of India
- d)Hussainara Khatoon vs. the State of Bihar
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
DC Wadhwa vs. State of Bihar
b)
Shreya Singhal vs. Union of India
c)
People’s Union for Democratic Rights vs. Union of India
d)
Hussainara Khatoon vs. the State of Bihar
|
Uday Menon answered |
Background:
In the case of Hussainara Khatoon vs. the State of Bihar, the Supreme Court of India introduced the concept of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) for the first time in India.
Key Points:
- Hussainara Khatoon: The case involved the release of undertrial prisoners who had been languishing in jail for several years without a trial.
- PIL: This case marked the beginning of PILs in India, allowing any public-spirited individual or organization to approach the court on behalf of those who are unable to seek justice themselves.
- Justice P.N. Bhagwati: The concept of PIL was introduced by Justice P.N. Bhagwati in this case, emphasizing the need for access to justice for all, especially the marginalized and underprivileged sections of society.
- Impact: The Hussainara Khatoon case set a precedent for the judiciary to take up cases of public importance and ensure that justice is accessible to all, irrespective of their social or economic status.
Significance:
- The case of Hussainara Khatoon vs. the State of Bihar is considered a landmark judgment in the history of Indian judiciary, as it paved the way for the evolution of PILs and the protection of human rights in the country.
- It highlighted the role of the judiciary in ensuring social justice and addressing systemic issues that affect the vulnerable sections of society.
This case laid the foundation for the development of PIL jurisprudence in India, allowing the courts to intervene in matters of public interest and serve as a beacon of hope for those seeking justice.
In the case of Hussainara Khatoon vs. the State of Bihar, the Supreme Court of India introduced the concept of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) for the first time in India.
Key Points:
- Hussainara Khatoon: The case involved the release of undertrial prisoners who had been languishing in jail for several years without a trial.
- PIL: This case marked the beginning of PILs in India, allowing any public-spirited individual or organization to approach the court on behalf of those who are unable to seek justice themselves.
- Justice P.N. Bhagwati: The concept of PIL was introduced by Justice P.N. Bhagwati in this case, emphasizing the need for access to justice for all, especially the marginalized and underprivileged sections of society.
- Impact: The Hussainara Khatoon case set a precedent for the judiciary to take up cases of public importance and ensure that justice is accessible to all, irrespective of their social or economic status.
Significance:
- The case of Hussainara Khatoon vs. the State of Bihar is considered a landmark judgment in the history of Indian judiciary, as it paved the way for the evolution of PILs and the protection of human rights in the country.
- It highlighted the role of the judiciary in ensuring social justice and addressing systemic issues that affect the vulnerable sections of society.
This case laid the foundation for the development of PIL jurisprudence in India, allowing the courts to intervene in matters of public interest and serve as a beacon of hope for those seeking justice.
What is the purpose of Public Interest Litigation (PIL)?- a)To give more power to the Executive branch.
- b)To restrict the Judiciary's authority in policy matters.
- c)To allow citizens to raise matters of public interest in court.
- d)To limit the rights of citizens to challenge laws.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
To give more power to the Executive branch.
b)
To restrict the Judiciary's authority in policy matters.
c)
To allow citizens to raise matters of public interest in court.
d)
To limit the rights of citizens to challenge laws.
|
Capstone Ias Learning answered |
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a mechanism that allows citizens to raise matters of public interest directly in court. It enables the Judiciary to address issues that impact society and citizens' rights, ensuring that the government's actions are in the interest of the public.
What is the primary role of an independent judiciary in a democracy?- a)To enforce executive orders
- b)To create new laws
- c)To protect citizens' rights and prevent arbitrary use of governmental authority
- d)To control the military
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
To enforce executive orders
b)
To create new laws
c)
To protect citizens' rights and prevent arbitrary use of governmental authority
d)
To control the military
|
Lakshya Ias answered |
An independent judiciary in a democracy plays a crucial role in protecting citizens' rights and preventing arbitrary use of governmental authority. It ensures the rule of law and safeguards individual freedoms.
Which constitutional provision grants the Supreme Court the power to review its own judgments?- a)Article 125
- b)Article 226
- c)Article 137
- d)Article 144
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Article 125
b)
Article 226
c)
Article 137
d)
Article 144
|
K.L Institute answered |
Article 137 of the Indian Constitution grants the Supreme Court the power to review its own judgments on the discovery of new evidence, errors apparent on the face of law, or for any other sufficient reason.
Which landmark case introduced the concept of 'Basic Structure' of the Constitution?- a)Golak Nath Case
- b)Kesavananda Bharti Case
- c)Menaka Case
- d)Vishaka Case
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Golak Nath Case
b)
Kesavananda Bharti Case
c)
Menaka Case
d)
Vishaka Case
|
Goel UPSC Coaching Center answered |
The concept of 'Basic Structure' of the Constitution was introduced in the landmark case of Kesavananda Bharti Case (1973). The Supreme Court held that the 'Basic Structure' of the Constitution cannot be changed or amended, providing a significant framework for constitutional interpretation.
Which article of the Indian Constitution allows citizens to approach the Supreme Court for PIL?- a)Article 226
- b)Article 32
- c)Article 133
- d)Article 39A
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Article 226
b)
Article 32
c)
Article 133
d)
Article 39A
|
Spectrum Coaching Institute answered |
Article 32 of the Indian Constitution grants the right to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of fundamental rights, and it is often used as the basis for filing PIL cases.
What is the purpose of advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court?- a)To enforce fundamental rights
- b)To issue writs
- c)To hear appeals
- d)To provide advice to the government on legal matters
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
To enforce fundamental rights
b)
To issue writs
c)
To hear appeals
d)
To provide advice to the government on legal matters
|
Lohit Matani answered |
The purpose of advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is to provide advice to the government on legal matters when a question of law or fact of public importance arises.
What is the main purpose of providing additional Judges to a High Court under Article 224 of the Indian Constitution?- a)To resolve disputes between the Centre and States
- b)To expedite the resolution of criminal cases
- c)To address temporary increases in the court's workload
- d)To ensure uniformity in judicial decisions
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
To resolve disputes between the Centre and States
b)
To expedite the resolution of criminal cases
c)
To address temporary increases in the court's workload
d)
To ensure uniformity in judicial decisions
|
Upsc Toppers answered |
Article 224 of the Indian Constitution allows for the appointment of additional Judges to a High Court to address temporary increases in the court's workload.
In what context did the Supreme Court introduce the concept of "All India Judicial Service"?- a)Reservation in government jobs.
- b)Admission to private professional colleges.
- c)Uniform Civil Code.
- d)Enhancing the judiciary's efficiency.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Reservation in government jobs.
b)
Admission to private professional colleges.
c)
Uniform Civil Code.
d)
Enhancing the judiciary's efficiency.
|
Ias Masters answered |
The Supreme Court introduced the concept of "All India Judicial Service" in the context of enhancing the efficiency of the judiciary. It aimed to create a uniform system of recruitment and training for judicial officers across the country.
What did the S.R. Bommai case establish regarding Presidential proclamations?- a)Proclamations are immune from judicial review.
- b)Proclamations can be dissolved by State Assemblies.
- c)Proclamations can be reviewed only by the President.
- d)Proclamations are judiciously reviewable.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Proclamations are immune from judicial review.
b)
Proclamations can be dissolved by State Assemblies.
c)
Proclamations can be reviewed only by the President.
d)
Proclamations are judiciously reviewable.
|
EduRev UPSC answered |
The S.R. Bommai case established that Presidential proclamations dissolving State Assemblies are judiciously reviewable. The court can examine the legality and constitutionality of such proclamations.
What factor has contributed to the rise of Judicial Activism in India?- a)Increase in Executive's efficiency.
- b)Judicial non-intervention.
- c)Failure of other branches of government.
- d)Strong legislative framework.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Increase in Executive's efficiency.
b)
Judicial non-intervention.
c)
Failure of other branches of government.
d)
Strong legislative framework.
|
|
Lakshya Ias answered |
The rise of Judicial Activism in India can be attributed to the failure of other branches of government, such as the Executive and the Legislature, to address issues effectively. As a result, the Judiciary has taken a more active role in safeguarding citizens' rights and ensuring governance.
What is the main argument of opponents of Judicial Activism?- a)Courts lack the capacity to make policy choices.
- b)Courts are not run on democratic lines.
- c)Judicial Activism strengthens the Executive.
- d)Judicial Activism interferes with lawmaking.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Courts lack the capacity to make policy choices.
b)
Courts are not run on democratic lines.
c)
Judicial Activism strengthens the Executive.
d)
Judicial Activism interferes with lawmaking.
|
Academic Studio answered |
Opponents of Judicial Activism argue that courts lack the capacity to effectively make policy choices, and taking controversial stands on public policy matters can lead to questionable decisions.
What is one of the pros of PIL?- a)It encourages frivolous cases
- b)It only benefits private individuals
- c)It provides legal representation to unrepresented voices
- d)It exclusively focuses on personal interests
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
It encourages frivolous cases
b)
It only benefits private individuals
c)
It provides legal representation to unrepresented voices
d)
It exclusively focuses on personal interests
|
|
Goel UPSC Coaching Center answered |
PIL helps to bring voices from marginalized sections of society into the legal sphere, offering them a platform to seek justice and redressal.
What does PIL stand for in the context of the legal system?- a)Personal Interest Litigation
- b)Private Individual Lawsuit
- c)Public Interest Litigation
- d)Popular Inquiry Legislation
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Personal Interest Litigation
b)
Private Individual Lawsuit
c)
Public Interest Litigation
d)
Popular Inquiry Legislation
|
Future Foundation Institute answered |
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a legal measure that allows individuals or organizations to approach the court in cases where the public or a particular community's interests are affected. It is not about personal or private interests, but rather concerns matters of public concern.
Which challenge is associated with PIL?- a)Limited utility for deserving people
- b)Strict adherence to separation of powers
- c)Difficulty in finding vested aims and interests
- d)Overuse by political pressure groups
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Limited utility for deserving people
b)
Strict adherence to separation of powers
c)
Difficulty in finding vested aims and interests
d)
Overuse by political pressure groups
|
|
Spectrum Coaching Institute answered |
PIL can be misused by various groups, including political entities, to further their interests rather than genuinely serving the public's welfare.
Which of the following categories can be entertained as PIL cases?- a)Matters related to private businesses
- b)Petitions against police misconduct
- c)Complaints about fashion trends
- d)Complaints related to sports events
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Matters related to private businesses
b)
Petitions against police misconduct
c)
Complaints about fashion trends
d)
Complaints related to sports events
|
BT Educators answered |
PIL cases focus on issues that have a broader public interest, such as police misconduct, human rights violations, and matters affecting the general public.
Which case marked the introduction of the concept of "Public Interest Litigation"?- a)Golak Nath Case
- b)Kesavananda Bharti Case
- c)Menaka Case
- d)SP Gupta Case
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Golak Nath Case
b)
Kesavananda Bharti Case
c)
Menaka Case
d)
SP Gupta Case
|
|
Academic Studio answered |
The concept of "Public Interest Litigation" was introduced and accepted by the Supreme Court in the case of SP Gupta (1981). It allowed individuals and organizations to approach the court on behalf of the public interest, leading to the court's involvement in various governance issues.
How can the challenges of PIL be mitigated?- a)Introduce stricter locus standi requirements
- b)Encourage more political influence
- c)Provide punishment for abusing PIL power
- d)Limit the types of issues that can be raised
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Introduce stricter locus standi requirements
b)
Encourage more political influence
c)
Provide punishment for abusing PIL power
d)
Limit the types of issues that can be raised
|
|
Master Training Institute answered |
Introducing consequences for misusing PIL power can help prevent frivolous cases and ensure that PIL serves its intended purpose of addressing genuine public interest issues.
Which principle aligns with the concept of PIL and provides for equal justice and free legal aid?- a)Article 12
- b)Article 226
- c)Article 39A
- d)Article 32
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Article 12
b)
Article 226
c)
Article 39A
d)
Article 32
|
Aim It Academy answered |
Article 39A of the Indian Constitution deals with equal justice and free legal aid, which resonates with the objectives of PIL to provide access to justice for all, especially the underprivileged.
What type of jurisdiction does the Supreme Court have when it hears appeals in matters of constitutional, civil, and criminal cases?- a)Original jurisdiction
- b)Supervisory jurisdiction
- c)Appellate jurisdiction
- d)Advisory jurisdiction
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Original jurisdiction
b)
Supervisory jurisdiction
c)
Appellate jurisdiction
d)
Advisory jurisdiction
|
|
Upsc Toppers answered |
The Supreme Court exercises appellate jurisdiction when it hears appeals in matters of constitutional, civil, and criminal cases. It reviews decisions made by lower courts.
What is the underlying principle of the concept of "Judicial Restraint"?- a)Judges must actively enforce constitutional rights.
- b)Judges should intervene in all policy matters.
- c)Judges must respect laws passed by the legislature.
- d)Judges should have complete autonomy.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Judges must actively enforce constitutional rights.
b)
Judges should intervene in all policy matters.
c)
Judges must respect laws passed by the legislature.
d)
Judges should have complete autonomy.
|
|
EduRev UPSC answered |
The underlying principle of the concept of "Judicial Restraint" is that judges should respect laws and decisions made by the legislature, intervening only when laws clearly violate constitutional values.
What is the central role of PIL in the legal system?- a)Promoting personal interests
- b)Facilitating political gain
- c)Enforcing separation of powers
- d)Bringing about social change
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Promoting personal interests
b)
Facilitating political gain
c)
Enforcing separation of powers
d)
Bringing about social change
|
Valor Academy answered |
The main objective of PIL is to bring social change by addressing issues that impact the larger public and marginalized sections of society, making the legal system more accessible and just.
Which constitutional provision allows the President, in consultation with the Chief Justice of India, to determine the age of a High Court Judge?- a)Article 217
- b)Article 144A
- c)Article 124A
- d)Article 215
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Article 217
b)
Article 144A
c)
Article 124A
d)
Article 215
|
|
Valor Academy answered |
Article 217 of the Indian Constitution allows the President, in consultation with the Chief Justice of India, to determine the age of a High Court Judge if any question regarding the Judge's age arises.
What is the primary concept of Judicial Activism?- a)Upholding the authority of the legislature.
- b)Restraining the Judiciary from interfering in executive matters.
- c)Allowing the Judiciary to actively enforce constitutional rights.
- d)Granting complete autonomy to the Executive branch.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
a)
Upholding the authority of the legislature.
b)
Restraining the Judiciary from interfering in executive matters.
c)
Allowing the Judiciary to actively enforce constitutional rights.
d)
Granting complete autonomy to the Executive branch.
|
|
Goel UPSC Coaching Center answered |
Judicial Activism refers to the active role played by the Judiciary in enforcing constitutional and legal rights, especially in cases where laws infringe upon citizens' rights or go against constitutional values. In this approach, the Judiciary exercises its power to strike down laws that violate fundamental rights and promotes pro-active decisions to address issues and injustices.
Chapter doubts & questions for Judicial Review, Activism & PIL - Famous Books for UPSC Exam (Summary & Tests) 2025 is part of UPSC CSE exam preparation. The chapters have been prepared according to the UPSC CSE exam syllabus. The Chapter doubts & questions, notes, tests & MCQs are made for UPSC CSE 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, notes, meanings, examples, exercises, MCQs and online tests here.
Chapter doubts & questions of Judicial Review, Activism & PIL - Famous Books for UPSC Exam (Summary & Tests) in English & Hindi are available as part of UPSC CSE exam.
Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for UPSC CSE Exam by signing up for free.
Famous Books for UPSC Exam (Summary & Tests)
773 videos|1444 docs|633 tests
|
|
© EduRev
|
Education Revolution
|
|
Signup to see your scores
go up
within 7 days!
within 7 days!
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup