Question Description
Read the passage given below and answer the questions that follows:The steps for creating a new state are as follows: A bill on a new state has to be recommended by the President. In India, it is usually the Cabinet which requests the President to do that. Article 3 makes it clear that the Parliament is the sole authority on making a decision on a new state. President refers the bill to the State Assembly for its views giving it a certain period of time. Parliament is not obligated to follow on the views of State Assembly. If the State Assembly does not express its opinion within the specified period of time, the bill could be introduced in the Parliament after the expiry of the specified period. Why did the authors of the constitution put complete responsibility of creating new states ONLY with the Parliament? Why did they not provide a bigger role for a State Assembly other than expressing ‘its views’ on the topic? To understand the intentions behind a certain clause in our Constitution the legal experts refer to the discussions of the authors that preceded the formulation of these clauses referred to as Constituent Assembly Debates (CAD). One legal expert clarifies: When the Constituent Assembly was deliberating in November 1948 on the scope and content of Article 3, there was a proposal by Prof. KT Shah that the legislation constituting a new State from any region of a State should originate from the legislature of the State concerned. Had this procedure been approved, the power to decide the statehood of a region seeking separation would have been vested with the State legislature dominated by the elite of developed regions. Opposing the same and using the then demand for an Andhra Province as an example, Shri K. Santhanam stated as under: “I wonder whether Professor Shah fully realizes the implications of his amendment. If his amendment is adopted, it would mean that no minority in any State can ask for separation of territory… unless it can get a majority in that State legislature. Take the case of Madras Province for instance. The Andhra’s want separation. They bring up a resolution in the Madras Legislature. It is defeated by a majority. There ends the matter. The way of the Andhra’s is blocked altogether. They cannot take any further step to constitute an Andhra province.” Thus Article 3 emerged in its current form.Q. To whom does the President refer the bill after his review?a)Parliamentb)State Assemblyc)Prime Ministerd)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? for Humanities/Arts 2024 is part of Humanities/Arts preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the Humanities/Arts exam syllabus. Information about Read the passage given below and answer the questions that follows:The steps for creating a new state are as follows: A bill on a new state has to be recommended by the President. In India, it is usually the Cabinet which requests the President to do that. Article 3 makes it clear that the Parliament is the sole authority on making a decision on a new state. President refers the bill to the State Assembly for its views giving it a certain period of time. Parliament is not obligated to follow on the views of State Assembly. If the State Assembly does not express its opinion within the specified period of time, the bill could be introduced in the Parliament after the expiry of the specified period. Why did the authors of the constitution put complete responsibility of creating new states ONLY with the Parliament? Why did they not provide a bigger role for a State Assembly other than expressing ‘its views’ on the topic? To understand the intentions behind a certain clause in our Constitution the legal experts refer to the discussions of the authors that preceded the formulation of these clauses referred to as Constituent Assembly Debates (CAD). One legal expert clarifies: When the Constituent Assembly was deliberating in November 1948 on the scope and content of Article 3, there was a proposal by Prof. KT Shah that the legislation constituting a new State from any region of a State should originate from the legislature of the State concerned. Had this procedure been approved, the power to decide the statehood of a region seeking separation would have been vested with the State legislature dominated by the elite of developed regions. Opposing the same and using the then demand for an Andhra Province as an example, Shri K. Santhanam stated as under: “I wonder whether Professor Shah fully realizes the implications of his amendment. If his amendment is adopted, it would mean that no minority in any State can ask for separation of territory… unless it can get a majority in that State legislature. Take the case of Madras Province for instance. The Andhra’s want separation. They bring up a resolution in the Madras Legislature. It is defeated by a majority. There ends the matter. The way of the Andhra’s is blocked altogether. They cannot take any further step to constitute an Andhra province.” Thus Article 3 emerged in its current form.Q. To whom does the President refer the bill after his review?a)Parliamentb)State Assemblyc)Prime Ministerd)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for Humanities/Arts 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Read the passage given below and answer the questions that follows:The steps for creating a new state are as follows: A bill on a new state has to be recommended by the President. In India, it is usually the Cabinet which requests the President to do that. Article 3 makes it clear that the Parliament is the sole authority on making a decision on a new state. President refers the bill to the State Assembly for its views giving it a certain period of time. Parliament is not obligated to follow on the views of State Assembly. If the State Assembly does not express its opinion within the specified period of time, the bill could be introduced in the Parliament after the expiry of the specified period. Why did the authors of the constitution put complete responsibility of creating new states ONLY with the Parliament? Why did they not provide a bigger role for a State Assembly other than expressing ‘its views’ on the topic? To understand the intentions behind a certain clause in our Constitution the legal experts refer to the discussions of the authors that preceded the formulation of these clauses referred to as Constituent Assembly Debates (CAD). One legal expert clarifies: When the Constituent Assembly was deliberating in November 1948 on the scope and content of Article 3, there was a proposal by Prof. KT Shah that the legislation constituting a new State from any region of a State should originate from the legislature of the State concerned. Had this procedure been approved, the power to decide the statehood of a region seeking separation would have been vested with the State legislature dominated by the elite of developed regions. Opposing the same and using the then demand for an Andhra Province as an example, Shri K. Santhanam stated as under: “I wonder whether Professor Shah fully realizes the implications of his amendment. If his amendment is adopted, it would mean that no minority in any State can ask for separation of territory… unless it can get a majority in that State legislature. Take the case of Madras Province for instance. The Andhra’s want separation. They bring up a resolution in the Madras Legislature. It is defeated by a majority. There ends the matter. The way of the Andhra’s is blocked altogether. They cannot take any further step to constitute an Andhra province.” Thus Article 3 emerged in its current form.Q. To whom does the President refer the bill after his review?a)Parliamentb)State Assemblyc)Prime Ministerd)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Read the passage given below and answer the questions that follows:The steps for creating a new state are as follows: A bill on a new state has to be recommended by the President. In India, it is usually the Cabinet which requests the President to do that. Article 3 makes it clear that the Parliament is the sole authority on making a decision on a new state. President refers the bill to the State Assembly for its views giving it a certain period of time. Parliament is not obligated to follow on the views of State Assembly. If the State Assembly does not express its opinion within the specified period of time, the bill could be introduced in the Parliament after the expiry of the specified period. Why did the authors of the constitution put complete responsibility of creating new states ONLY with the Parliament? Why did they not provide a bigger role for a State Assembly other than expressing ‘its views’ on the topic? To understand the intentions behind a certain clause in our Constitution the legal experts refer to the discussions of the authors that preceded the formulation of these clauses referred to as Constituent Assembly Debates (CAD). One legal expert clarifies: When the Constituent Assembly was deliberating in November 1948 on the scope and content of Article 3, there was a proposal by Prof. KT Shah that the legislation constituting a new State from any region of a State should originate from the legislature of the State concerned. Had this procedure been approved, the power to decide the statehood of a region seeking separation would have been vested with the State legislature dominated by the elite of developed regions. Opposing the same and using the then demand for an Andhra Province as an example, Shri K. Santhanam stated as under: “I wonder whether Professor Shah fully realizes the implications of his amendment. If his amendment is adopted, it would mean that no minority in any State can ask for separation of territory… unless it can get a majority in that State legislature. Take the case of Madras Province for instance. The Andhra’s want separation. They bring up a resolution in the Madras Legislature. It is defeated by a majority. There ends the matter. The way of the Andhra’s is blocked altogether. They cannot take any further step to constitute an Andhra province.” Thus Article 3 emerged in its current form.Q. To whom does the President refer the bill after his review?a)Parliamentb)State Assemblyc)Prime Ministerd)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for Humanities/Arts. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Humanities/Arts Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Read the passage given below and answer the questions that follows:The steps for creating a new state are as follows: A bill on a new state has to be recommended by the President. In India, it is usually the Cabinet which requests the President to do that. Article 3 makes it clear that the Parliament is the sole authority on making a decision on a new state. President refers the bill to the State Assembly for its views giving it a certain period of time. Parliament is not obligated to follow on the views of State Assembly. If the State Assembly does not express its opinion within the specified period of time, the bill could be introduced in the Parliament after the expiry of the specified period. Why did the authors of the constitution put complete responsibility of creating new states ONLY with the Parliament? Why did they not provide a bigger role for a State Assembly other than expressing ‘its views’ on the topic? To understand the intentions behind a certain clause in our Constitution the legal experts refer to the discussions of the authors that preceded the formulation of these clauses referred to as Constituent Assembly Debates (CAD). One legal expert clarifies: When the Constituent Assembly was deliberating in November 1948 on the scope and content of Article 3, there was a proposal by Prof. KT Shah that the legislation constituting a new State from any region of a State should originate from the legislature of the State concerned. Had this procedure been approved, the power to decide the statehood of a region seeking separation would have been vested with the State legislature dominated by the elite of developed regions. Opposing the same and using the then demand for an Andhra Province as an example, Shri K. Santhanam stated as under: “I wonder whether Professor Shah fully realizes the implications of his amendment. If his amendment is adopted, it would mean that no minority in any State can ask for separation of territory… unless it can get a majority in that State legislature. Take the case of Madras Province for instance. The Andhra’s want separation. They bring up a resolution in the Madras Legislature. It is defeated by a majority. There ends the matter. The way of the Andhra’s is blocked altogether. They cannot take any further step to constitute an Andhra province.” Thus Article 3 emerged in its current form.Q. To whom does the President refer the bill after his review?a)Parliamentb)State Assemblyc)Prime Ministerd)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Read the passage given below and answer the questions that follows:The steps for creating a new state are as follows: A bill on a new state has to be recommended by the President. In India, it is usually the Cabinet which requests the President to do that. Article 3 makes it clear that the Parliament is the sole authority on making a decision on a new state. President refers the bill to the State Assembly for its views giving it a certain period of time. Parliament is not obligated to follow on the views of State Assembly. If the State Assembly does not express its opinion within the specified period of time, the bill could be introduced in the Parliament after the expiry of the specified period. Why did the authors of the constitution put complete responsibility of creating new states ONLY with the Parliament? Why did they not provide a bigger role for a State Assembly other than expressing ‘its views’ on the topic? To understand the intentions behind a certain clause in our Constitution the legal experts refer to the discussions of the authors that preceded the formulation of these clauses referred to as Constituent Assembly Debates (CAD). One legal expert clarifies: When the Constituent Assembly was deliberating in November 1948 on the scope and content of Article 3, there was a proposal by Prof. KT Shah that the legislation constituting a new State from any region of a State should originate from the legislature of the State concerned. Had this procedure been approved, the power to decide the statehood of a region seeking separation would have been vested with the State legislature dominated by the elite of developed regions. Opposing the same and using the then demand for an Andhra Province as an example, Shri K. Santhanam stated as under: “I wonder whether Professor Shah fully realizes the implications of his amendment. If his amendment is adopted, it would mean that no minority in any State can ask for separation of territory… unless it can get a majority in that State legislature. Take the case of Madras Province for instance. The Andhra’s want separation. They bring up a resolution in the Madras Legislature. It is defeated by a majority. There ends the matter. The way of the Andhra’s is blocked altogether. They cannot take any further step to constitute an Andhra province.” Thus Article 3 emerged in its current form.Q. To whom does the President refer the bill after his review?a)Parliamentb)State Assemblyc)Prime Ministerd)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Read the passage given below and answer the questions that follows:The steps for creating a new state are as follows: A bill on a new state has to be recommended by the President. In India, it is usually the Cabinet which requests the President to do that. Article 3 makes it clear that the Parliament is the sole authority on making a decision on a new state. President refers the bill to the State Assembly for its views giving it a certain period of time. Parliament is not obligated to follow on the views of State Assembly. If the State Assembly does not express its opinion within the specified period of time, the bill could be introduced in the Parliament after the expiry of the specified period. Why did the authors of the constitution put complete responsibility of creating new states ONLY with the Parliament? Why did they not provide a bigger role for a State Assembly other than expressing ‘its views’ on the topic? To understand the intentions behind a certain clause in our Constitution the legal experts refer to the discussions of the authors that preceded the formulation of these clauses referred to as Constituent Assembly Debates (CAD). One legal expert clarifies: When the Constituent Assembly was deliberating in November 1948 on the scope and content of Article 3, there was a proposal by Prof. KT Shah that the legislation constituting a new State from any region of a State should originate from the legislature of the State concerned. Had this procedure been approved, the power to decide the statehood of a region seeking separation would have been vested with the State legislature dominated by the elite of developed regions. Opposing the same and using the then demand for an Andhra Province as an example, Shri K. Santhanam stated as under: “I wonder whether Professor Shah fully realizes the implications of his amendment. If his amendment is adopted, it would mean that no minority in any State can ask for separation of territory… unless it can get a majority in that State legislature. Take the case of Madras Province for instance. The Andhra’s want separation. They bring up a resolution in the Madras Legislature. It is defeated by a majority. There ends the matter. The way of the Andhra’s is blocked altogether. They cannot take any further step to constitute an Andhra province.” Thus Article 3 emerged in its current form.Q. To whom does the President refer the bill after his review?a)Parliamentb)State Assemblyc)Prime Ministerd)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Read the passage given below and answer the questions that follows:The steps for creating a new state are as follows: A bill on a new state has to be recommended by the President. In India, it is usually the Cabinet which requests the President to do that. Article 3 makes it clear that the Parliament is the sole authority on making a decision on a new state. President refers the bill to the State Assembly for its views giving it a certain period of time. Parliament is not obligated to follow on the views of State Assembly. If the State Assembly does not express its opinion within the specified period of time, the bill could be introduced in the Parliament after the expiry of the specified period. Why did the authors of the constitution put complete responsibility of creating new states ONLY with the Parliament? Why did they not provide a bigger role for a State Assembly other than expressing ‘its views’ on the topic? To understand the intentions behind a certain clause in our Constitution the legal experts refer to the discussions of the authors that preceded the formulation of these clauses referred to as Constituent Assembly Debates (CAD). One legal expert clarifies: When the Constituent Assembly was deliberating in November 1948 on the scope and content of Article 3, there was a proposal by Prof. KT Shah that the legislation constituting a new State from any region of a State should originate from the legislature of the State concerned. Had this procedure been approved, the power to decide the statehood of a region seeking separation would have been vested with the State legislature dominated by the elite of developed regions. Opposing the same and using the then demand for an Andhra Province as an example, Shri K. Santhanam stated as under: “I wonder whether Professor Shah fully realizes the implications of his amendment. If his amendment is adopted, it would mean that no minority in any State can ask for separation of territory… unless it can get a majority in that State legislature. Take the case of Madras Province for instance. The Andhra’s want separation. They bring up a resolution in the Madras Legislature. It is defeated by a majority. There ends the matter. The way of the Andhra’s is blocked altogether. They cannot take any further step to constitute an Andhra province.” Thus Article 3 emerged in its current form.Q. To whom does the President refer the bill after his review?a)Parliamentb)State Assemblyc)Prime Ministerd)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Read the passage given below and answer the questions that follows:The steps for creating a new state are as follows: A bill on a new state has to be recommended by the President. In India, it is usually the Cabinet which requests the President to do that. Article 3 makes it clear that the Parliament is the sole authority on making a decision on a new state. President refers the bill to the State Assembly for its views giving it a certain period of time. Parliament is not obligated to follow on the views of State Assembly. If the State Assembly does not express its opinion within the specified period of time, the bill could be introduced in the Parliament after the expiry of the specified period. Why did the authors of the constitution put complete responsibility of creating new states ONLY with the Parliament? Why did they not provide a bigger role for a State Assembly other than expressing ‘its views’ on the topic? To understand the intentions behind a certain clause in our Constitution the legal experts refer to the discussions of the authors that preceded the formulation of these clauses referred to as Constituent Assembly Debates (CAD). One legal expert clarifies: When the Constituent Assembly was deliberating in November 1948 on the scope and content of Article 3, there was a proposal by Prof. KT Shah that the legislation constituting a new State from any region of a State should originate from the legislature of the State concerned. Had this procedure been approved, the power to decide the statehood of a region seeking separation would have been vested with the State legislature dominated by the elite of developed regions. Opposing the same and using the then demand for an Andhra Province as an example, Shri K. Santhanam stated as under: “I wonder whether Professor Shah fully realizes the implications of his amendment. If his amendment is adopted, it would mean that no minority in any State can ask for separation of territory… unless it can get a majority in that State legislature. Take the case of Madras Province for instance. The Andhra’s want separation. They bring up a resolution in the Madras Legislature. It is defeated by a majority. There ends the matter. The way of the Andhra’s is blocked altogether. They cannot take any further step to constitute an Andhra province.” Thus Article 3 emerged in its current form.Q. To whom does the President refer the bill after his review?a)Parliamentb)State Assemblyc)Prime Ministerd)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Humanities/Arts tests.