Consider the following statements regarding Article 18: It prevents ...
Article 18 of the Indian Constitution deals with the abolition of titles. It states that no title, not being a military or academic distinction, shall be conferred by the State. Here are the given statements and their explanations:
1) It prevents individuals from adopting hereditary titles like Maharaja.
This statement is correct. Article 18 prohibits the State from conferring any title, and also prevents individuals from accepting titles from foreign states. This includes hereditary titles like Maharaja, which were prevalent in India before independence.
2) A foreigner holding office of profit under an Indian state cannot accept any title from a foreign state but can accept emoluments with the President's prior consent.
This statement is incorrect. Article 18 applies to all individuals, whether Indian citizens or foreigners. It prohibits the acceptance of any title, whether from India or a foreign state. However, a foreigner holding an office of profit under the Indian state can accept emoluments (salary or other benefits) with the President's prior consent.
In summary, both statements are not correct. Article 18 prohibits the conferring and acceptance of titles, including hereditary titles, by the State or individuals, whether Indian citizens or foreigners. However, a foreigner holding an office of profit can accept emoluments with the President's prior consent.
Consider the following statements regarding Article 18: It prevents ...
- To provide equal status for all citizens constitution under article 18 has abolished titles and made the following provisions in this regard.
- It prohibits the state from conferring any title (except military or academic distinction) on anybody, whether a citizen or a foreigner.
- It prohibits a citizen of India from accepting any title from any foreign state
- A foreigner holding any office of profit or trust under the state cannot accept any title from any foreign state without the consent of the president.
- No citizen or a foreigner holding any office of profit or trust under the State is to accept any present, emolument, or office from or under any foreign State without the consent of the president.
With prior permission of the president, a foreigner holding an office of profit under the Indian state can accept a title as well as emoluments conferred by a foreign state. Hence, statement 2 is not correct. Article 18 also bans hereditary titles of nobility like Maharaja, Raj Bahadur, Rai Bahadur, Rai Saheb, Dewan Bahadur, etc, which were conferred by colonial States. However, it does not prevent an individual from adopting a "name" like Maharaja. For example, one can choose a name like Maharaja Ravi, etc. It only prevents the state from conferring such hereditary titles. Hence, statement 1 is not correct Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the National Awards–Bharat Ratna, Padma Vibhushan, Padma Bhushan, and Padma Sri. It ruled that these awards do not amount to ‘titles’ within the meaning of Article 18 that prohibits only hereditary titles of nobility. Therefore, they are not violative of Article 18 as the theory of equality does not mandate that merit should not be recognized It also ruled that these awards should not be used as suffixes or prefixes to the names of awardees. Otherwise, they should forfeit the awards.