All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >  Directions: Read the following passage and an... Start Learning for Free
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
The Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens certain fundamental freedoms, which are recognized as their fundamental rights. However, these fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of India are not absolute as no right can be. Each of these fundamental rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by the Parliament or the State Legislatures. Accordingly, the Constitution of India lays down the grounds and the purposes for which a legislature can impose 'reasonable restrictions' on the rights guaranteed to citizens. The State cannot travel beyond the contours of these reasonable restrictions in curbing the fundamental rights guaranteed to citizens. While determining the constitutional validity of a restriction imposed on a fundamental right by a legislation, the Court is not concerned with the necessity of the restriction or the wisdom of the policy underlying it, but only whether the restriction is in excess of the requirement, and whether the legislature has overstepped the Constitutional limitations. Two of the fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen of India are- the right to move freely throughout the territory of India and the right to reside and settle in any part of India. However, the State may impose reasonable restrictions on these rights by law, in the interests of the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled tribes.
Q. Mr. Z, a citizen of India, was issued a passport on June 1, 2020 by the Passport Office. Mr. Z was due to travel to Spain on July 15, 2021. On July 11, 2021, Mr. Z received a letter from the Regional Passport Officer intimating him that it was decided by the Government of India to seize his passport ''in public interest''. Mr. Z was required to surrender his passport within seven days of the receipt of that letter. In the given situation, which of the following statements is correct?
  • a)
    Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right of free movement throughout the territory of India.
  • b)
    Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right to reside and settle in any part of India.
  • c)
    Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of the law relating to passports in India.
  • d)
    Mr. Z cannot challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right(s) of free movement throughout the territory of India and/or to residence and settlement in any part of India.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
FREE This question is part of
Download PDF Attempt Test
Download PDF Attempt this Test
Most Upvoted Answer
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Con...
Mr. Z cannot challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right(s) of free movement throughout the territory of India and/or to residence and settlement in any part of India.
The support for the answer can be drawn from the following lines from the passage, 'While determining the constitutional validity of a restriction imposed on a fundamental right by a legislation, the Court is not concerned with the necessity of the restriction or the wisdom of the policy underlying it ... the State may impose reasonable restrictions on these rights by law, in the interests of the general public.'
Free Test
FREE
Start Free Test
Start Free Test
Community Answer
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Con...
Explanation of the Correct Answer
In the given scenario involving Mr. Z's passport, the correct option is D, which states that Mr. Z cannot challenge the letter on the grounds of his fundamental rights of free movement and residence. Here’s why:
Reasonable Restrictions on Fundamental Rights
- The Constitution of India allows for reasonable restrictions on fundamental rights.
- The government can impose such restrictions in the interest of public safety or national security.
Public Interest Justification
- The Regional Passport Officer’s decision to seize Mr. Z's passport was made in the interest of public safety, which is a valid ground for imposing restrictions.
- The government’s action in this case aligns with the constitutional provision that permits limitations on fundamental rights for the greater good.
Legal Framework
- Mr. Z’s right to free movement and residence is indeed a fundamental right, but these rights can be curtailed under specific circumstances.
- The Constitution does not guarantee absolute freedom; thus, the government’s actions can be deemed lawful if they adhere to the prescribed legal framework.
Challenging the Decision
- While Mr. Z may feel aggrieved, the challenge to the letter cannot be based solely on the grounds of his fundamental rights, as the government has exercised its power within constitutional limits.
- The challenge could potentially relate to procedural or legal discrepancies in the passport law but not directly to the fundamental rights mentioned.
In conclusion, Mr. Z cannot successfully challenge the letter as it falls within the permissible scope of reasonable restrictions imposed by the state.
Attention CLAT Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed CLAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in CLAT.
< Previous Question Next Question >
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens certain fundamental freedoms, which are recognized as their fundamental rights. However, these fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of India are not absolute as no right can be. Each of these fundamental rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by the Parliament or the State Legislatures. Accordingly, the Constitution of India lays down the grounds and the purposes for which a legislature can impose reasonable restrictions on the rights guaranteed to citizens. The State cannot travel beyond the contours of these reasonable restrictions in curbing the fundamental rights guaranteed to citizens. While determining the constitutional validity of a restriction imposed on a fundamental right by a legislation, the Court is not concerned with the necessity of the restriction or the wisdom of the policy underlying it, but only whether the restriction is in excess of the requirement, and whether the legislature has overstepped the Constitutional limitations. Two of the fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen of India are- the right to move freely throughout the territory of India and the right to reside and settle in any part of India. However, the State may impose reasonable restrictions on these rights by law, in the interests of the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled tribes.Q.The appropriate authority in a State passed an externment order against Mr. A, a citizen of India. The externment order prohibited Mr. A, from residing within the State, from the date specified in such order. The externment order was passed by virtue of powers conferred on the appropriate authority by law, and the constitutional validity of this law had been upheld by the Supreme Court of India. The externment order was passed on the ground that Mr. A was found to be frequently engaged in illegal business of narcotic drugs and was also involved in several cases of riot and criminal intimidation. In the given situation, which of the following statements is correct regarding the externment order?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens certain fundamental freedoms, which are recognized as their fundamental rights. However, these fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of India are not absolute as no right can be. Each of these fundamental rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by the Parliament or the State Legislatures. Accordingly, the Constitution of India lays down the grounds and the purposes for which a legislature can impose reasonable restrictions on the rights guaranteed to citizens. The State cannot travel beyond the contours of these reasonable restrictions in curbing the fundamental rights guaranteed to citizens. While determining the constitutional validity of a restriction imposed on a fundamental right by a legislation, the Court is not concerned with the necessity of the restriction or the wisdom of the policy underlying it, but only whether the restriction is in excess of the requirement, and whether the legislature has overstepped the Constitutional limitations. Two of the fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen of India are- the right to move freely throughout the territory of India and the right to reside and settle in any part of India. However, the State may impose reasonable restrictions on these rights by law, in the interests of the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled tribes.Q.A law was enacted by the Parliament of India which consisted of a provision making it mandatory for every person riding a two-wheeler in India, to wear a helmet, failing which such person was made liable to a fine. Mr. X, a citizen of India, was fined for violation of the said provision. Mr. X challenged the constitutional validity of the said provision. In the given situation, which of the following statements is/are correct?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens certain fundamental freedoms, which are recognized as their fundamental rights. However, these fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of India are not absolute as no right can be. Each of these fundamental rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by the Parliament or the State Legislatures. Accordingly, the Constitution of India lays down the grounds and the purposes for which a legislature can impose reasonable restrictions on the rights guaranteed to citizens. The State cannot travel beyond the contours of these reasonable restrictions in curbing the fundamental rights guaranteed to citizens. While determining the constitutional validity of a restriction imposed on a fundamental right by a legislation, the Court is not concerned with the necessity of the restriction or the wisdom of the policy underlying it, but only whether the restriction is in excess of the requirement, and whether the legislature has overstepped the Constitutional limitations. Two of the fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen of India are- the right to move freely throughout the territory of India and the right to reside and settle in any part of India. However, the State may impose reasonable restrictions on these rights by law, in the interests of the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled tribes.Q.A group of Indian students of XYZ University located in New Delhi, India posted on social networking sites that they would hold a demonstration outside the university campus, protesting against a recently passed law which made it compulsory for university students to wear uniforms while attending classes. The students further threatened to use whatever means necessary to stop the oppression of students. Therefore, the State Authorities placed barricades around the university campus in order to restrict movement of the students carrying out the demonstration and ensuring that the demonstration does not turn violent. In the given situation, which of the following statements is correct regarding the act of placing of barricades by State Authorities?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens certain fundamental freedoms, which are recognized as their fundamental rights. However, these fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of India are not absolute as no right can be. Each of these fundamental rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by the Parliament or the State Legislatures. Accordingly, the Constitution of India lays down the grounds and the purposes for which a legislature can impose reasonable restrictions on the rights guaranteed to citizens. The State cannot travel beyond the contours of these reasonable restrictions in curbing the fundamental rights guaranteed to citizens. While determining the constitutional validity of a restriction imposed on a fundamental right by a legislation, the Court is not concerned with the necessity of the restriction or the wisdom of the policy underlying it, but only whether the restriction is in excess of the requirement, and whether the legislature has overstepped the Constitutional limitations. Two of the fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen of India are- the right to move freely throughout the territory of India and the right to reside and settle in any part of India. However, the State may impose reasonable restrictions on these rights by law, in the interests of the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled tribes.Q. Which of the following statements is incorrect?

Passage - 1Fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution are, in the absence of specific constitutional provisions, mainly enforceable against "the State". The definition of the State in article 12 being an "inclusive" one, courts have ruled that where there is pervasive or predominant governmental control or significant involvement in its activity, such bodies, entities and organizations fall within the definition of "the State".Article 14 is one of the most important Articles of the Indian constitution and it is also regarded as part of the golden triangle of the Constitution along with Article 19 and 21 .In India, this right is very important because there has been a widespread socio-economic difference which has been in existence from a long time. People have been discriminated on the basis of their gender or the religion they follow, therefore Article 14 was included in the Constitution to remove such inequalities and bring all the people under the equal protection of the law. Another important point about this Article is that it not only imposes a duty on the State to abstain from discriminating people but it also puts a positive duty totake such action by which the inequalities can be bridged between the people. Article 19(1)(

Top Courses for CLATView all

Top Courses for CLAT

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens certain fundamental freedoms, which are recognized as their fundamental rights. However, these fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of India are not absolute as no right can be. Each of these fundamental rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by the Parliament or the State Legislatures. Accordingly, the Constitution of India lays down the grounds and the purposes for which a legislature can impose reasonable restrictions on the rights guaranteed to citizens. The State cannot travel beyond the contours of these reasonable restrictions in curbing the fundamental rights guaranteed to citizens. While determining the constitutional validity of a restriction imposed on a fundamental right by a legislation, the Court is not concerned with the necessity of the restriction or the wisdom of the policy underlying it, but only whether the restriction is in excess of the requirement, and whether the legislature has overstepped the Constitutional limitations. Two of the fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen of India are- the right to move freely throughout the territory of India and the right to reside and settle in any part of India. However, the State may impose reasonable restrictions on these rights by law, in the interests of the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled tribes.Q. Mr. Z, a citizen of India, was issued a passport on June 1, 2020 by the Passport Office. Mr. Z was due to travel to Spain on July 15, 2021. On July 11, 2021, Mr. Z received a letter from the Regional Passport Officer intimating him that it was decided by the Government of India to seize his passport in public interest. Mr. Z was required to surrender his passport within seven days of the receipt of that letter. In the given situation, which of the following statements is correct?a)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right of free movement throughout the territory of India.b)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right to reside and settle in any part of India.c)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of the law relating to passports in India.d)Mr. Z cannot challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right(s) of free movement throughout the territory of India and/or to residence and settlement in any part of India.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens certain fundamental freedoms, which are recognized as their fundamental rights. However, these fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of India are not absolute as no right can be. Each of these fundamental rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by the Parliament or the State Legislatures. Accordingly, the Constitution of India lays down the grounds and the purposes for which a legislature can impose reasonable restrictions on the rights guaranteed to citizens. The State cannot travel beyond the contours of these reasonable restrictions in curbing the fundamental rights guaranteed to citizens. While determining the constitutional validity of a restriction imposed on a fundamental right by a legislation, the Court is not concerned with the necessity of the restriction or the wisdom of the policy underlying it, but only whether the restriction is in excess of the requirement, and whether the legislature has overstepped the Constitutional limitations. Two of the fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen of India are- the right to move freely throughout the territory of India and the right to reside and settle in any part of India. However, the State may impose reasonable restrictions on these rights by law, in the interests of the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled tribes.Q. Mr. Z, a citizen of India, was issued a passport on June 1, 2020 by the Passport Office. Mr. Z was due to travel to Spain on July 15, 2021. On July 11, 2021, Mr. Z received a letter from the Regional Passport Officer intimating him that it was decided by the Government of India to seize his passport in public interest. Mr. Z was required to surrender his passport within seven days of the receipt of that letter. In the given situation, which of the following statements is correct?a)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right of free movement throughout the territory of India.b)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right to reside and settle in any part of India.c)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of the law relating to passports in India.d)Mr. Z cannot challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right(s) of free movement throughout the territory of India and/or to residence and settlement in any part of India.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens certain fundamental freedoms, which are recognized as their fundamental rights. However, these fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of India are not absolute as no right can be. Each of these fundamental rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by the Parliament or the State Legislatures. Accordingly, the Constitution of India lays down the grounds and the purposes for which a legislature can impose reasonable restrictions on the rights guaranteed to citizens. The State cannot travel beyond the contours of these reasonable restrictions in curbing the fundamental rights guaranteed to citizens. While determining the constitutional validity of a restriction imposed on a fundamental right by a legislation, the Court is not concerned with the necessity of the restriction or the wisdom of the policy underlying it, but only whether the restriction is in excess of the requirement, and whether the legislature has overstepped the Constitutional limitations. Two of the fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen of India are- the right to move freely throughout the territory of India and the right to reside and settle in any part of India. However, the State may impose reasonable restrictions on these rights by law, in the interests of the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled tribes.Q. Mr. Z, a citizen of India, was issued a passport on June 1, 2020 by the Passport Office. Mr. Z was due to travel to Spain on July 15, 2021. On July 11, 2021, Mr. Z received a letter from the Regional Passport Officer intimating him that it was decided by the Government of India to seize his passport in public interest. Mr. Z was required to surrender his passport within seven days of the receipt of that letter. In the given situation, which of the following statements is correct?a)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right of free movement throughout the territory of India.b)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right to reside and settle in any part of India.c)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of the law relating to passports in India.d)Mr. Z cannot challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right(s) of free movement throughout the territory of India and/or to residence and settlement in any part of India.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens certain fundamental freedoms, which are recognized as their fundamental rights. However, these fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of India are not absolute as no right can be. Each of these fundamental rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by the Parliament or the State Legislatures. Accordingly, the Constitution of India lays down the grounds and the purposes for which a legislature can impose reasonable restrictions on the rights guaranteed to citizens. The State cannot travel beyond the contours of these reasonable restrictions in curbing the fundamental rights guaranteed to citizens. While determining the constitutional validity of a restriction imposed on a fundamental right by a legislation, the Court is not concerned with the necessity of the restriction or the wisdom of the policy underlying it, but only whether the restriction is in excess of the requirement, and whether the legislature has overstepped the Constitutional limitations. Two of the fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen of India are- the right to move freely throughout the territory of India and the right to reside and settle in any part of India. However, the State may impose reasonable restrictions on these rights by law, in the interests of the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled tribes.Q. Mr. Z, a citizen of India, was issued a passport on June 1, 2020 by the Passport Office. Mr. Z was due to travel to Spain on July 15, 2021. On July 11, 2021, Mr. Z received a letter from the Regional Passport Officer intimating him that it was decided by the Government of India to seize his passport in public interest. Mr. Z was required to surrender his passport within seven days of the receipt of that letter. In the given situation, which of the following statements is correct?a)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right of free movement throughout the territory of India.b)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right to reside and settle in any part of India.c)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of the law relating to passports in India.d)Mr. Z cannot challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right(s) of free movement throughout the territory of India and/or to residence and settlement in any part of India.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens certain fundamental freedoms, which are recognized as their fundamental rights. However, these fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of India are not absolute as no right can be. Each of these fundamental rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by the Parliament or the State Legislatures. Accordingly, the Constitution of India lays down the grounds and the purposes for which a legislature can impose reasonable restrictions on the rights guaranteed to citizens. The State cannot travel beyond the contours of these reasonable restrictions in curbing the fundamental rights guaranteed to citizens. While determining the constitutional validity of a restriction imposed on a fundamental right by a legislation, the Court is not concerned with the necessity of the restriction or the wisdom of the policy underlying it, but only whether the restriction is in excess of the requirement, and whether the legislature has overstepped the Constitutional limitations. Two of the fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen of India are- the right to move freely throughout the territory of India and the right to reside and settle in any part of India. However, the State may impose reasonable restrictions on these rights by law, in the interests of the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled tribes.Q. Mr. Z, a citizen of India, was issued a passport on June 1, 2020 by the Passport Office. Mr. Z was due to travel to Spain on July 15, 2021. On July 11, 2021, Mr. Z received a letter from the Regional Passport Officer intimating him that it was decided by the Government of India to seize his passport in public interest. Mr. Z was required to surrender his passport within seven days of the receipt of that letter. In the given situation, which of the following statements is correct?a)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right of free movement throughout the territory of India.b)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right to reside and settle in any part of India.c)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of the law relating to passports in India.d)Mr. Z cannot challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right(s) of free movement throughout the territory of India and/or to residence and settlement in any part of India.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens certain fundamental freedoms, which are recognized as their fundamental rights. However, these fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of India are not absolute as no right can be. Each of these fundamental rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by the Parliament or the State Legislatures. Accordingly, the Constitution of India lays down the grounds and the purposes for which a legislature can impose reasonable restrictions on the rights guaranteed to citizens. The State cannot travel beyond the contours of these reasonable restrictions in curbing the fundamental rights guaranteed to citizens. While determining the constitutional validity of a restriction imposed on a fundamental right by a legislation, the Court is not concerned with the necessity of the restriction or the wisdom of the policy underlying it, but only whether the restriction is in excess of the requirement, and whether the legislature has overstepped the Constitutional limitations. Two of the fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen of India are- the right to move freely throughout the territory of India and the right to reside and settle in any part of India. However, the State may impose reasonable restrictions on these rights by law, in the interests of the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled tribes.Q. Mr. Z, a citizen of India, was issued a passport on June 1, 2020 by the Passport Office. Mr. Z was due to travel to Spain on July 15, 2021. On July 11, 2021, Mr. Z received a letter from the Regional Passport Officer intimating him that it was decided by the Government of India to seize his passport in public interest. Mr. Z was required to surrender his passport within seven days of the receipt of that letter. In the given situation, which of the following statements is correct?a)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right of free movement throughout the territory of India.b)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right to reside and settle in any part of India.c)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of the law relating to passports in India.d)Mr. Z cannot challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right(s) of free movement throughout the territory of India and/or to residence and settlement in any part of India.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens certain fundamental freedoms, which are recognized as their fundamental rights. However, these fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of India are not absolute as no right can be. Each of these fundamental rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by the Parliament or the State Legislatures. Accordingly, the Constitution of India lays down the grounds and the purposes for which a legislature can impose reasonable restrictions on the rights guaranteed to citizens. The State cannot travel beyond the contours of these reasonable restrictions in curbing the fundamental rights guaranteed to citizens. While determining the constitutional validity of a restriction imposed on a fundamental right by a legislation, the Court is not concerned with the necessity of the restriction or the wisdom of the policy underlying it, but only whether the restriction is in excess of the requirement, and whether the legislature has overstepped the Constitutional limitations. Two of the fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen of India are- the right to move freely throughout the territory of India and the right to reside and settle in any part of India. However, the State may impose reasonable restrictions on these rights by law, in the interests of the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled tribes.Q. Mr. Z, a citizen of India, was issued a passport on June 1, 2020 by the Passport Office. Mr. Z was due to travel to Spain on July 15, 2021. On July 11, 2021, Mr. Z received a letter from the Regional Passport Officer intimating him that it was decided by the Government of India to seize his passport in public interest. Mr. Z was required to surrender his passport within seven days of the receipt of that letter. In the given situation, which of the following statements is correct?a)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right of free movement throughout the territory of India.b)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right to reside and settle in any part of India.c)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of the law relating to passports in India.d)Mr. Z cannot challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right(s) of free movement throughout the territory of India and/or to residence and settlement in any part of India.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens certain fundamental freedoms, which are recognized as their fundamental rights. However, these fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of India are not absolute as no right can be. Each of these fundamental rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by the Parliament or the State Legislatures. Accordingly, the Constitution of India lays down the grounds and the purposes for which a legislature can impose reasonable restrictions on the rights guaranteed to citizens. The State cannot travel beyond the contours of these reasonable restrictions in curbing the fundamental rights guaranteed to citizens. While determining the constitutional validity of a restriction imposed on a fundamental right by a legislation, the Court is not concerned with the necessity of the restriction or the wisdom of the policy underlying it, but only whether the restriction is in excess of the requirement, and whether the legislature has overstepped the Constitutional limitations. Two of the fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen of India are- the right to move freely throughout the territory of India and the right to reside and settle in any part of India. However, the State may impose reasonable restrictions on these rights by law, in the interests of the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled tribes.Q. Mr. Z, a citizen of India, was issued a passport on June 1, 2020 by the Passport Office. Mr. Z was due to travel to Spain on July 15, 2021. On July 11, 2021, Mr. Z received a letter from the Regional Passport Officer intimating him that it was decided by the Government of India to seize his passport in public interest. Mr. Z was required to surrender his passport within seven days of the receipt of that letter. In the given situation, which of the following statements is correct?a)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right of free movement throughout the territory of India.b)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right to reside and settle in any part of India.c)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of the law relating to passports in India.d)Mr. Z cannot challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right(s) of free movement throughout the territory of India and/or to residence and settlement in any part of India.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens certain fundamental freedoms, which are recognized as their fundamental rights. However, these fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of India are not absolute as no right can be. Each of these fundamental rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by the Parliament or the State Legislatures. Accordingly, the Constitution of India lays down the grounds and the purposes for which a legislature can impose reasonable restrictions on the rights guaranteed to citizens. The State cannot travel beyond the contours of these reasonable restrictions in curbing the fundamental rights guaranteed to citizens. While determining the constitutional validity of a restriction imposed on a fundamental right by a legislation, the Court is not concerned with the necessity of the restriction or the wisdom of the policy underlying it, but only whether the restriction is in excess of the requirement, and whether the legislature has overstepped the Constitutional limitations. Two of the fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen of India are- the right to move freely throughout the territory of India and the right to reside and settle in any part of India. However, the State may impose reasonable restrictions on these rights by law, in the interests of the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled tribes.Q. Mr. Z, a citizen of India, was issued a passport on June 1, 2020 by the Passport Office. Mr. Z was due to travel to Spain on July 15, 2021. On July 11, 2021, Mr. Z received a letter from the Regional Passport Officer intimating him that it was decided by the Government of India to seize his passport in public interest. Mr. Z was required to surrender his passport within seven days of the receipt of that letter. In the given situation, which of the following statements is correct?a)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right of free movement throughout the territory of India.b)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right to reside and settle in any part of India.c)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of the law relating to passports in India.d)Mr. Z cannot challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right(s) of free movement throughout the territory of India and/or to residence and settlement in any part of India.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens certain fundamental freedoms, which are recognized as their fundamental rights. However, these fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of India are not absolute as no right can be. Each of these fundamental rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by the Parliament or the State Legislatures. Accordingly, the Constitution of India lays down the grounds and the purposes for which a legislature can impose reasonable restrictions on the rights guaranteed to citizens. The State cannot travel beyond the contours of these reasonable restrictions in curbing the fundamental rights guaranteed to citizens. While determining the constitutional validity of a restriction imposed on a fundamental right by a legislation, the Court is not concerned with the necessity of the restriction or the wisdom of the policy underlying it, but only whether the restriction is in excess of the requirement, and whether the legislature has overstepped the Constitutional limitations. Two of the fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen of India are- the right to move freely throughout the territory of India and the right to reside and settle in any part of India. However, the State may impose reasonable restrictions on these rights by law, in the interests of the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled tribes.Q. Mr. Z, a citizen of India, was issued a passport on June 1, 2020 by the Passport Office. Mr. Z was due to travel to Spain on July 15, 2021. On July 11, 2021, Mr. Z received a letter from the Regional Passport Officer intimating him that it was decided by the Government of India to seize his passport in public interest. Mr. Z was required to surrender his passport within seven days of the receipt of that letter. In the given situation, which of the following statements is correct?a)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right of free movement throughout the territory of India.b)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right to reside and settle in any part of India.c)Mr. Z can challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of the law relating to passports in India.d)Mr. Z cannot challenge the letter on the ground that it is violative of his fundamental right(s) of free movement throughout the territory of India and/or to residence and settlement in any part of India.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses

Suggested Free Tests

Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Follow Us
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup