Match the following:I. Chief Election CommA. Elected by Rajya SabhaII. Lok Sabha SpeakerB. Appointed by PresidentIII. Dy Chairman, Rajya SabhaC. Elected by Lok SabhaA. I-A, II-B, III-Ca)I-A, II-B, III-Cb)I-B, II-C, III-Ac)I-C, II-B, III-Ad)I-C, II-A, III-BCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

CLAT Exam > CLAT Questions > Match the following:I. Chief Election CommA. ...

Match the following:
I. Chief Election Comm
A. Elected by Rajya Sabha
II. Lok Sabha Speaker
B. Appointed by President
III. Dy Chairman, Rajya Sabha
C. Elected by Lok Sabha
A. I-A, II-B, III-C

a)
I-A, II-B, III-C
b)
I-B, II-C, III-A
c)
I-C, II-B, III-A
d)
I-C, II-A, III-B

Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Join for Free

Join for Free

Most Upvoted Answer

Match the following:I. Chief Election CommA. Elected by Rajya SabhaII....

The correct matching of the given options is:

I. Chief Election Comm - B. Appointed by President
II. Lok Sabha Speaker - C. Elected by Lok Sabha
III. Dy Chairman, Rajya Sabha - A. Elected by Rajya Sabha

Let's understand the roles and the process of appointment/election for each of these positions:

I. Chief Election Commissioner (CEC):
- The Chief Election Commissioner is the head of the Election Commission of India.
- The CEC is responsible for conducting free and fair elections in the country.
- The CEC is appointed by the President of India.
- The appointment is made based on the recommendation of the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers.

II. Lok Sabha Speaker:
- The Lok Sabha Speaker is the presiding officer of the Lok Sabha, the lower house of the Parliament of India.
- The Speaker is responsible for maintaining order in the house, conducting the proceedings, and interpreting the rules of procedure.
- The Speaker is elected by the members of the Lok Sabha.
- The election takes place at the beginning of the first session after a general election or when the position is vacant.

III. Deputy Chairman of Rajya Sabha:
- The Rajya Sabha is the upper house of the Parliament of India.
- The Deputy Chairman of Rajya Sabha is the second-highest-ranking official in the house.
- The Deputy Chairman is responsible for presiding over the sessions in the absence of the Chairman.
- The Deputy Chairman is elected by the members of the Rajya Sabha.
- The election takes place at the beginning of the first session after a general election or when the position is vacant.

Therefore, the correct matching of the given options is:

I. Chief Election Comm - B. Appointed by President
II. Lok Sabha Speaker - C. Elected by Lok Sabha
III. Dy Chairman, Rajya Sabha - A. Elected by Rajya Sabha

Hence, option B is the correct answer.

Answered by Glance Learning Institute · View profile

Free Test

FREE

Test: Important Constitutional Bodies
15 Ques | 10 Min

Start Free Test

View all free CLAT tests

Community Answer

Match the following:I. Chief Election CommA. Elected by Rajya SabhaII....

Cheif Election Commissioner is appointed by the president.
Lok sabha speaker is elected from within the members of lok sabha.
Dy. Chairman of Rajya Sabha is elected from the member of Rajya Sabha.
Therefore, 'B' is the correct option.

View all answers Start learning for free

Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

The chairman of Public accounts committee (PAC) of the parliament is appointed by

View answer

The phenomenon of defections is not new to Indian politics. It has been plaguing the political landscape for over five decades. The recurrence of this evil phenomenon led to the 1985 Anti-Defection Law, which defined three grounds of disqualification of MLAs — giving up party membership; going against party whip; and abstaining from voting.Resignation as MLA was not one of the conditions. Exploiting this loophole, the 17 rebel MLAs in Karnataka resigned, their act aimed at ending the majority of the ruling coalition and, at the same time, avoiding disqualification. However, the Speaker refused to accept the resignations and declared them disqualified. This was possible as the legislation empowers the presiding officer of the House (i.e. the Speaker) to decide on complaints of defection under no time constraint.The law originally protected the Speaker’s decision from judicial review. However, this safeguard was struck down inKihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu and Others(1992).While the SC upheld the Speaker’s discretionary power, it underscored that the Speaker functioned as a tribunal under the anti-defection law, thereby making her/his decisions subject to judicial review. InShrimanth Balasaheb Patel & Ors vs Speaker Karnataka Legislative Assembly & Ors(2019), where the three-judge SC bench upheld the then Karnataka Speaker’s decision of disqualification of the 17 rebel MLAs. However, it struck down his ban on the MLAs from contesting elections till 2023, negating the only possible permanent solution to the problem. The Supreme Court played the role of a neutral umpire in this political slugfest. The Anti-Defection Law provided a safeguard for defections made on genuine ideological differences. The 91st Constitutional Amendment introduced in 2003 deleted the provision allowing split. The 91st Amendment also barred the appointment of defectors as Ministers until their disqualification period is over or they are re-elected, whichever is earlier.The main issue is that the defectors treat disqualification as a mere detour, before they return to the House or government by re-contesting. This can only be stopped by extending the disqualification period from re-contesting and appointment to Chairmanships/Ministries to at least six years. The minimum period limit of six years is needed to ensure that the defectors are not allowed to enter the election fray for least one election cycle, which is five years.Q.The recent judgement of the SC in Shrimanth Balasaheb Patel & Ors vs Speaker Karnataka Legislative Assembly & Ors (2019) upheld which of the following statement?

View answer

The phenomenon of defections is not new to Indian politics. It has been plaguing the political landscape for over five decades. The recurrence of this evil phenomenon led to the 1985 Anti-Defection Law, which defined three grounds of disqualification of MLAs — giving up party membership; going against party whip; and abstaining from voting.Resignation as MLA was not one of the conditions. Exploiting this loophole, the 17 rebel MLAs in Karnataka resigned, their act aimed at ending the majority of the ruling coalition and, at the same time, avoiding disqualification. However, the Speaker refused to accept the resignations and declared them disqualified. This was possible as the legislation empowers the presiding officer of the House (i.e. the Speaker) to decide on complaints of defection under no time constraint.The law originally protected the Speaker’s decision from judicial review. However, this safeguard was struck down inKihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu and Others(1992).While the SC upheld the Speaker’s discretionary power, it underscored that the Speaker functioned as a tribunal under the anti-defection law, thereby making her/his decisions subject to judicial review. InShrimanth Balasaheb Patel & Ors vs Speaker Karnataka Legislative Assembly & Ors(2019), where the three-judge SC bench upheld the then Karnataka Speaker’s decision of disqualification of the 17 rebel MLAs. However, it struck down his ban on the MLAs from contesting elections till 2023, negating the only possible permanent solution to the problem. The Supreme Court played the role of a neutral umpire in this political slugfest. The Anti-Defection Law provided a safeguard for defections made on genuine ideological differences. The 91st Constitutional Amendment introduced in 2003 deleted the provision allowing split. The 91st Amendment also barred the appointment of defectors as Ministers until their disqualification period is over or they are re-elected, whichever is earlier.The main issue is that the defectors treat disqualification as a mere detour, before they return to the House or government by re-contesting. This can only be stopped by extending the disqualification period from re-contesting and appointment to Chairmanships/Ministries to at least six years. The minimum period limit of six years is needed to ensure that the defectors are not allowed to enter the election fray for least one election cycle, which is five years.Q.What is the main loophole of the current Anti-Defection Law as per the author?

View answer

The phenomenon of defections is not new to Indian politics. It has been plaguing the political landscape for over five decades. The recurrence of this evil phenomenon led to the 1985 Anti-Defection Law, which defined three grounds of disqualification of MLAs — giving up party membership; going against party whip; and abstaining from voting.Resignation as MLA was not one of the conditions. Exploiting this loophole, the 17 rebel MLAs in Karnataka resigned, their act aimed at ending the majority of the ruling coalition and, at the same time, avoiding disqualification. However, the Speaker refused to accept the resignations and declared them disqualified. This was possible as the legislation empowers the presiding officer of the House (i.e. the Speaker) to decide on complaints of defection under no time constraint.The law originally protected the Speaker’s decision from judicial review. However, this safeguard was struck down inKihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu and Others(1992).While the SC upheld the Speaker’s discretionary power, it underscored that the Speaker functioned as a tribunal under the anti-defection law, thereby making her/his decisions subject to judicial review. InShrimanth Balasaheb Patel & Ors vs Speaker Karnataka Legislative Assembly & Ors(2019), where the three-judge SC bench upheld the then Karnataka Speaker’s decision of disqualification of the 17 rebel MLAs. However, it struck down his ban on the MLAs from contesting elections till 2023, negating the only possible permanent solution to the problem. The Supreme Court played the role of a neutral umpire in this political slugfest. The Anti-Defection Law provided a safeguard for defections made on genuine ideological differences. The 91st Constitutional Amendment introduced in 2003 deleted the provision allowing split. The 91st Amendment also barred the appointment of defectors as Ministers until their disqualification period is over or they are re-elected, whichever is earlier.The main issue is that the defectors treat disqualification as a mere detour, before they return to the House or government by re-contesting. This can only be stopped by extending the disqualification period from re-contesting and appointment to Chairmanships/Ministries to at least six years. The minimum period limit of six years is needed to ensure that the defectors are not allowed to enter the election fray for least one election cycle, which is five years.Q.What is the role of the Supreme Court in matters of Anti—Defection cases?

View answer

The phenomenon of defections is not new to Indian politics. It has been plaguing the political landscape for over five decades. The recurrence of this evil phenomenon led to the 1985 Anti-Defection Law, which defined three grounds of disqualification of MLAs — giving up party membership; going against party whip; and abstaining from voting.Resignation as MLA was not one of the conditions. Exploiting this loophole, the 17 rebel MLAs in Karnataka resigned, their act aimed at ending the majority of the ruling coalition and, at the same time, avoiding disqualification. However, the Speaker refused to accept the resignations and declared them disqualified. This was possible as the legislation empowers the presiding officer of the House (i.e. the Speaker) to decide on complaints of defection under no time constraint.The law originally protected the Speaker’s decision from judicial review. However, this safeguard was struck down inKihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu and Others(1992).While the SC upheld the Speaker’s discretionary power, it underscored that the Speaker functioned as a tribunal under the anti-defection law, thereby making her/his decisions subject to judicial review. InShrimanth Balasaheb Patel & Ors vs Speaker Karnataka Legislative Assembly & Ors(2019), where the three-judge SC bench upheld the then Karnataka Speaker’s decision of disqualification of the 17 rebel MLAs. However, it struck down his ban on the MLAs from contesting elections till 2023, negating the only possible permanent solution to the problem. The Supreme Court played the role of a neutral umpire in this political slugfest. The Anti-Defection Law provided a safeguard for defections made on genuine ideological differences. The 91st Constitutional Amendment introduced in 2003 deleted the provision allowing split. The 91st Amendment also barred the appointment of defectors as Ministers until their disqualification period is over or they are re-elected, whichever is earlier.The main issue is that the defectors treat disqualification as a mere detour, before they return to the House or government by re-contesting. This can only be stopped by extending the disqualification period from re-contesting and appointment to Chairmanships/Ministries to at least six years. The minimum period limit of six years is needed to ensure that the defectors are not allowed to enter the election fray for least one election cycle, which is five years.Q.Which statement sums up the mood of the author regarding the state of Anti-Defection laws in the country?

View answer

Top Courses for CLATView all

Current Affairs: Daily, Weekly & Monthly

Legal Reasoning for CLAT

Lucent for GK

Crash Course for CLAT

CLAT Mock Test Series 2026

Top Courses for CLAT

View all

Match the following:I. Chief Election CommA. Elected by Rajya SabhaII. Lok Sabha SpeakerB. Appointed by PresidentIII. Dy Chairman, Rajya SabhaC. Elected by Lok SabhaA. I-A, II-B, III-Ca)I-A, II-B, III-Cb)I-B, II-C, III-Ac)I-C, II-B, III-Ad)I-C, II-A, III-BCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
Match the following:I. Chief Election CommA. Elected by Rajya SabhaII. Lok Sabha SpeakerB. Appointed by PresidentIII. Dy Chairman, Rajya SabhaC. Elected by Lok SabhaA. I-A, II-B, III-Ca)I-A, II-B, III-Cb)I-B, II-C, III-Ac)I-C, II-B, III-Ad)I-C, II-A, III-BCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Match the following:I. Chief Election CommA. Elected by Rajya SabhaII. Lok Sabha SpeakerB. Appointed by PresidentIII. Dy Chairman, Rajya SabhaC. Elected by Lok SabhaA. I-A, II-B, III-Ca)I-A, II-B, III-Cb)I-B, II-C, III-Ac)I-C, II-B, III-Ad)I-C, II-A, III-BCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Match the following:I. Chief Election CommA. Elected by Rajya SabhaII. Lok Sabha SpeakerB. Appointed by PresidentIII. Dy Chairman, Rajya SabhaC. Elected by Lok SabhaA. I-A, II-B, III-Ca)I-A, II-B, III-Cb)I-B, II-C, III-Ac)I-C, II-B, III-Ad)I-C, II-A, III-BCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Match the following:I. Chief Election CommA. Elected by Rajya SabhaII. Lok Sabha SpeakerB. Appointed by PresidentIII. Dy Chairman, Rajya SabhaC. Elected by Lok SabhaA. I-A, II-B, III-Ca)I-A, II-B, III-Cb)I-B, II-C, III-Ac)I-C, II-B, III-Ad)I-C, II-A, III-BCorrect answer is option 'B'. 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 Match the following:I. Chief Election CommA. Elected by Rajya SabhaII. Lok Sabha SpeakerB. Appointed by PresidentIII. Dy Chairman, Rajya SabhaC. Elected by Lok SabhaA. I-A, II-B, III-Ca)I-A, II-B, III-Cb)I-B, II-C, III-Ac)I-C, II-B, III-Ad)I-C, II-A, III-BCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Match the following:I. Chief Election CommA. Elected by Rajya SabhaII. Lok Sabha SpeakerB. Appointed by PresidentIII. Dy Chairman, Rajya SabhaC. Elected by Lok SabhaA. I-A, II-B, III-Ca)I-A, II-B, III-Cb)I-B, II-C, III-Ac)I-C, II-B, III-Ad)I-C, II-A, III-BCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Match the following:I. Chief Election CommA. Elected by Rajya SabhaII. Lok Sabha SpeakerB. Appointed by PresidentIII. Dy Chairman, Rajya SabhaC. Elected by Lok SabhaA. I-A, II-B, III-Ca)I-A, II-B, III-Cb)I-B, II-C, III-Ac)I-C, II-B, III-Ad)I-C, II-A, III-BCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Match the following:I. Chief Election CommA. Elected by Rajya SabhaII. Lok Sabha SpeakerB. Appointed by PresidentIII. Dy Chairman, Rajya SabhaC. Elected by Lok SabhaA. I-A, II-B, III-Ca)I-A, II-B, III-Cb)I-B, II-C, III-Ac)I-C, II-B, III-Ad)I-C, II-A, III-BCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Match the following:I. Chief Election CommA. Elected by Rajya SabhaII. Lok Sabha SpeakerB. Appointed by PresidentIII. Dy Chairman, Rajya SabhaC. Elected by Lok SabhaA. I-A, II-B, III-Ca)I-A, II-B, III-Cb)I-B, II-C, III-Ac)I-C, II-B, III-Ad)I-C, II-A, III-BCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.

Explore Courses for CLAT exam