Judiciary Exams Exam  >  Judiciary Exams Tests  >  Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Judiciary Exams MCQ

Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Judiciary Exams MCQ


Test Description

20 Questions MCQ Test - Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh for Judiciary Exams 2024 is part of Judiciary Exams preparation. The Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh questions and answers have been prepared according to the Judiciary Exams exam syllabus.The Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh MCQs are made for Judiciary Exams 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, notes, meanings, examples, exercises, MCQs and online tests for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh below.
Solutions of Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh questions in English are available as part of our course for Judiciary Exams & Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh solutions in Hindi for Judiciary Exams course. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Judiciary Exams Exam by signing up for free. Attempt Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh | 20 questions in 20 minutes | Mock test for Judiciary Exams preparation | Free important questions MCQ to study for Judiciary Exams Exam | Download free PDF with solutions
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 1

What was the central issue in the case of Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka that led to her petitioning the Supreme Court under Article 32?

Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 1
The central issue in the case of Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka was the unequal treatment of Karnataka and non-Karnataka students in terms of admission conditions and fees. This discrepancy led to Mohini Jain filing a petition with the Supreme Court under Article 32 to challenge the notification issued by the Karnataka Government and seek admission under the same terms as Karnataka students admitted under "Government Seats."
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 2

In the context of Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka, which constitutional rights were highlighted by the Supreme Court as being interrelated and crucial for the illiterate majority?

Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 2
The Supreme Court highlighted the interrelation between the right to education outlined in Article 41 and the right to live with dignity as encompassed in Article 21. It emphasized that the right to education directly derives from the right to life and is crucial for realizing the fundamental rights in the Constitution for the illiterate majority.
1 Crore+ students have signed up on EduRev. Have you? Download the App
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 3

What was the conclusion reached by the Court in Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka regarding the notification issued by the Karnataka Government?

Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 3
The Court concluded that the notification issued by the Karnataka Government exceeded its legal authority, leading to Mohini's successful appeal. This decision was significant in ensuring equal treatment and access to education for students, highlighting the importance of upholding constitutional rights.
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 4
How did private institutions react to the judgment in Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka?
Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 4
Private institutions reacted to the judgment in Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka by expressing concerns that following the court's decision could potentially force them to shut down. This reaction reflects the challenges and implications that legal decisions can have on various stakeholders within the education sector.
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 5
What did the Supreme Court emphasize in the case of M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors following the Unni Krishnan decision?
Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 5
The Supreme Court emphasized the independence of provisions in both Part III and Part IV of the Constitution in the case of M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors following the Unni Krishnan decision. This highlights the equal importance and interdependence of both sets of provisions, rejecting the idea that rights under Part III take precedence over the moral claims in Part IV.
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 6
What was the significance of the ruling in the Unni Krishnan case according to subsequent judgments?
Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 6
The significance of the ruling in the Unni Krishnan case, according to subsequent judgments, was that it declared Article 45 as a fundamental right even without explicit mention in Part III. This decision underscored that a right does not need to be expressly stated in Part III to be considered a fundamental right, emphasizing the broader implications and interpretations of constitutional rights.
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 7
How did the Supreme Court view the relationship between provisions in Part III and Part IV of the Constitution in the context of fundamental rights?
Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 7
The Supreme Court viewed the provisions in Part III and Part IV of the Constitution as equally important and interdependent. It rejected the notion that rights under Part III should take precedence over the moral claims in Part IV, highlighting the complementary nature of both sets of provisions and emphasizing their mutual significance in the legal framework.
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 8
In the context of constitutional rights, what did the ruling in M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors underscore about the nature of fundamental rights?
Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 8
The ruling in M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors underscored that fundamental rights can be expanded beyond explicit mention in Part III. This decision emphasized the dynamic and evolving nature of fundamental rights, indicating that they are not confined solely to those explicitly stated in the Constitution but can be interpreted and extended based on legal precedents and evolving societal needs.
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 9
According to the Indian Constitution, which of the following is recognized as a fundamental right for citizens?
Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 9
In the Indian Constitution, the right to pursue a degree in fields like medicine and engineering is recognized as a fundamental right for citizens. This right allows individuals to choose their desired field of study and pursue education in various disciplines, promoting personal growth and professional development.
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 10
According to the petitioners in the Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh case, why did they argue that the state has a responsibility to provide education to all citizens?
Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 10
The petitioners in the Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh case argued that the state has a responsibility to provide education to all citizens, irrespective of their social or financial status. This stance emphasizes the importance of ensuring equal access to education for all individuals, regardless of their background or economic standing, to promote a more inclusive and equitable society.
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 11
What was the significance of referencing the Mohini Jain case in the arguments presented by the petitioners in the Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh case?
Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 11
The petitioners referenced the Mohini Jain case to support their stance in expanding the interpretation of the right to education. This reference was crucial in their argument to underscore the broader implications and applications of the right to education beyond the specific circumstances of the cases involved, thereby strengthening their position on the importance of education accessibility.
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 12
How did the petitioners view the establishment of an educational institution in the context of the Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh case?
Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 12
According to the petitioners in the Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh case, establishing an educational institution was viewed as analogous to launching a business venture. They likened the process of setting up and managing educational institutions to entrepreneurial activities, whether for profit or not, highlighting the complexities and considerations involved in managing educational enterprises effectively.
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 13
What autonomy did the petitioners believe schools should have regarding funding and fee structures in the Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh case?
Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 13
The petitioners believed that schools should have the autonomy to set fees and receive funding independently from students in the Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh case. This autonomy was seen as essential for schools to manage their financial affairs effectively and make decisions regarding fee structures based on their specific needs and operational requirements, promoting financial sustainability and independence.
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 14
What was the central argument presented by the respondents in the Unni Krishnan Case regarding the state's responsibility for education?
Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 14
The central argument presented by the respondents in the Unni Krishnan Case was that the state was obligated to provide free and mandatory education exclusively to children aged 14 and below. This argument raised concerns about the feasibility and affordability of extending this responsibility to higher education levels.
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 15
What specific constitutional article did the respondents refer to in their argument about the state's educational obligations?
Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 15
In their argument, the respondents in the Unni Krishnan Case referred to Article 45 of the Constitution, emphasizing that the state's obligation for free and compulsory education was limited to children aged 14 and below. Article 45 pertains to the provision of early childhood care and education for children below the age of six years.
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 16
What major concern did the respondents raise regarding the extension of the state's educational responsibilities to higher education levels?
Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 16
The respondents in the Unni Krishnan Case expressed concerns about the significantly higher costs associated with tertiary education in comparison to primary education. This financial burden was highlighted as a key factor in questioning the extension of the state's responsibility to provide free and mandatory education beyond the primary level.
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 17
How did the respondents justify their position on limiting the state's educational obligations to children aged 14 and below?
Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 17
The respondents justified their position on confining the state's educational obligations to children aged 14 and below by invoking constitutional provisions. They argued that the state's responsibility for free and compulsory education was explicitly outlined in the Constitution and pertained specifically to the younger age group, thus limiting the scope of state intervention in education.
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 18
According to the Supreme Court's rulings in the case of Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh, which of the following statements is true regarding the right to education?
Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 18
As per the Supreme Court's rulings in the case of Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh, the right to education beyond the age of fourteen is dependent on the state's economic capacity and development, as outlined in Article 41. This highlights the importance of considering economic factors in providing education beyond a certain age, emphasizing the role of the state in facilitating educational opportunities based on economic resources.
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 19
What constitutional provision was emphasized by the Supreme Court in the context of the right to basic education in the Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh case?
Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 19
In the case of Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh, the Supreme Court emphasized Article 45 in the context of the right to basic education. Article 45 aims to provide free and compulsory education for all children under 14 within ten years of the Constitution's commencement. This underscores the constitutional directive to ensure educational opportunities for young children as a fundamental aspect of the right to education.
Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 20
How did the Supreme Court interpret the right to education for children under 14 years of age in the Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh case?
Detailed Solution for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh - Question 20
In the Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh case, the Supreme Court recognized that the non-justiciable right to education for children under 14 had become enforceable after 44 years of the Constitution's enactment. This decision marked an important development in the enforceability of educational rights for young children, emphasizing the evolving nature of constitutional interpretations over time.
Information about Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh Page
In this test you can find the Exam questions for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh solved & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving Questions and answers for Test: Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh, EduRev gives you an ample number of Online tests for practice

Top Courses for Judiciary Exams

Download as PDF

Top Courses for Judiciary Exams