The Supreme Court of India Has Struck Down the Constitution (Ninety Ninth Amendment) Act, 2014 as Unconstitutional. It is Related To­ - Legal Reasoning

Advertisements
Advertisements
MCQ

Choose the most appropriate option:

The Supreme Court of India has struck down the Constitution (Ninety-ninth Amendment) Act, 2014 as unconstitutional. It is related to­

Options

  • Land Exchange between India and Bangladesh

  • National Judicial Appointment Commission

  • Religious Rights

  • Jallikattu (Bull Fighting)

Advertisements

Solution

National Judicial Appointment Commission

Concept: Indian Constitution (Entrance Exams)
  Is there an error in this question or solution?
2015-2016 (May) Set 1

RELATED QUESTIONS

One of the reasons for recusal of a Judge is that litigants/the public might entertain a reasonable apprehension about his impartiality. As Lord Chief Justice Hewart said: "It is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done." And therefore, in order to uphold the credibility of the integrity institution, Judge recuses from hearing the case. A Judge of the Supreme Court or the High Court, while assuming Office, takes an oath as prescribed under Schedule III to the Constitution of India, that: "… I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India as by law established, that I will uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India, that I will duly and faithfully and to the best of my ability, knowledge and judgment perform the duties of my office without fear or favour, affection or ill-will and that I will uphold the Constitution and the laws." Called upon to discharge the duties of the Office without fear or favour, affection or ill-will, it is only desirable, if not proper, that a Judge, for any unavoidable reason like some pecuniary interest, affinity or adversity with the parties in the case, direct or indirect interest in the outcome of the litigation, family directly involved in litigation on the same issue elsewhere, the Judge being aware that he or someone in his immediate family has an interest, financial or otherwise that could have a substantial bearing as a consequence of the decision in the litigation, etc., to recuse himself from the adjudication of a particular matter. No doubt, these examples are not exhaustive. The simple question is, whether the adjudication by the Judge concerned, would cause reasonable doubt in the mind of a reasonably informed litigant and fair-minded public as to his impartiality. Being an institution whose hallmark is transparency, it is only proper that the Judge discharging high and noble duties, at least broadly indicate the reasons for recusing from the case so that the litigants or the well-meaning public may not entertain any misunderstanding. Once reasons for recusal are indicated, there will not be any room for attributing any motive for the recusal. To put it differently, it is part of his duty to be accountable to the Constitution by upholding it without fear or favour, affection or ill- will. Therefore, I am of the view that it is the constitutional duty, as reflected in one's oath, to be transparent and accountable, and hence, a Judge is required to indicate reasons for his recusal from a particular case.

Suppose a situation arises where a recusal by a Judge is used as a means to allow a party to choose its own bench, will it be axiomatic from the passage that such recusal is proper, morally or/and constitutionally?


The term of which of the following Lok Sabha was extended beyond the normal period of five years laid down in the Constitution?


Who called Indian constitution as Quasi-Federal?


Legal Principle: The doctrine of basic structure in Constitutional jurisprudence means that the Constitution of India has certain basic features that cannot be taken away through amendments by the Parliament. The power of judicial review is a part of the basic structure and it helps the constitutional Courts to determine whether an amendment is against the basic structure or not.

Fact Situation: Parliament proposes an amendment limit the power of appeal against conviction for the offence of Sedition, to be exercised only by the Supreme Court of India.

Which of the following statements is the most appropriate in relation to the legal principle stated above?


In which Constitutional Amendment Act seats of Lok Sabha were increased from 525 to 545?


Which act provided for the establishment of not only a Federal Public Service Commission but also a Provincial Public Service Commission and Joint Public Service Commission? 


From the constitution of which country, the procedure for amendment of the constitution has been borrowed by India?


Which of the following amendments, amended the preamble to the constitution of India 1950?


Which of the following Article lays down that no person shall be compelled to pay any taxes for the promotion or maintenance of any particular religion or religious denomination?


Who exercises the actual executive power under the parliamentary form of Government?


Which of the following provided the term of office of a member of the Rajya Sabha for 6 years?


The minimum number of judges to sit on the constitutional bench or a bench which gives its advisory opinion on a reference by the President must be


Who among the following does not hold his/her office at the pleasure of the President of India?


Which of the following Article of the constitution dealt with the establishment of the Nagar Panchayats, Municipal councils and Municipal corporations?


Which of the following is not a fundamental right in India?


The President of India is elected by an electoral college consisting of


The following questions consist of two statements, one labeled as ‘Assertion’ (A) and other as ‘Reason’ (R). You are to examine these two statements carefully and select the correct answers.

Assertion (A): The state shall not make any law, which takes away or abridges the rights conferred by Part III (Fundamental Rights) and any law made in contravention of this clause shall, to the extent of the contravention, be void.

Reason (R): The fundamental rights are the rights reserved by the people and for this reason, they are eternal and sacrosanct.


Match schedule I and II and choose the appropriate answer.

  Schedule I   Schedule II
i. Republic 1. Head of the state is elected by the people
ii. Secular 2. State does not recognize any religion as religion of the state
iii. Democracy   3. The government which gets authority from the will of the people

Who is the present Chief Justice of Supreme Court of India?


The following question consists of two statements one labelled as ‘Assertion’ (A) and other as ‘Reason’ (R). You are to examine these two statements carefully and select the correct answer.

Assertion (A): The State shall not make any law, which takes away or abridges the rights conferred by Part-III (Fundamental Rights) and any law made in contravention of this clause shell, to the extent of the contravention, be void.

Reason (R): The Fundamental Rights are the rights reserved by the people and for this reason, they are eternal and sacrosanct.


Share
Notifications



      Forgot password?
Use app×