Current Affairs
Question Bank
Every CA question in one place. Filter by subject, month, or exam track. Solutions inline.
Subject
Month
42 questions · page 1 of 2
- Polity & Governance30 Apr 2026
Consider the following statements about the constitutional and judicial framework for Backward Classes welfare in India: 1. Article 15(4) and Article 16(4) of the Constitution authorise special provisions for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes. 2. The 102nd Constitutional Amendment, 2018 inserted Article 338-B and gave the National Commission for Backward Classes constitutional status. 3. The 105th Constitutional Amendment, 2021 restored states' power to maintain their own state lists of Other Backward Classes. 4. The Indra Sawhney judgment (1992) abolished the concept of the 'creamy layer' for Other Backward Classes reservations. How many of the above statements are correct?
- A.Only three
- B.All four
- C.Only two
- D.Only one
Show solution
Answer: A. Only three
**Statement 1** is correct — Articles 15(4) and 16(4). **Statement 2** is correct — 102nd Amendment, 2018; Article 338-B; NCBC constitutional status. **Statement 3** is correct — 105th Amendment, 2021 restored state OBC-list power after a 2021 SC judgment had affirmed only Centre had this power. **Statement 4 is incorrect** — Indra Sawhney **introduced** (not abolished) the **'creamy layer' exclusion** for OBC reservation, along with the 50% ceiling. Hence three statements are correct.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance30 Apr 2026
Consider the following pairs about India's Backward Classes (BC) framework: 1. Mandal Commission — 1979, chaired by B. P. Mandal 2. Indra Sawhney v UoI (1992) — Capped total reservations at 50% and introduced 'creamy layer' rule 3. 102nd Constitutional Amendment, 2018 — Gave NCBC constitutional status 4. Article 340 — Authorises Parliament to enact reservation laws for SCs Which of the above pairs is/are correctly matched?
- A.1, 2 and 3 only
- B.1, 2, 3 and 4
- C.2 and 3 only
- D.1 and 4 only
Show solution
Answer: A. 1, 2 and 3 only
**Pair 1** is correct — Mandal Commission, 1979, B. P. Mandal. **Pair 2** is correct — Indra Sawhney 1992: 50% cap + creamy layer rule. **Pair 3** is correct — 102nd Amendment, 2018, gave NCBC constitutional status. **Pair 4 is incorrect** — **Article 340** empowers the **President** to appoint a Commission to investigate the conditions of socially and educationally backward classes — it does **not** authorise Parliament to enact SC reservation laws (which flows from Articles 15(4), 16(4), 17, etc., and the SC/ST Acts). Hence 1, 2 and 3 only are correctly matched.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance30 Apr 2026
Section 408 of the Companies Act, 2013 deals with the constitution of which body?
- A.National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT)
- B.Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO)
- C.Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI)
- D.Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT)
Show solution
Answer: A. National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT)
**Section 408** establishes the **NCLT**. **SFIO** is constituted under Section 211. **IBBI** is established under Section 188 of the IBC, 2016. **SAT** is constituted under the SEBI Act, 1992 (Section 15K).
Read source story → - Polity & Governance30 Apr 2026
On 29 April 2026, the Centre notified the appointment of which former judge as President of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT)?
- A.Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal — former Punjab & Haryana High Court judge
- B.Justice Ramalingam Sudhakar — former Manipur High Court Chief Justice
- C.Justice Ashok Bhushan — former Supreme Court judge
- D.Justice Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya — former Supreme Court judge
Show solution
Answer: A. Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal — former Punjab & Haryana High Court judge
**Justice (retd) Anupinder Singh Grewal**, former judge of the **Punjab & Haryana High Court**, was notified as NCLT President on 29 April 2026 by the ACC for a 5-year term or until age 67. **Justice Ramalingam Sudhakar** was the **outgoing predecessor**. **Justice Ashok Bhushan** is a former NCLAT Chairperson. **Justice Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya** was the **first NCLAT Chairperson** — both are real distractors but not the new NCLT President.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance30 Apr 2026
Which Constitutional Amendment Act gave constitutional status to Panchayati Raj Institutions and is commemorated on National Panchayati Raj Day every 24 April?
- A.73rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992
- B.74th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992
- C.86th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2002
- D.42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976
Show solution
Answer: A. 73rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992
The **73rd CAA, 1992** inserted Part IX (Articles 243-243-O) and the 11th Schedule, giving constitutional status to PRIs; it came into force on **24 April 1993** — hence NPRD on 24 April. **74th CAA** dealt with urban local bodies (Municipalities, Part IX-A). **86th CAA** added Article 21A (Right to Education). **42nd CAA, 1976** (the 'Mini-Constitution') added DPSP Articles 39A, 43A and Fundamental Duties — but did not constitutionalise panchayats.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance29 Apr 2026
Which of the following Sikkim 'firsts' are correctly matched with their year? 1. First state to ban plastic bags — 1998 2. First fully organic state — 2016 3. Khangchendzonga National Park inscribed as UNESCO World Heritage Site — 2014 4. Sikkim University established — 2007
- A.1 and 2 only
- B.1, 2 and 4 only
- C.1 and 4 only
- D.2, 3 and 4 only
Show solution
Answer: B. 1, 2 and 4 only
Pair 1 is correct — Sikkim became India's **first state to ban plastic bags in 1998**. Pair 2 is correct — declared **first fully organic state in 2016**. Pair 3 is **incorrect** — **Khangchendzonga National Park** was inscribed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site (mixed natural-cultural) in **2016**, not 2014. Pair 4 is correct — **Sikkim University** was established as a central university in **2007**.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance29 Apr 2026
Match the following correctly: 1. 35th Constitutional Amendment (1974) — a. Special provision protecting Sikkim's pre-merger laws and identity 2. 36th Constitutional Amendment (1975) — b. Made Sikkim an 'associate state' of India 3. Article 371F — c. Conferred full statehood on Sikkim Select the correct option:
- A.1-a, 2-b, 3-c
- B.1-b, 2-c, 3-a
- C.1-c, 2-a, 3-b
- D.1-b, 2-a, 3-c
Show solution
Answer: B. 1-b, 2-c, 3-a
**35th Amendment (1974)** made Sikkim an **'associate state'** of India with representation in Parliament — predecessor framework (1-b). **36th Amendment (1975)** conferred **full statehood** on Sikkim, making it the 22nd state effective 16 May 1975 (2-c). **Article 371F** was inserted by the 36th Amendment as a **special provision protecting Sikkim's pre-merger laws** (Sikkim Subject Act 1961, Sikkim Income Tax Manual 1948) and ensuring Sikkimese representation and identity (3-a).
Read source story → - Polity & Governance29 Apr 2026
Consider the following statements about Sikkim's path to statehood: 1. The Kingdom of Sikkim was established in 1642 with Phuntsog Namgyal as the first Chogyal. 2. The Treaty of Tumlong (1861) made Sikkim a British protectorate. 3. The 1950 Indo-Sikkim Treaty made Sikkim a fully sovereign state. 4. Sikkim became India's 22nd state on 16 May 1975 via the 36th Constitutional Amendment. Which of the statements given above are correct?
- A.1, 2 and 4 only
- B.1, 3 and 4 only
- C.2, 3 and 4 only
- D.1, 2, 3 and 4
Show solution
Answer: A. 1, 2 and 4 only
Statement 1 is correct — **Phuntsog Namgyal** was the **first Chogyal** consecrated at Yuksom in **1642**. Statement 2 is correct — the **Treaty of Tumlong, 1861** made Sikkim a **British protectorate**. Statement 3 is **incorrect** — the **1950 Indo-Sikkim Treaty** made Sikkim an **Indian protectorate** (NOT sovereign), with India controlling defence, external affairs, and strategic communications. Statement 4 is correct — Sikkim became the **22nd state on 16 May 1975** via the **36th Constitutional Amendment**.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance29 Apr 2026
Which constitutional provisions provide protection in arrest, and what is the D K Basu (1996) ruling?
- A.Only Article 14 applies
- B.Article 22 provides procedural safeguards (right to know grounds; consult legal practitioner; production before nearest magistrate within 24 hours); Articles 21 and 14 add substantive protections; D K Basu vs State of West Bengal (1996) laid down 11 binding guidelines for police regarding arrest and detention to prevent custodial torture, including arrest memo, identity recording, medical examination, and intimation to family
- C.Article 19 alone covers arrest
- D.No constitutional safeguards exist
Show solution
Answer: B. Article 22 provides procedural safeguards (right to know grounds; consult legal practitioner; production before nearest magistrate within 24 hours); Articles 21 and 14 add substantive protections; D K Basu vs State of West Bengal (1996) laid down 11 binding guidelines for police regarding arrest and detention to prevent custodial torture, including arrest memo, identity recording, medical examination, and intimation to family
**Article 22** of the Constitution provides procedural safeguards in arrest: right to be informed of grounds, right to consult legal practitioner, and production before nearest magistrate within 24 hours (excluding journey time). **Article 21** provides substantive due-process protection (right to life and personal liberty), and **Article 14** provides equality before law. The Supreme Court's landmark ruling in **D K Basu vs State of West Bengal (1996)** laid down **11 binding guidelines** for police arrests and detentions to prevent custodial abuse — including arrest memo, identity recording, medical examination, and intimation to family. UAPA's **Section 43D(5)** further raises the bar for bail.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance29 Apr 2026
What is the constitutional and statutory framework for the right to education in India?
- A.Only Directive Principle Article 45 applies
- B.Constitutional foundation: Article 21A (inserted by 86th Constitutional Amendment Act 2002, effective 1 April 2010) makes free and compulsory education a fundamental right for children aged 6-14; Article 45 (DPSP, amended 2002) directs State to provide early childhood care below 6; Article 51A(k) makes it a fundamental duty of parents to provide education; statutory operationalisation through RTE Act 2009 (effective 1 April 2010); Section 12(1)(c) mandates 25% quota in private unaided schools; Article 30 exempts unaided minority schools (per Pramati 2014)
- C.Only the RTE Act 2009 applies; no constitutional basis
- D.Education is a State subject only
Show solution
Answer: B. Constitutional foundation: Article 21A (inserted by 86th Constitutional Amendment Act 2002, effective 1 April 2010) makes free and compulsory education a fundamental right for children aged 6-14; Article 45 (DPSP, amended 2002) directs State to provide early childhood care below 6; Article 51A(k) makes it a fundamental duty of parents to provide education; statutory operationalisation through RTE Act 2009 (effective 1 April 2010); Section 12(1)(c) mandates 25% quota in private unaided schools; Article 30 exempts unaided minority schools (per Pramati 2014)
The right to education in India has a **layered constitutional and statutory architecture**: **Article 21A** (inserted by 86th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2002; effective 1 April 2010) makes free and compulsory education a **fundamental right for children aged 6-14**. **Article 45** (DPSP) was amended to direct the State to provide early childhood care for children **below 6**. **Article 51A(k)** makes it a **fundamental duty of parents** to provide educational opportunities to children aged 6-14. The **RTE Act 2009** (effective 1 April 2010) operationalises Article 21A, with **Section 12(1)(c)** mandating the **25% quota** in private unaided schools. **Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust (2014)** held RTE inapplicable to **unaided minority schools** under **Article 30**.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance28 Apr 2026
What is Ladakh's status as a Union Territory in terms of legislature, and which constitutional provision governs its administration?
- A.Has a full legislative assembly under Article 239A
- B.Ladakh has NO legislative assembly; it is administered through the Lieutenant Governor under Article 239 of the Constitution; Article 239A (legislature for UTs) applies to Puducherry and J&K but NOT Ladakh
- C.Has a Council of Ministers but no LG
- D.Has dual administration with Centre + State both involved
Show solution
Answer: B. Ladakh has NO legislative assembly; it is administered through the Lieutenant Governor under Article 239 of the Constitution; Article 239A (legislature for UTs) applies to Puducherry and J&K but NOT Ladakh
**Ladakh has no legislative assembly** — it is administered directly through the **Lieutenant Governor under Article 239** of the Constitution. **Article 239A** provides for legislatures in certain UTs, but applies to **Puducherry and J&K only**, not Ladakh. **LAHDC Leh** (Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council Leh, established 1995) and **LAHDC Kargil** (established 2003) provide some local democratic representation. Civil-society groups continue to demand inclusion under the **Sixth Schedule** of the Constitution to protect tribal rights and identity.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance28 Apr 2026
Who is currently the Lieutenant Governor of Ladakh as of April 2026, and who was his immediate predecessor?
- A.Radha Krishna Mathur, succeeding B D Mishra
- B.Vinai Kumar Saxena (since 13 March 2026, previously LG of Delhi); succeeded Kavinder Gupta who resigned on 5 March 2026 after just 9 months in office
- C.Manoj Sinha, succeeding Mathur
- D.B D Mishra, succeeding Saxena
Show solution
Answer: B. Vinai Kumar Saxena (since 13 March 2026, previously LG of Delhi); succeeded Kavinder Gupta who resigned on 5 March 2026 after just 9 months in office
**Vinai Kumar Saxena** is the current Lieutenant Governor of Ladakh — he is the **4th LG**, having taken oath on **13 March 2026** after previously serving as the **LG of Delhi**. He succeeded **Kavinder Gupta** (the 3rd LG) who resigned on **5 March 2026** after just **nine months in office** (he had been appointed on 14 July 2025) and was subsequently appointed as **Governor of Himachal Pradesh in 2026**. The earlier LGs were Radha Krishna Mathur (1st, 2019-2023) and Brigadier (Dr) B D Mishra (2nd, 2023-2025).
Read source story → - Polity & Governance28 Apr 2026
When did Ladakh become a Union Territory, and under which legislation?
- A.1 January 2020 under Constitution Amendment Act
- B.31 October 2019 under the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 — following the abrogation of Article 370 on 5 August 2019
- C.15 August 1947 under Independence Act
- D.26 January 1950 under Constitution
Show solution
Answer: B. 31 October 2019 under the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 — following the abrogation of Article 370 on 5 August 2019
**Ladakh became a Union Territory on 31 October 2019** under the **Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019**. The Act was passed by Parliament on **5 August 2019**, the same day as the **abrogation of Article 370** of the Constitution that had given special status to J&K. The Act bifurcated the erstwhile state of J&K into two UTs: **Jammu & Kashmir (with legislature)** and **Ladakh (without legislature)**.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance28 Apr 2026
Which five new districts of Ladakh were approved by LG Vinai Kumar Saxena on 27 April 2026?
- A.Leh, Kargil, Nubra, Zanskar, Suru
- B.Nubra, Sham, Changthang, Zanskar, and Drass — taking the total from 2 (Leh + Kargil) to 7
- C.Anantnag, Pulwama, Sopore, Kupwara, Bandipore
- D.Hunder, Pangong, Tso Kar, Hanle, Lamayuru
Show solution
Answer: B. Nubra, Sham, Changthang, Zanskar, and Drass — taking the total from 2 (Leh + Kargil) to 7
**Ladakh Lieutenant Governor Vinai Kumar Saxena** approved the creation of **five new districts — Nubra, Sham, Changthang, Zanskar, and Drass** — on **27 April 2026**, taking the total from **2 (Leh and Kargil) to 7**. The Ministry of Home Affairs had approved the formation in **August 2024** under Union HM Amit Shah. On **28 April 2026**, the LG also approved appointments of Deputy Commissioners and Superintendents of Police for all five new districts.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance28 Apr 2026
Which 2024 state legislation became the first in independent India to enact a Uniform Civil Code, requiring registration of live-in relationships?
- A.Goa UCC
- B.Uttarakhand Uniform Civil Code (UCC), 2024 — passed by the Uttarakhand Legislative Assembly in February 2024
- C.Tamil Nadu Civil Code
- D.Maharashtra UCC
Show solution
Answer: B. Uttarakhand Uniform Civil Code (UCC), 2024 — passed by the Uttarakhand Legislative Assembly in February 2024
The **Uttarakhand Uniform Civil Code (UCC), 2024** is the first state-level UCC in independent India, passed by the Uttarakhand Legislative Assembly in **February 2024**. It mandates **registration of live-in relationships**, provides equal inheritance rights, and unifies marriage/divorce rules across communities. Goa has had a Portuguese-era civil code since 1867 (Portuguese Civil Code, 1867), but Uttarakhand is the first state to enact a fresh UCC under the Indian Constitution.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance28 Apr 2026
Under which statute are live-in relationships covered for civil protection in India?
- A.The Hindu Marriage Act 1955 alone
- B.The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — Section 2(f) defines 'domestic relationship' to include relationships 'in the nature of marriage'
- C.Indian Evidence Act 1872
- D.Special Marriage Act 1954
Show solution
Answer: B. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — Section 2(f) defines 'domestic relationship' to include relationships 'in the nature of marriage'
Live-in relationships are covered for civil protections under the **Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA), 2005**. **Section 2(f)** of PWDVA defines 'domestic relationship' to include relationships **'in the nature of marriage'** — interpreted by the Supreme Court in **D Velusamy v D Patchaiammal (2010)** through five conditions, and refined further in **Indra Sarma v V K V Sarma (2013)** with an eight-feature test. PWDVA does NOT criminalise the relationship itself; it provides civil remedies.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance28 Apr 2026
Although the Supreme Court declined criminal prosecution, what relief did it permit for the child born from the live-in relationship?
- A.Custody only to the father
- B.Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC (now Section 144 BNSS, 2023 from 1 July 2024) — child rights protected regardless of parents' relationship status
- C.Adoption by the state
- D.No relief permitted
Show solution
Answer: B. Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC (now Section 144 BNSS, 2023 from 1 July 2024) — child rights protected regardless of parents' relationship status
The court clarified that the woman could seek **maintenance for the 8-year-old child** born from the relationship. **Section 125 of the CrPC (1973)** — now **Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023** from **1 July 2024** — provides for maintenance of children (legitimate or illegitimate) who are unable to maintain themselves. The bench held that **child rights remain protected regardless of the nature of the parents' relationship**.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance28 Apr 2026
Under which provision of the Domestic Violence Act 2005 are live-in relationships covered?
- A.Section 1(a) — definitions
- B.Section 2(f) — defines 'domestic relationship' to include those 'in the nature of marriage'
- C.Section 5(c) — protection orders
- D.Section 12(d) — residence orders
Show solution
Answer: B. Section 2(f) — defines 'domestic relationship' to include those 'in the nature of marriage'
**Section 2(f)** of the **Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005** defines 'domestic relationship' to include those 'in the nature of marriage'. The Supreme Court in **D Velusamy v D Patchaiammal (2010)** laid down five conditions for what qualifies as 'in the nature of marriage', refined further in **Indra Sarma v V K V Sarma (2013)** with an eight-feature test.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance27 Apr 2026
Ladakh is India's largest Union Territory by area at 86,904 sq km. What is its approximate population per the 2011 Census?
- A.About 2.74 lakh
- B.About 27 lakh
- C.About 1 crore
- D.About 50,000
Show solution
Answer: A. About 2.74 lakh
Ladakh has a population of about **2.74 lakh** as per the **2011 Census** — making it one of India's most thinly populated regions. Its area of **86,904 sq km** makes it India's largest Union Territory by area, far exceeding all other UTs combined. The sparse population and difficult terrain underpin the rationale for the new districts.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance27 Apr 2026
Ladakh became a separate Union Territory under which Act and on which date?
- A.State Reorganisation Act 1956; 1 November 1956
- B.J&K Reorganisation Act 2019; 31 October 2019
- C.Constitution (One Hundred and First Amendment) Act 2016; 1 July 2017
- D.North-Eastern Areas (Reorganisation) Act 1971; 21 January 1972
Show solution
Answer: B. J&K Reorganisation Act 2019; 31 October 2019
Ladakh became a separate UT on **31 October 2019** under the **Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act 2019**, which bifurcated the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir into two UTs — **J&K (with legislature)** and **Ladakh (without legislature)**. Article 370 had been rendered inoperative on 5 August 2019 through Presidential Orders.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance27 Apr 2026
Which of the five new Ladakh districts provides access to the Siachen Glacier — the highest battlefield in the world?
- A.Drass
- B.Zanskar
- C.Nubra
- D.Sham
Show solution
Answer: C. Nubra
**Nubra** — located north of Leh at the confluence of the **Shyok and Nubra rivers** — provides the access route to the **Siachen Glacier**, the world's highest battlefield (occupied by India under Operation Meghdoot since 1984). Drass is in the Kargil region (1999 Kargil War site); Changthang hosts Pangong Tso; Zanskar is a remote sub-region of Kargil.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance27 Apr 2026
Following the recent decision, how many districts does the Union Territory of Ladakh have, and which were the original two?
- A.5 districts; original were Nubra and Drass
- B.7 districts; original were Leh and Kargil
- C.9 districts; original were Leh and Zanskar
- D.3 districts; original were Leh and Kargil
Show solution
Answer: B. 7 districts; original were Leh and Kargil
Ladakh now has **7 districts** in total. The original two were **Leh** and **Kargil**. The five newly notified districts are **Nubra, Sham, Changthang, Zanskar, and Drass**, approved by LG **Vinai Kumar Saxena** with prior MHA in-principle approval received in **August 2024**.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance27 Apr 2026
India's primary anti-drug legislation — under which the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) was constituted — is:
- A.Indian Penal Code, 1860
- B.Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985
- C.Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002
- D.Disaster Management Act, 2005
Show solution
Answer: B. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985
The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985 is India's primary anti-drug legislation. It prohibits production, manufacture, sale, transport, possession of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances except for medical or scientific purposes. The Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB), established in 1986 under Ministry of Home Affairs, is the apex enforcement agency. PIT-NDPS Act 1988 is a complementary preventive-detention law.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance27 Apr 2026
In the landmark Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992) case, the Supreme Court held that:
- A.The Tenth Schedule is unconstitutional
- B.The Speaker's decision under the Tenth Schedule is final and not subject to judicial review
- C.The Tenth Schedule is constitutional, but the Speaker's decision is subject to judicial review
- D.Only the Election Commission can decide disqualification
Show solution
Answer: C. The Tenth Schedule is constitutional, but the Speaker's decision is subject to judicial review
In Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992), a Constitution Bench upheld the constitutional validity of the Tenth Schedule but STRUCK DOWN Paragraph 7 (which had attempted to bar judicial review). The Court held that the Speaker's decision under the Tenth Schedule IS SUBJECT TO JUDICIAL REVIEW — though only on limited grounds (mala fides, perversity, violation of constitutional mandates, and natural-justice violations). The Court also held that while deciding on disqualification, the Speaker acts as a TRIBUNAL.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance27 Apr 2026
Under the 'merger' provision of the Tenth Schedule, what proportion of members of the legislature party must agree for the merger to be valid (and thus avoid disqualification)?
- A.More than half (1/2)
- B.At least one-third (1/3)
- C.At least two-thirds (2/3)
- D.All members (unanimity)
Show solution
Answer: C. At least two-thirds (2/3)
Under the Tenth Schedule's merger exception, disqualification does not apply if a member's ORIGINAL POLITICAL PARTY merges with another party AND at least TWO-THIRDS (2/3) of the members of the LEGISLATURE PARTY agree to such merger. The earlier 'split' provision (since omitted by the 91st Amendment 2003) had allowed one-third (1/3) of members to defect — so be careful not to confuse the two.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance27 Apr 2026
The 91st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2003 made which key change to the Anti-Defection Law?
- A.Added the law for the first time
- B.Omitted the 'split' provision and retained only the 'merger' provision
- C.Removed the Speaker as the deciding authority
- D.Made disqualification petitions non-justiciable
Show solution
Answer: B. Omitted the 'split' provision and retained only the 'merger' provision
The 91st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2003 OMITTED the 'split' provision (which had earlier allowed one-third of legislature party members to defect without disqualification) and retained only the 'MERGER' provision (which requires at least two-thirds of legislature party members to agree to a merger). It also limited the size of Council of Ministers to 15% of Lower House strength and added Articles 75(1B), 164(1B), and 361B. The Speaker remains the deciding authority (with judicial review). The law was originally added by the 52nd Amendment 1985, not 2003.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance27 Apr 2026
Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan (NMBA) was originally launched on which date in how many districts?
- A.15 August 2020 in 272 most-affected districts
- B.26 January 2018 in all states
- C.2 October 2019 in 100 districts
- D.15 August 2022 in 500 districts
Show solution
Answer: A. 15 August 2020 in 272 most-affected districts
NMBA was launched on 15 August 2020 (Independence Day) in 272 most-affected districts; it was subsequently expanded to all states. NMBA is India's flagship anti-drug-abuse mission under the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, implemented under the National Action Plan for Drug Demand Reduction (NAPDDR).
Read source story → - Polity & Governance27 Apr 2026
Which of the following Articles of the Constitution were ADDED by the 91st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2003 in connection with the Anti-Defection Law?
- A.Articles 102(2) and 191(2)
- B.Articles 75(1B), 164(1B), and 361B
- C.Articles 80 and 81
- D.Articles 105 and 194
Show solution
Answer: B. Articles 75(1B), 164(1B), and 361B
The 91st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2003 ADDED Articles 75(1B), 164(1B), and 361B. Article 75(1B) provides that a member disqualified under the Tenth Schedule cannot be appointed a Union Minister; Article 164(1B) provides the same for State Ministers; Article 361B provides that such disqualified members cannot hold any remunerative political post. Articles 102(2) and 191(2) provide for disqualification of MPs and MLAs respectively under the Tenth Schedule but were added by the 52nd Amendment 1985 (along with the Tenth Schedule itself).
Read source story → - Polity & Governance27 Apr 2026
In Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992), the Supreme Court of India struck down which Paragraph of the Tenth Schedule on the ground that it attempted to bar judicial review?
- A.Paragraph 1
- B.Paragraph 4
- C.Paragraph 7
- D.Paragraph 10
Show solution
Answer: C. Paragraph 7
In Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992), the Supreme Court struck down PARAGRAPH 7 of the Tenth Schedule, which had attempted to bar judicial review of the Speaker's decisions on disqualification. The Court held that this paragraph was unconstitutional because it offended the Court's powers under Articles 136, 226, and 227. The rest of the Tenth Schedule was held constitutionally valid. The Court also ruled that while deciding on disqualification, the Speaker acts as a tribunal.
Read source story → - Polity & Governance27 Apr 2026
The Anti-Defection Law is contained in which Schedule of the Constitution of India, and was added by which Constitutional Amendment Act?
- A.Eighth Schedule, by the 42nd Amendment Act 1976
- B.Tenth Schedule, by the 52nd Amendment Act 1985
- C.Tenth Schedule, by the 91st Amendment Act 2003
- D.Eleventh Schedule, by the 73rd Amendment Act 1992
Show solution
Answer: B. Tenth Schedule, by the 52nd Amendment Act 1985
The Anti-Defection Law is contained in the TENTH SCHEDULE of the Constitution, added by the 52ND CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT ACT, 1985 under PM Rajiv Gandhi's government. It was further strengthened by the 91st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2003 which omitted the 'split' provision and retained only the 'merger' provision. The 73rd Amendment 1992 added the Eleventh Schedule (Panchayati Raj). The 42nd Amendment 1976 made many changes but did NOT add the Anti-Defection Law.
Read source story →