UPSC Combined Section Officer Archives

1. Consider the following statements : Subsidiary motion by itself has

Consider the following statements :

Subsidiary motion by itself has no meaning.
In Kangaroo closure, only important clauses are debated and voted.
Removal of the President of India comes under substantive motion.

Which of the above statements are correct ?

1 and 2 only

2 and 3 only

1 and 3 only

1, 2 and 3

This question was previously asked in

UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2024

Download PDF Attempt Online

All three statements are correct. Subsidiary motions depend on or relate to another motion. Kangaroo closure involves debating and voting only on selected, important parts. Removal of the President is a substantive motion.

Statement 1 is correct. Subsidiary motions, such as motions to adjourn, close debate, or amend, have no independent meaning and must be connected to a substantive motion.
Statement 2 is correct. Kangaroo closure is a procedural device where the presiding officer selects only the most important clauses of a Bill or resolution for discussion and voting, effectively skipping discussion and voting on the less important clauses to save time.
Statement 3 is correct. A substantive motion is an independent proposal dealing with a significant matter (like impeachment of the President or Chief Justice, or a vote of no-confidence), requiring a decision by the House. The motion for the removal of the President is a self-contained proposal of great importance.

Motions in parliamentary procedure are broadly classified into substantive, substitute, and subsidiary motions. A substantive motion is a self-contained proposal. A substitute motion is moved in substitution of the original motion and, if adopted, replaces the original motion. Subsidiary motions aid in deciding the original or substantive motion. Closure is a tool used to cut short debate on a motion. Different types of closure include simple closure, closure by compartment (guillotine), and kangaroo closure.

2. Consider the following statements regarding various motions in Parliam

Consider the following statements regarding various motions in Parliament :

Calling Attention Motion is an Indian innovation.
The Rajya Sabha can make use of Adjournment Motion.
Motion of Thanks is voted.

Which of the above statements are correct ?

1 and 2 only

2 and 3 only

1 and 3 only

1, 2 and 3

This question was previously asked in

UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2024

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is C because statement 1 (Calling Attention Motion is Indian innovation) and statement 3 (Motion of Thanks is voted) are correct, while statement 2 (Rajya Sabha using Adjournment Motion) is incorrect.

Indian parliamentary procedure has unique devices like the Calling Attention Motion. Different motions serve distinct purposes and have specific rules regarding which House can use them and whether they are voted upon.

The Calling Attention Motion is a unique Indian contribution to parliamentary procedure, allowing members to call a minister’s attention to urgent public matters. Adjournment Motion is a serious procedure used only in the Lok Sabha to discuss a matter of urgent public importance by interrupting normal business; Rajya Sabha cannot use it. The Motion of Thanks on the President’s Address is a formal motion debated and put to vote in both Houses. Amendments can also be moved to this motion.

3. Consider the following statements regarding censure and no-confidence

Consider the following statements regarding censure and no-confidence motions :

No-confidence motion needs the support of 50 members to be admitted.
There is a need to state reason for moving the no-confidence motion.
Censure motion can be moved against individual minister.

Which of the above statements are correct ?

1 and 2 only

2 and 3 only

1 and 3 only

1, 2 and 3

This question was previously asked in

UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2024

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is C because statement 1 (50 members support for no-confidence motion) and statement 3 (censure motion against individual minister) are correct, while statement 2 (need to state reason for no-confidence motion) is incorrect.

No-confidence and Censure motions are parliamentary tools to hold the Council of Ministers accountable, but they differ in scope and requirements.

A No-confidence Motion can only be moved in the Lok Sabha against the entire Council of Ministers. As per Rule 198 of Lok Sabha rules, it requires the support of at least 50 members to be admitted. While the underlying reason is lack of confidence, the motion itself does not need to explicitly state the reasons. A Censure Motion can be moved against an individual minister, a group of ministers, or the entire Council of Ministers, and it specifically states the reasons for censure (disapproval of specific policy or action).

4. What is the time limit specified in the RTI Act, 2005 for the Central

What is the time limit specified in the RTI Act, 2005 for the Central / State Information Commissions to decide on complaints ?

15 days

One month

Two months

No such time limit has been specified

This question was previously asked in

UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2024

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is D because the RTI Act, 2005 does not specify a fixed time limit within which the Central or State Information Commissions must decide on complaints filed before them under Section 18.

While the Act specifies time limits for providing information by PIOs (30 days, or 48 hours in case of life/liberty) and for first appeals (30-45 days), it does not impose a statutory deadline for the Information Commissions to dispose of complaints (Section 18) or second appeals (Section 19).

Although no specific time limit is mandated by the Act for deciding complaints or second appeals by the Information Commissions, they are expected to function efficiently and dispose of cases expeditiously. Delays in disposing of cases by Commissions have been a point of concern, leading to backlogs. The Act focuses on the preliminary stages of the request process having strict timelines.

5. Consider the following statements: The Rajya Sabha does not have a d

Consider the following statements:

The Rajya Sabha does not have a device called Special Mention.
Short duration discussion was introduced in the Parliament post-1991.

Which of the above statements is/are correct?

1 only

2 only

Both 1 and 2

Neither 1 nor 2

This question was previously asked in

UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2024

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is D because both statements are incorrect. Special Mention is a device available in Rajya Sabha, and Short Duration Discussion was introduced much earlier than 1991.

Parliamentary procedures include various devices for members to raise matters of public importance. ‘Special Mention’ is a Rajya Sabha procedure, while ‘Short Duration Discussion’ has been a part of parliamentary practice for decades.

Special Mention is a procedure in the Rajya Sabha (Upper House) under which a Member can raise a matter of urgent public importance with the permission of the Chairman. The Lok Sabha (Lower House) has a similar procedure called ‘Raising a Matter Under Rule 377’. Short Duration Discussion, also known as ‘Two-Hour Discussion’, was introduced in the Lok Sabha in 1953. Therefore, both statements are factually incorrect regarding the specific house and introduction timeline.

6. The first Indian state to introduce the law on RTI was

The first Indian state to introduce the law on RTI was

Tamil Nadu

Uttar Pradesh

Maharashtra

Gujarat

This question was previously asked in

UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2024

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is A as Tamil Nadu was the first Indian state to enact its own law on the Right to Information.

Before the Central RTI Act of 2005, several Indian states had passed their own laws on the Right to Information, reflecting growing demand for transparency and accountability.

The Tamil Nadu Right to Information Act was passed in 1996, making it the pioneering state in India to introduce a law granting its citizens the right to access information from public authorities. This was followed by other states like Goa (1997), Rajasthan (2000), Maharashtra (2002), Karnataka (2002), etc., before the central legislation unified and expanded the right nationwide in 2005.

7. Consider the following statements: An applicant making request for inf

Consider the following statements:
An applicant making request for information under RTI Act, 2005

shall give the reason why the information is sought for.
shall give his/her personal details.
shall not give any reason for requesting the information or any other personal details except those that may be necessary for contacting him.

Which of the above statements is/are correct?

1 only

2 only

3 only

1, 2 and 3

This question was previously asked in

UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2024

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is C because Section 6(2) of the RTI Act, 2005 explicitly states that an applicant is not required to give reasons for seeking information or provide personal details beyond what is necessary for contact.

A cornerstone of the RTI Act is that access to information is a right, and therefore, the applicant does not need to justify their request or reveal extensive personal information.

Section 6(2) is a vital safeguard against potential misuse or intimidation and ensures that the process of seeking information is not burdensome or intrusive for the applicant. The focus is on the right to information itself, not on the applicant’s motives or detailed identity. Only contact information is required to facilitate communication and delivery of the information.

8. Consider the following statements: Public Information Officer at the

Consider the following statements:

Public Information Officer at the administrative unit level will receive the applications under the RTI Act, 2005.
Assistant Public Information Officer at the sub-district, sub-divisional levels will receive the applications under the RTI Act, 2005.
Any officer of a public authority, who is available in the authority’s office when the application is made, will receive the applications under the RTI Act, 2005.

Which of the above statements are correct?

1 and 2 only

2 and 3 only

1 and 3 only

1, 2 and 3

This question was previously asked in

UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2024

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is A because the RTI Act designates specific officers at administrative and sub-district levels to receive applications, while not allowing just *any* available officer to do so.

The RTI Act establishes a designated hierarchy of officers – Public Information Officers (PIOs) and Assistant Public Information Officers (APIOs) – for receiving and processing RTI applications.

Section 5(1) mandates every public authority to designate PIOs in all administrative units or offices. These are the primary officers for receiving applications. Section 5(2) mandates the designation of APIOs at the sub-divisional or sub-district levels, whose role is to receive applications and forward them to the concerned PIO. Statement 3 is incorrect as it implies any officer can receive applications, which is not specified in the Act; receiving is the designated function of PIOs and APIOs.

9. Consider the following statements: The RTI Act, 2005 stipulates that a

Consider the following statements:
The RTI Act, 2005 stipulates that a Public Authority should transfer an RTI application or a part thereof to another Public Authority if the application or a part of it pertains to information

held by another Public Authority.
which is more closely connected with the functions of another Public Authority.

Which of the above statements is/are correct?

1 only

2 only

Both 1 and 2

Neither 1 nor 2

This question was previously asked in

UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2024

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is C because Section 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005 mandates the transfer of an RTI application if the information requested is held by another public authority or is more closely connected with the functions of another public authority.

Section 6(3) is a crucial provision that prevents applicants from being penalized for directing their request to the wrong public authority. It places the responsibility on the receiving authority to transfer the application to the appropriate one.

Section 6(3) requires the public authority receiving the application to transfer it to the appropriate public authority within five days and inform the applicant immediately. This ensures that the applicant’s request is directed to the entity that holds the information or is best suited to provide it. The two conditions mentioned in the question are precisely those specified in Section 6(3) for triggering the transfer mechanism.

10. Consider the following statements about an inquiry carried out by an I

Consider the following statements about an inquiry carried out by an Information Commission:

1. It may examine any record to which the RTI Act, 2005 applies.
2. No such record can be withheld from it (irrespective of any provision of any Act passed by the Parliament or the State legislature).
3. Information Commission has the powers of a civil court trying a suit under the code of civil procedure.

Which of the above statements are correct ?

1 and 2 only

2 and 3 only

1 and 3 only

1, 2 and 3

This question was previously asked in

UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2024

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is D as all three statements correctly describe the powers of the Information Commission during an inquiry under the RTI Act, 2005.

Section 18(3) and Section 18(4) of the RTI Act grant significant powers to the Central and State Information Commissions to conduct inquiries and access records held by public authorities, overriding restrictions in other laws.

Section 18(3) bestows upon the Information Commission the powers of a civil court in respect of matters such as summoning, requiring discovery and inspection, receiving evidence on affidavit, etc. Section 18(4) further strengthens this by giving the Commission the power to examine any record to which the Act applies, under the control of the public authority, and explicitly states that no such record may be withheld from it on any grounds, notwithstanding anything contained in any other Act of Parliament or State Legislature.