UPSC IAS Archives

1. Along with the Budget, the Finance Minister also places other document

Along with the Budget, the Finance Minister also places other documents before the Parliament which include ‘The Macro Economic Framework Statement’. The aforesaid document is presented because this is mandated by

Join Our Telegram Channel

Long standing parliamentary convention

Article 112 and Article 110(1) of the Constitution of India

Article 113 of the Constitution of India

Provisions of the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management Act, 2003

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

The document ‘The Macro Economic Framework Statement’ is presented along with the Budget because it is mandated by the provisions of the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management Act, 2003.

The Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) Act, 2003, is an Act of the Parliament of India that sets targets for the government to establish financial discipline, reduce the fiscal deficit, and improve macroeconomic management. Section 3(1) of the Act requires the Central Government to lay before both Houses of Parliament certain documents along with the Annual Financial Statement (Budget). These documents include the Macro Economic Framework Statement, the Medium Term Fiscal Policy Statement, and the Fiscal Policy Strategy Statement.

Article 112 of the Constitution of India requires the government to present an Annual Financial Statement (the Union Budget). Article 110 deals with Money Bills. Article 113 deals with the procedure in Parliament with respect to estimates. While these articles lay down the constitutional basis for the Budget presentation, the specific requirement to present documents like the Macro Economic Framework Statement alongside the budget originates from statutory requirements, specifically the FRBM Act. Parliamentary convention supports transparency and laying documents before Parliament, but the specific mandate for this document is legal.

2. In India, separation of judiciary from the executive is enjoined by

In India, separation of judiciary from the executive is enjoined by

Join Our Telegram Channel

the Preamble of the Constitution

a Directive Principle of State Policy

the Seventh Schedule

the conventional practice

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

The separation of judiciary from the executive in India is mandated by Article 50 of the Constitution. Article 50 states: “The State shall take steps to separate the judiciary from the executive in the public services of the State.” This provision is contained in Part IV of the Constitution, which deals with the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs). While not legally enforceable, this principle guides the State in its governance and lawmaking.
A) The Preamble: Contains ideals but not specific mandates for separation of powers.
B) A Directive Principle of State Policy: Article 50 is a DPSP.
C) The Seventh Schedule: Deals with the distribution of legislative powers between the Union and States.
D) The conventional practice: While separation is practiced, it is based on the constitutional directive in Article 50 and judicial pronouncements, not merely convention.

– Article 50 mandates the separation of the judiciary from the executive.
– Article 50 is a Directive Principle of State Policy.

Historically, under British rule, there was a considerable overlap between executive and judicial functions, particularly at the district level (e.g., District Magistrate exercising both executive and judicial powers). Article 50 aims to achieve complete separation to ensure the independence of the judiciary, which has been implemented over time by various state governments.

3. Which one of the following categories of Fundamental Rights incorporat

Which one of the following categories of Fundamental Rights incorporates protection against untouchability as a form of discrimination ?

Join Our Telegram Channel

Right against Exploitation

Right to Freedom

Right to Constitutional Remedies

Right to Equality

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

Article 17 of the Constitution of India abolishes “Untouchability” and forbids its practice in any form. The enforcement of any disability arising out of “Untouchability” shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law. Article 17 falls under the category of the Right to Equality, which is guaranteed by Articles 14 to 18 in Part III of the Constitution.
A) Right against Exploitation (Articles 23-24): Deals with prohibition of forced labour and child labour.
B) Right to Freedom (Articles 19-22): Deals with fundamental freedoms, protection against arbitrary arrest, etc.
C) Right to Constitutional Remedies (Article 32): Guarantees the right to move the Supreme Court for enforcement of fundamental rights.
D) Right to Equality (Articles 14-18): Guarantees equality before law, prohibits discrimination, abolishes untouchability, etc.
Thus, protection against untouchability is incorporated within the Right to Equality.

– Article 17 abolishes untouchability.
– Article 17 is part of the Right to Equality (Articles 14-18).

Parliament has enacted laws like the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 (originally Untouchability (Offences) Act, 1955) to give effect to Article 17 and prescribe punishments for the practice of untouchability. This right is absolute and not subject to any restrictions.

4. With reference to the funds under Members of Parliament Local Area Dev

With reference to the funds under Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS), which of the following statements are correct ?

1. MPLADS funds must be used to create durable assets like physical infrastructure for health, education, etc.
2. A specified portion of each MP’s fund must benefit SC/ST populations.
3. MPLADS funds are sanctioned on yearly basis and the unused funds cannot be carried forward to the next year.
4. The district authority must inspect at least 10% of all works under implementation every year.

Select the correct answer using the code given below :

1 and 2 only

3 and 4 only

1, 2 and 3 only

1, 2 and 4 only

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

Statement 1: MPLADS guidelines explicitly state that the focus should be on the creation of durable assets such as buildings, roads, bridges, school buildings, health centres, etc., for public use. This statement is correct.
Statement 2: The guidelines mandate that a certain percentage of the funds should be used for creating assets in areas predominantly inhabited by Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST). Currently, this allocation is 15% for SC concentrated areas and 7.5% for ST concentrated areas. This statement is correct.
Statement 3: MPLADS funds are not sanctioned on a yearly basis only. The entitlement is Rs 5 crore per MP per year. Importantly, unused funds *can* be carried forward to the subsequent years within the term of the Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha MP. The statement says unused funds cannot be carried forward, which is incorrect.
Statement 4: MPLADS guidelines require the District Authority to inspect at least 10% of the works completed or under implementation every year to ensure proper execution and quality. This statement is correct.
Therefore, statements 1, 2, and 4 are correct.

– MPLADS funds are for creating durable community assets.
– Specific allocation for SC/ST areas is mandatory.
– Unused funds can be carried forward.
– District authorities must inspect a minimum percentage of works.

MPLADS is a scheme formulated by the Government of India which enables Members of Parliament to recommend developmental work in their constituencies. The scheme aims to create durable community assets based on locally felt needs. The responsibility for implementation lies with the District Authority.

Join Our Telegram Channel

5. Rajya Sabha has equal powers with Lok Sabha in

Rajya Sabha has equal powers with Lok Sabha in

Join Our Telegram Channel

the matter of creating new All India Services

amending the Constitution

the removal of the government

making cut motions

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

A) Creating new All India Services: This power is vested *exclusively* in the Rajya Sabha by Article 312. The Rajya Sabha passes a resolution by a special majority, authorizing Parliament to create new All India Services. Lok Sabha does not have equal power here; it requires Rajya Sabha’s initiation.
B) Amending the Constitution: A Bill to amend the Constitution can be introduced in either House of Parliament. It must be passed by each House by a special majority (majority of the total membership of the House and a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting). Both Houses have equal powers in the process of constitutional amendment.
C) The removal of the government: The Council of Ministers is collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha (Article 75(3)). A no-confidence motion, which leads to the removal of the government, can only be moved and voted upon in the Lok Sabha. Rajya Sabha does not have this power.
D) Making cut motions: Cut motions are part of the budgetary process and are specific to the Lok Sabha. Money Bills, including appropriation bills related to budget demands, originate in the Lok Sabha, and the Rajya Sabha has limited powers, primarily advisory, regarding Money Bills (Article 109).
Therefore, Rajya Sabha has equal powers with Lok Sabha in amending the Constitution.

– Rajya Sabha has exclusive power over creating All India Services (Article 312).
– Both Houses have equal powers in the process of Constitutional Amendment (Article 368).
– The government is responsible only to the Lok Sabha.
– Financial matters, including budget and cut motions, are primarily within the domain of the Lok Sabha.

The unequal powers of the two Houses reflect the federal nature (Rajya Sabha represents states, given exclusive power over AIS affecting states) and the principle of responsible government (Lok Sabha represents the people directly and controls the executive).

6. Consider the following statements: 1. Aadhaar metadata cannot be sto

Consider the following statements:

Join Our Telegram Channel

1. Aadhaar metadata cannot be stored for more than three months.
2. State cannot enter into any contract with private corporations for sharing of Aadhaar data.
3. Aadhaar is mandatory for obtaining insurance products.
4. Aadhaar is mandatory for getting benefits funded out of the Consolidated Fund of India.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct ?

1 and 4 only

2 and 4 only

3 only

1, 2 and 3 only

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

Statement 1: According to UIDAI regulations (Aadhaar Authentication Regulations, 2016), authentication transaction logs are retained for 5 years, not 3 months. Therefore, statement 1 is incorrect.
Statement 2: Section 29 of the Aadhaar Act, 2016 restricts the sharing of core biometric information. Identity information can be shared only with consent for specific purposes or under court order. The Supreme Court judgment in Puttaswamy case upheld the restrictive nature of the Act regarding data sharing with private entities, emphasizing minimal data collection and use. While private entities can act as Authentication User Agencies (AUAs) or e-KYC User Agencies (KUAs), direct and general “sharing of Aadhaar data” with private corporations is prohibited. Thus, the statement that the State cannot enter into *any* contract for sharing of *Aadhaar data* (interpreted as general data sharing beyond permitted authentication/KYC processes under strict rules) with private corporations aligns with the law’s intent and judgment, making this statement likely correct in context.
Statement 3: The Supreme Court judgment held that Aadhaar cannot be made mandatory for services unless they are benefits, subsidies, or services funded out of the Consolidated Fund of India (Section 7 of the Aadhaar Act). Insurance products are generally not funded out of the Consolidated Fund of India. Therefore, making Aadhaar mandatory for obtaining insurance products was ruled unconstitutional by the SC. Thus, statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 4: The Supreme Court upheld Section 7 of the Aadhaar Act, which mandates Aadhaar for receiving subsidies, benefits, or services funded out of the Consolidated Fund of India. Thus, statement 4 is correct.
Based on this analysis, statements 2 and 4 are correct, while 1 and 3 are incorrect.

– Authentication logs are stored for 5 years.
– Sharing of Aadhaar data, especially core biometrics, with private entities is heavily restricted.
– Aadhaar cannot be mandatory for services not funded by the Consolidated Fund of India (like insurance).
– Aadhaar can be mandatory for benefits/services funded by the Consolidated Fund of India.

The Supreme Court’s judgment on Aadhaar in the Puttaswamy case (2018) significantly curtailed the mandatory use of Aadhaar, limiting it primarily to schemes receiving funds from the Consolidated Fund of India. It also reinforced data protection principles and restrictions on sharing.

7. Consider the following statements: 1. The President of India can sum

Consider the following statements:

1. The President of India can summon a session of the Parliament at such place as he/she thinks fit.
2. The Constitution of India provides for three sessions of the Parliament in a year, but it is not mandatory to conduct all three sessions.
3. There is no minimum number of days that the Parliament is required to meet in a year.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct ?

1 only

2 only

1 and 3 only

2 and 3 only

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

Statement 1: Article 85(1) of the Constitution states that the President shall from time to time summon each House of Parliament to meet at such time and place as he thinks fit. This grants the President the power to decide the place of the parliamentary session. Thus, statement 1 is correct.
Statement 2: The Constitution does not mandate three sessions per year. Article 85(1) only requires that “six months shall not intervene between its last sitting in one session and the date appointed for its first sitting in the next session.” This means Parliament must meet at least twice a year. While the practice is to hold three sessions (Budget, Monsoon, Winter), it is not constitutionally mandatory. Thus, statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 3: The Constitution does not specify a minimum number of sitting days for Parliament in a year. The frequency of meetings is primarily determined by the executive’s need for legislative business and the constitutional requirement of not having more than a six-month gap between sessions. Thus, statement 3 is correct.

– The President summons Parliament sessions and determines the place.
– The Constitution mandates Parliament must meet at least twice a year (max 6 months between sessions).
– There is no minimum number of sitting days specified in the Constitution.

The typical three sessions are Budget (Feb-May), Monsoon (July-Sept), and Winter (Nov-Dec). The lack of a mandated minimum number of sitting days has sometimes been criticized as potentially limiting parliamentary scrutiny.

Join Our Telegram Channel

8. Consider the following statements: 1. According to the Constitution

Consider the following statements:

Join Our Telegram Channel

1. According to the Constitution of India, a person who is eligible to vote can be made a minister in a State for six months even if he/she is not a member of the Legislature of that State.
2. According to the Representation of People Act, 1951, a person convicted of a criminal offence and sentenced to imprisonment for five years is permanently disqualified from contesting an election even after his release from prison.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct ?

1 only

2 only

Both 1 and 2

Neither 1 nor 2

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

Statement 1: Article 164(4) of the Constitution states that a Minister who for any period of six consecutive months is not a member of the Legislature of the State shall at the expiration of that period cease to be a Minister. This implies that a person who is otherwise eligible can be appointed as a minister for a period of up to six months, during which time they must get elected to the legislature. Eligibility to vote is a basic requirement for being a legislator, so a voter is generally eligible to be considered for ministerial post for this period. Thus, statement 1 is correct.
Statement 2: Section 8 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 deals with disqualification on conviction for certain offences. If a person is convicted of any offence and sentenced to imprisonment for two years or more, he shall be disqualified from the date of such conviction and shall continue to be disqualified for a further period of six years after his release. A sentence of five years imprisonment falls under this category. The disqualification is for the period of sentence plus six years after release, not “permanently”. Thus, statement 2 is incorrect.

– A non-legislator can be a minister for a maximum of six months (Article 164(4)).
– Disqualification under RPA, 1951 for conviction and sentence of 2+ years is for the sentence duration plus six years after release, not permanent.

Statement 1 reflects the flexibility in the Indian parliamentary system to allow experts or individuals not currently in the legislature to be appointed as ministers for a short duration, provided they get elected within six months. Statement 2 highlights the specific provisions for criminal disqualification of candidates under the RPA, 1951, which are aimed at keeping persons with criminal backgrounds out of the legislature for a specified period.

9. With reference to the provisions contained in Part IV of the Constitut

With reference to the provisions contained in Part IV of the Constitution of India, which of the following statements is/are correct?

Join Our Telegram Channel

1. They shall be enforceable by courts.
2. They shall not be enforceable by any court.
3. The principles laid down in this part are to influence the making of laws by the State.

Select the correct answer using the code given below :

1 only

2 only

1 and 3 only

2 and 3 only

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

Part IV of the Constitution of India contains the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs). Article 37, which is part of Part IV, explicitly states that “The provisions contained in this Part shall not be enforceable by any court, but the principles therein laid down are nevertheless fundamental in the governance of the country and it shall be the duty of the State to apply these principles in making laws.”
Statement 1 is incorrect because DPSPs are not enforceable by courts.
Statement 2 is correct because Article 37 states that DPSPs are not enforceable by any court.
Statement 3 is correct because Article 37 states that these principles are fundamental in governance and the State has a duty to apply them in making laws, meaning they influence lawmaking.
Therefore, statements 2 and 3 are correct.

– DPSPs are in Part IV of the Constitution.
– DPSPs are non-justiciable (not enforceable by courts).
– DPSPs are guiding principles for the State in making laws and governance.

While DPSPs are not legally enforceable, courts have sometimes used them in interpreting Fundamental Rights or other constitutional provisions. The judiciary has also emphasized the importance of balancing Fundamental Rights and DPSPs, recognizing that both are essential for the welfare state envisioned by the Constitution. The State is morally and politically bound to implement DPSPs through legislation.

10. “Gold Tranche” (Reserve Tranche) refers to

“Gold Tranche” (Reserve Tranche) refers to

Join Our Telegram Channel

a loan system of the World Bank

one of the operations of a Central Bank

a credit system granted by WTO to its members

a credit system granted by IMF to its members

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

“Gold Tranche” or “Reserve Tranche” is a term used in the context of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). It refers to the portion of a member country’s quota in the IMF that can be drawn upon at any time without any conditions or economic policy reforms being required. It is essentially a reserve asset or credit line that a member country holds with the IMF, denominated in Special Drawing Rights (SDRs). This system allows member countries to access funds in times of balance of payments needs.

– Gold Tranche or Reserve Tranche is associated with the IMF.
– It represents an unconditional drawing right for member countries.
– It is part of a country’s quota contribution to the IMF.

Each member country contributes a quota to the IMF, paid partly in reserve assets (like SDRs or major currencies) and partly in the country’s own currency. The portion paid in reserve assets plus any borrowing by the IMF from the member country constitutes the reserve tranche position. A country can draw on its reserve tranche at any time it represents that it has a balance of payments need, without having to agree to conditionality.