Lokpal and Important Commissions Archives

91. The Ex-Officio Members of the National Human Rights Commission of Indi

The Ex-Officio Members of the National Human Rights Commission of India include:

[amp_mcq option1=”Chairpersons of National Commission for Minorities, National Commission for Scheduled Castes, National Commission for Scheduled Tribes, National Commission for Women” option2=”Chairpersons of National Commission for Minorities, National Commission for Scheduled Castes, National Commission for Scheduled Tribes only” option3=”Chairpersons of National Commission for Scheduled Castes, National Commission for Scheduled Tribes, National Commission for Women only” option4=”Chairpersons of National Commission for Minorities, National Commission for Scheduled Castes, National Commission for Scheduled Tribes, National Commission for Protection of Child Rights” correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CAPF – 2014

Download PDF Attempt Online

As per the Protection of Human Rights Act, the Chairpersons of the National Commission for Minorities, the National Commission for Scheduled Castes, the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes, and the National Commission for Women are ex-officio members of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). Subsequently, the Chairperson of the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights was also added as an ex-officio member. Therefore, option D lists all of them.

The question asks about the composition of the National Human Rights Commission of India, specifically its ex-officio members.

The National Human Rights Commission is a statutory body established in 1993 under the Protection of Human Rights Act. Its primary functions include investigating human rights violations and making recommendations to the government. Apart from the Chairperson and full-time members, it includes chairpersons of certain national commissions as ex-officio members to ensure coordination and broader representation.

92. The Central Administrative Tribunal adjudicates disputes with respect

The Central Administrative Tribunal adjudicates disputes with respect to the recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed

to public services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union
members of the defence forces
officers and servants of the Supreme Court or of any High Court in India

Select the correct answer using the code given below.

[amp_mcq option1=”1 and 2″ option2=”1 only” option3=”2 only” option4=”2 and 3″ correct=”option2″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CAPF – 2013

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct answer is B) 1 only. The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) adjudicates disputes regarding service matters of persons appointed to public services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union, but specifically excludes members of defence forces and staff of the Supreme Court/High Courts.

– Statement 1: The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) was established under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. Its jurisdiction covers recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to public services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union. This statement is correct.
– Statement 2: Section 2 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, explicitly states that the Act does not apply to persons who are members of the naval, military, or air forces or of any other armed forces of the Union. Therefore, the CAT does not adjudicate disputes for members of the defence forces. This statement is incorrect.
– Statement 3: Section 2 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, also explicitly states that the Act does not apply to officers and servants of the Supreme Court or of any High Court. Therefore, the CAT does not adjudicate disputes for officers and servants of the Supreme Court or High Courts. This statement is incorrect.

The CAT is a specialized quasi-judicial body aimed at providing speedy and effective redressal of grievances to central government employees. Its jurisdiction extends to All India Services, Central Civil Services, Civil posts under the Union, and civilian employees of defence services.

93. Which of the following statements about National Green Tribunal is/are

Which of the following statements about National Green Tribunal is/are correct?

1. It is a specialized body equipped with the necessary expertise to handle environmental disputes involving multidisciplinary issues.
2. The Tribunal shall be bound by the procedure laid down under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Select the correct answer using the code given below.

[amp_mcq option1=”1 only” option2=”2 only” option3=”Both 1 and 2″ option4=”Neither 1 nor 2″ correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CAPF – 2012

Download PDF Attempt Online

Statement 1 is correct. The National Green Tribunal (NGT) is established under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, as a specialized judicial body equipped with environmental experts to handle cases involving environmental issues that are often multidisciplinary.
Statement 2 is incorrect. Section 19(1) of the NGT Act, 2010, explicitly states that the Tribunal shall not be bound by the procedure laid down in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, but shall be guided by the principles of natural justice.

Key features and powers of statutory bodies like the NGT are important for understanding environmental governance in India.

The NGT was established for effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental protection and conservation of forests and other natural resources. It has dedicated benches across the country.

94. Which of the following statements about National Human Rights Commissi

Which of the following statements about National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) is/are correct?

1. It is an alternative non-judicial channel.
2. Victims of human rights violations can seek reparation through NHRC.
3. It cannot grant immediate relief.
4. It has the direct power of enforcement.

Select the correct answer using the code given below.

[amp_mcq option1=”1 only” option2=”1 and 2 only” option3=”1, 2 and 4″ option4=”2, 3 and 4″ correct=”option2″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CAPF – 2012

Download PDF Attempt Online

Statement 1 is correct: NHRC functions as an alternative, non-judicial mechanism for addressing human rights complaints.
Statement 2 is correct: NHRC can recommend reparation, including monetary compensation, to victims of human rights violations.
Statement 3 is generally considered correct in the sense that NHRC’s power is recommendatory; it cannot issue binding orders for immediate relief like a court of law. However, it can recommend interim measures. Given the options, the intended meaning is likely that it lacks the power to *grant* enforceable immediate relief.
Statement 4 is incorrect: NHRC is a recommendatory body. It does not have direct enforcement powers; it relies on the government to implement its recommendations.

NHRC is a recommendatory body with the power to inquire into human rights violations.
It can recommend compensation and other measures for victims.
It lacks judicial powers to issue binding orders or enforce its recommendations directly.

The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, defines the powers and functions of NHRC. While it has significant powers of inquiry and investigation, its recommendations are not legally binding on the government, although they carry moral authority and political weight.

95. Who among the following was not a non-government representative in the

Who among the following was not a non-government representative in the Lokpal Bill Drafting Committee, 2011 ?

[amp_mcq option1=”Kiran Bedi” option2=”Arvind Kejriwal” option3=”Prashant Bhushan” option4=”Shanti Bhushan” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CAPF – 2011

Download PDF Attempt Online

The Lokpal Bill Drafting Committee formed in 2011 consisted of government representatives and non-government representatives (representing the Jan Lokpal movement). The non-government representatives were Anna Hazare, Shanti Bhushan, Prashant Bhushan, Arvind Kejriwal, and Kiran Bedi. Based on the composition of the committee, all the individuals listed in the options (Kiran Bedi, Arvind Kejriwal, Prashant Bhushan, and Shanti Bhushan) were non-government representatives. Therefore, the question as posed appears flawed, as it asks who was *not* a non-government representative from a list where all were. However, if forced to select from the options provided, and based on external information indicating A as the intended answer in some contexts, this suggests a potential error in the question’s premise or phrasing within the source material. Factual evidence indicates all four were indeed non-government representatives.

– The Lokpal Bill Drafting Committee (2011) included representatives from the government and civil society.
– Shanti Bhushan, Prashant Bhushan, Arvind Kejriwal, and Kiran Bedi were the prominent civil society representatives nominated to the committee, along with Anna Hazare.
– As all individuals listed in the options were non-government representatives, the question contains a factual inconsistency.
– Based on the probable intended answer from exam sources, Kiran Bedi (A) is indicated, despite factual contradiction.

The committee was co-chaired by Pranab Mukherjee (from the government side) and Shanti Bhushan (initially from the civil society side). The formation of this joint drafting committee was a significant event following the anti-corruption movement led by Anna Hazare, aiming to draft a Lokpal Bill acceptable to both the government and civil society.

96. With reference to the Delimitation Commission in India, consider the f

With reference to the Delimitation Commission in India, consider the following statements:

1. The orders of the Delimitation Commission cannot be challenged in any court of law.
2. When the orders of the Delimitation Commission are laid before the Lok Sabha or State Legislative Assembly, they cannot be modified.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

[amp_mcq option1=”1 only” option2=”2 only” option3=”Both 1 and 2″ option4=”Neither 1 nor 2″ correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CAPF – 2010

Download PDF Attempt Online

Both statement 1 and statement 2 are correct regarding the Delimitation Commission.

Orders issued by the Delimitation Commission have legal force and are typically immune from judicial review and legislative modification once finalized and laid before Parliament/Assemblies.

1. Statement 1 is correct. Article 329(a) of the Constitution bars any court from inquiring into the validity of any law relating to the delimitation of constituencies or the allotment of seats made or purporting to be made under such law. The orders of the Delimitation Commission are issued under relevant Delimitation Acts passed by Parliament, and these Acts further specify that the Commission’s orders cannot be challenged in court.
2. Statement 2 is correct. Delimitation Commission orders are laid before the Lok Sabha and the concerned State Legislative Assemblies, but the Constitution and the Delimitation Acts explicitly state that they cannot be modified by Parliament or the State Assembly. They are laid only for information.

97. Match List-I with List-II and select the correct answer using the code

Match List-I with List-II and select the correct answer using the code given below :

List-I (Commission)	List-II (Issue)
A. Dar Commission	1. Assassination of Indira Gandhi
B. Kalelkar Commission	2. Ragging in educational institutions
C. Thakkar Commission	3. Demand for Linguistic States
	4. Backward Classes

Code :
A B C

[amp_mcq option1=”3 4 1″ option2=”3 2 4″ option3=”1 2 4″ option4=”1 4 2″ correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CAPF – 2009

Download PDF Attempt Online

Matching the commissions with their issues:
– Dar Commission (1948): Appointed to examine the feasibility of reorganization of states on a linguistic basis (Issue 3: Demand for Linguistic States).
– Kalelkar Commission (1953): The First Backward Classes Commission, chaired by Kaka Kalelkar (Issue 4: Backward Classes).
– Thakkar Commission (1984): Appointed to inquire into the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi (Issue 1: Assassination of Indira Gandhi).
Thus, the correct match is A-3, B-4, C-1.

Specific commissions were appointed in Indian history to address significant issues like state reorganization, social backwardness, and national security events.

The Dar Commission opposed linguistic reorganization, preferring administrative convenience. The Kalelkar Commission submitted its report in 1955 but its recommendations were not fully accepted by the government. The Thakkar Commission investigated the security lapses leading to Indira Gandhi’s assassination.

98. The National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) has been constituted und

The National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) has been constituted under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. In this context which of the following statements is not correct ?

[amp_mcq option1=”Hon’ble Chief Justice of Supreme Court is the Executive Chairman of the Authority” option2=”Its objective is to provide free and competent legal services to the weaker sections of the society on the basis of equal opportunity” option3=”It issues guidelines for the State Legal Services Authorities to implement the legal programmes and schemes throughout the country” option4=”To organize Lok Adalats for amicable settlement of disputes” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CAPF – 2009

Download PDF Attempt Online

The question asks for the incorrect statement. Statement A is incorrect. The Chief Justice of India is the *Patron-in-Chief* of NALSA. The Executive Chairman of NALSA is a serving or retired judge of the Supreme Court nominated by the President in consultation with the Chief Justice of India. The Executive Chairman is the active head responsible for the Authority’s functioning.

The Chief Justice of India is the Patron-in-Chief, not the Executive Chairman, of the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA).

NALSA provides free legal aid to eligible persons, organizes Lok Adalats for alternative dispute resolution, and works to raise legal awareness. It aims to ensure that justice is not denied to any citizen merely on the grounds of economic or other disabilities. State Legal Services Authorities (SLSAs), District Legal Services Authorities (DLSAs), and Taluk Legal Services Committees are established at lower levels to implement these objectives.

99. The Central Vigilance Commission was established on the recommendation

The Central Vigilance Commission was established on the recommendation of which one of the following Committees?

[amp_mcq option1=”Santhanam Committee” option2=”Dinesh Goswami Committee” option3=”Tarkunde Committee” option4=”Narasimham Committee” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC NDA-2 – 2018

Download PDF Attempt Online

The Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) was established on the recommendation of the Santhanam Committee.

The Committee on Prevention of Corruption, chaired by K. Santhanam, was appointed in 1962 to examine issues related to corruption in government departments. The committee submitted its report in 1964, recommending the establishment of a Central Vigilance Commission to oversee vigilance administration and advise on anti-corruption measures.

The CVC was initially established by an executive resolution in 1964. It was later given statutory status through the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003. The Narasimham Committee is known for its recommendations on banking sector reforms, while the Dinesh Goswami and Tarkunde Committees focused on electoral reforms.

100. The creation of the institution of Lokpal was first recommended by

The creation of the institution of Lokpal was first recommended by

[amp_mcq option1=”Law Commission” option2=”Santhanam Committee” option3=”Shah Commission” option4=”Administrative Reforms Commission” correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC NDA-2 – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct answer is D.

The Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC), in its report submitted in 1966, first recommended the establishment of an ombudsman-like institution in India, proposing the creation of Lokpal at the Centre and Lokayuktas in the states.

The idea was borrowed from the Scandinavian concept of Ombudsman, intended to address public grievances against administrative misconduct. The Santhanam Committee (1962-64) dealt with preventing corruption but did not propose the Lokpal institution. The Shah Commission (1977) inquired into the excesses of the Emergency.