171. Which of the following statements regarding Rajya Sabha is / are corre

Which of the following statements regarding Rajya Sabha is / are correct ?

  • 1. The maximum permissible strength of Rajya Sabha is 250
  • 2. In Rajya Sabha, 238 members are elected indirectly from the States and Union Territories
  • 3. It shares legislative powers equally with Lok Sabha in matters such as creation of All India Services

Select the correct answer using the code given below :

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

This question was previously asked in
UPSC CDS-1 – 2016
The correct option is A) 1 and 2 only.
Statements 1 and 2 accurately describe the maximum strength and the method of election/nomination for the Rajya Sabha. Statement 3 is incorrect because the power to initiate the creation of All India Services is a special power of the Rajya Sabha (under Article 312), where it does not share equal legislative power for *initiation* with the Lok Sabha.
The Rajya Sabha is composed of not more than 250 members (238 elected from States and Union Territories and 12 nominated by the President). While general legislative powers are shared, Article 312 grants the Rajya Sabha the exclusive power to initiate the creation of new All India Services by passing a resolution with a special majority.

172. Who among the following Prime Ministers of India were defeated by a vo

Who among the following Prime Ministers of India were defeated by a vote of No Confidence ?

  • 1. Morarji Desai
  • 2. Viswanath Pratap Singh
  • 3. H.D. Deve Gowda
  • 4. Atal Bihari Vajpayee

Select the correct answer using the code given below :

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

This question was previously asked in
UPSC CDS-1 – 2016
The correct option is C) 2, 3 and 4 only.
V.P. Singh (1990), H.D. Deve Gowda (1997), and Atal Bihari Vajpayee (1999) all lost a vote of No Confidence in the Lok Sabha, leading to their defeat as Prime Ministers. Morarji Desai resigned before the scheduled vote of No Confidence in 1979, thus not being technically ‘defeated by a vote’.
A motion of No Confidence can be moved against the Council of Ministers in the Lok Sabha. If it is passed by a simple majority, the Council of Ministers must resign.

173. With reference to Finance Bill and Money Bill in the Indian Parliament

With reference to Finance Bill and Money Bill in the Indian Parliament, consider the following statements:
1. When the Lok Sabha transmits Finance Bill to the Rajya Sabha, it can amend or reject the Bill.
2. When the Lok Sabha transmits Money Bill to the Rajya Sabha, it cannot amend or reject the Bill, it can only make recommendations.
3. In the case of disagreement between the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, there is no joint sitting for Money Bill, but a joint sitting becomes necessary for Finance Bill.
How many of the above statements are correct?

[amp_mcq option1=”Only one” option2=”Only two” option3=”All three” option4=”None” correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in
UPSC IAS – 2023
Statement 1 is correct. Finance Bills in India can be of two types: Finance Bill (Part A) and Finance Bill (Part B). While Finance Bill (Part A) contains aspects that make it close to a Money Bill and requires the President’s recommendation for introduction, it is overall treated as an ordinary bill concerning the powers of the Rajya Sabha. Rajya Sabha has the power to amend or reject a Finance Bill.

Statement 2 is correct. Money Bills, as defined under Article 110, have a special procedure outlined in Article 109. Money Bills can only be introduced in the Lok Sabha. Once passed by the Lok Sabha, they are transmitted to the Rajya Sabha, which cannot amend or reject the Bill. Rajya Sabha can only make recommendations, which the Lok Sabha may or may not accept. If Rajya Sabha does not return the Bill within 14 days, it is deemed to have been passed by both Houses in the form passed by the Lok Sabha.

Statement 3 is correct. Article 108 of the Constitution provides for a joint sitting of both Houses to resolve disagreements on ordinary Bills. Money Bills are specifically excluded from the scope of joint sittings; the special procedure under Article 109 ensures that the Lok Sabha’s will prevails. Finance Bills, being treated primarily as ordinary bills (except for introduction requirements for Part A), are subject to the joint sitting mechanism in case of a deadlock between the Houses.

– Rajya Sabha can amend/reject Finance Bills but only make recommendations on Money Bills.
– Money Bills have a special procedure giving Lok Sabha pre-eminence.
– Joint sitting is available for ordinary Bills and Finance Bills, but not for Money Bills.
The Speaker of the Lok Sabha has the final authority to decide whether a Bill is a Money Bill or not, and this decision cannot be questioned in any court.

174. Which among the following is not a condition for the disqualificatio

Which among the following is not a condition for the disqualification of a Member of Parliament?

[amp_mcq option1=”Voluntary acquisition of citizenship of a foreign country” option2=”Holding the office of the Chairperson of the National Commission for Women” option3=”The Member abstains from voting in the House without prior permission” option4=”The Member holds the office of the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the National Coal Development Corporation Ltd.” correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in
UPSC CDS-2 – 2021

Disqualification of a Member of Parliament can occur on several grounds listed in the Constitution (Article 102) and the Representation of the People Act, 1951, including voluntarily acquiring foreign citizenship (A) and holding an office of profit under the government (B and D could potentially be offices of profit depending on their specific nature and whether they are exempted by law). Abstaining from voting in the House *without prior permission* is relevant to disqualification under the Tenth Schedule (Anti-Defection Law), but the strict condition is voting or abstaining contrary to any direction (whip) issued by the political party, *unless* such vote or abstention is condoned by the party within fifteen days. Merely abstaining without permission, without violating a whip, is not a ground for disqualification. Thus, the phrasing in C is not an independent, always applicable condition for disqualification.

While violating a party whip by abstaining *can* lead to disqualification under the anti-defection law, simply abstaining without permission is not a direct, universally applicable ground without reference to a whip or other rules. Acquisition of foreign citizenship (A) and holding certain offices (like potential offices of profit in B and D) are more direct grounds unless exempted.

Office of Profit is a complex concept; holding a position is disqualifying if it is considered an office of profit under the government and is not exempted by Parliament. Acquiring foreign citizenship automatically leads to cessation of Indian citizenship and thus disqualification. Defection grounds relate to changing parties or violating party directives/whips on voting/abstention.


Exit mobile version