The Parliamentary Act Archives

101. The Central Industrial Security Force was constituted

The Central Industrial Security Force was constituted

[amp_mcq option1=”under an Act of the Parliament.” option2=”as per a resolution of the Cabinet.” option3=”as per an executive order issued by the Ministry of Defence.” option4=”as per an executive order issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs.” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2018

Download PDF Attempt Online

The Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) was constituted under the Central Industrial Security Force Act, 1968, which was passed by the Parliament of India.

Security forces in India, especially Central Armed Police Forces like CISF, are established by specific Acts enacted by the Parliament.

The Act defines the constitution of the Force, its powers, duties, conditions of service of its members, and related matters. It is administered by the Ministry of Home Affairs.

102. A person who for any reason ceases to be a member of the Central Indus

A person who for any reason ceases to be a member of the Central Industrial Security Force does not have to surrender which one of the following items?

[amp_mcq option1=”The certificate of appointment” option2=”Arms issued to him/her” option3=”Clothing issued to him/her while in service” option4=”Any appreciation letter issued to him during his service” correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2018

Download PDF Attempt Online

When a person ceases to be a member of the Central Industrial Security Force, they are required to surrender all official property and documents issued to them during their service. This includes their certificate of appointment, issued arms, and official clothing. An appreciation letter, being a personal recognition or commendation, is not official property to be returned and is typically kept by the individual.

Official items like appointment certificates, arms, and clothing are issued for duty and must be returned upon ceasing service, whereas personal commendations like appreciation letters are retained by the individual.

The requirement to surrender official items upon leaving service is standard procedure in all government departments and security forces to ensure accountability for government property.

103. For disciplinary proceedings, the supervisory officers of the Central

For disciplinary proceedings, the supervisory officers of the Central Industrial Security Force are governed by which of the following?

[amp_mcq option1=”National Security Act” option2=”Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules” option3=”Rules applicable to the officers of the Central Government of the corresponding class” option4=”Indian Penal Code” correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2018

Download PDF Attempt Online

Members of the Central Industrial Security Force, including supervisory officers, are appointed by the Central Government. Their conditions of service, including disciplinary proceedings, are governed by the Central Industrial Security Force Act, 1968, and the Rules framed thereunder (e.g., CISF Rules, 2001). These rules are essentially “Rules applicable to the officers of the Central Government of the corresponding class” as CISF is a Central Armed Police Force and its personnel are central government employees.

Disciplinary matters for CISF personnel are governed by the specific Act and Rules applicable to the Force, which fall under the broader category of rules for central government employees of their status.

While the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules provide a general code of conduct for central government employees, the specific procedures for disciplinary action against members of a force like CISF are detailed in their own Act and Rules. These force-specific rules are formulated by the Central Government and apply to the members of the force as central government employees of a specific class. The National Security Act and Indian Penal Code are not the primary governing laws for service conduct and disciplinary proceedings.

104. Which one of the following is in accordance with the procedure prescri

Which one of the following is in accordance with the procedure prescribed in the Central Industrial Security Force Act, 1968 in relation to an arrest made by any member of the Force?

[amp_mcq option1=”Keep the arrested person in custody for not more than 48 hours for interrogation and release him/her if, prima facie, no criminal case is made out against the detainee” option2=”Lodge a First Information Report with the local police if, prima facie, a criminal case is made out against the arrested person” option3=”Hand over the arrested person to the Chief Security Officer of the industrial establishment concerned for such action as deemed fit” option4=”Hand over the arrested person to a Police Officer or have him/her taken to the nearest police station without any unnecessary delay” correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2018

Download PDF Attempt Online

According to Section 14(2) of the Central Industrial Security Force Act, 1968, any person arrested by a member of the Force shall be made over without delay to a police officer or shall be taken to the nearest police station.

The primary procedure after arrest by CISF is to hand over the arrested person to the local police without unnecessary delay.

Section 14 of the Act outlines the duty of members of the Force to prevent breaches of rules and regulations and to make arrests. Subsection (2) specifically addresses the handling of arrested individuals. Option A is incorrect as CISF is not authorized to keep individuals in custody for 48 hours for general interrogation like the police might, their power is mainly for handing over. Options B and C are not the mandated procedure for an arrest under the Act.

105. What is “m-Power” in relation to the Central Industrial Security Force

What is “m-Power” in relation to the Central Industrial Security Force ?

[amp_mcq option1=”It is the name of the operational network of the Force.” option2=”It is the code governing the powers of the supervisory officers of the Force.” option3=”It is a mobile application which enables the members of the Force to address their pay-related queries and register their grievances while on the move.” option4=”It is the motto of the Force.” correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct answer is C. “m-Power” in relation to the Central Industrial Security Force is a mobile application designed for its personnel.

– “m-Power” stands for ‘Mobile Application for Personnel On Road/Weekend’ or similar phrasing related to mobility and access.
– It is an initiative by the CISF to leverage technology for the welfare and administrative convenience of its personnel, who are often deployed in remote locations or away from their administrative units.
– The application allows members of the force to access services and information related to their pay, allowances, provident fund, and also provides a platform for registering grievances directly from their mobile devices.

– Such mobile applications are part of broader e-governance and welfare initiatives undertaken by various government departments and forces to improve connectivity and service delivery to their personnel.
– The launch of ‘m-Power’ aimed to empower CISF personnel by providing them with easy access to important information and grievance redressal mechanisms, reducing dependency on traditional administrative channels which can be slow and cumbersome, especially for those on deployment.

106. Who is competent to order transfer of the supervisory officers of the

Who is competent to order transfer of the supervisory officers of the Central Industrial Security Force ?

[amp_mcq option1=”The Director General of the Central Industrial Security Force” option2=”The Inspector General if the transfer is from one unit to another within the same sector” option3=”The Deputy Inspector General if the transfer is from one unit to another within the same zone” option4=”The Central Government” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct answer is A. The Director General of the Central Industrial Security Force is competent to order the transfer of supervisory officers.

– Transfer powers within a large force like the CISF are hierarchical. The Director General, being the head of the force, holds the highest authority for transfers.
– While Inspector Generals (IGs) and Deputy Inspector Generals (DIGs) also have transfer powers, these are typically restricted to officers within their respective sectors (for IG) or zones (for DIGs), and often limited to certain ranks (e.g., DIGs transferring Assistant Commandants within their zone, IGs transferring Deputy Commandants within their sector).
– The Director General’s power extends to transferring supervisory officers across the entire force, including higher ranks up to Commandant or even beyond, and across different sectors or zones.
– The Central Government is competent for appointments and transfers at the very apex level (like the Director General himself), but routine transfers of supervisory officers within the force are primarily handled by the DG and delegated authorities.
– Since the question asks who is competent generally for “supervisory officers” without specifying rank or location limits (as options B and C do), the Director General holds the broadest and highest level of competence among the listed options for such transfers.

– The specific transfer powers for different ranks within the CISF are detailed in the force’s internal transfer policy guidelines. These guidelines delineate the authority (DG, Addl DG, IG, DIG) competent to order transfers based on the rank of the officer being transferred and the geographical scope of the transfer.
– The DG’s power is comprehensive, covering transfers that fall outside the limited jurisdictions of IGs and DIGs.

107. As per the provisions of the CISF Rules, 2001, which of the following

As per the provisions of the CISF Rules, 2001, which of the following authorities is deemed to be the Inquiring Authority where there is a complaint of sexual harassment?

[amp_mcq option1=”An officer not below the rank of the Deputy Inspector General in whose jurisdiction the act of sexual harassment is alleged o have been committed” option2=”The authority who had appointed the member of the Force against whom the complaint is made” option3=”The President of the CISF Wives Welfare Association” option4=”The Complaints Committee established in the Central Industrial Security Force for conducting inquiries into -such complaints” correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct answer is D. As per the CISF Rules, the authority deemed to be the Inquiring Authority for complaints of sexual harassment is the Complaints Committee established for this purpose.

– Following the Supreme Court’s Vishaka guidelines and the enactment of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, government organizations like the CISF are mandated to establish Internal Complaints Committees (previously known as Complaints Committees) to inquire into allegations of sexual harassment.
– Rule 35A of the CISF Rules, 2001 (inserted later to align with the law) specifically deals with complaints of sexual harassment and mandates that an inquiry into such complaints shall be conducted by an Inquiry Committee constituted for this purpose.
– This Inquiry Committee (or Complaints Committee) is the designated authority, not individual officers based on rank or jurisdiction, or associations like the Wives Welfare Association.

– The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, requires every employer to constitute an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) at each office or administrative unit with 10 or more employees. The structure and composition of the ICC are also specified in the Act.
– The CISF Rules were amended to reflect these statutory requirements, making the established Complaints/Inquiry Committee the competent authority for such inquiries.

108. Which one of the following is not one of the major penalties prescribe

Which one of the following is not one of the major penalties prescribed in the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001?

[amp_mcq option1=”Reduction to a lower stage in the time scale of pay by one stage for a period not exceeding three years, without cumulative effect, and not adversely affecting promotion” option2=”Compulsory retirement” option3=”Dismissal from service” option4=”Reduction to a lower time scale of pay, grade, post or service for a period to be specified in the order of penalty which shall be a bar to the promotion of the enrolled member during such specified period to the time scale of pay, grade, post or service from which he was reduced” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct answer is A. Statement A describes a minor penalty, not one of the major penalties prescribed in the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001.

– The Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001, classify penalties into Minor Penalties and Major Penalties (Rule 34).
– Major Penalties typically include severe actions like dismissal, removal, compulsory retirement, and significant reduction in rank or pay scale that affects future prospects.
– Minor Penalties include censure, warning, fine, and minor reduction in pay which is explicitly stated as having no cumulative effect or adverse impact on promotion.
– Option A describes “Reduction to a lower stage in the time scale of pay by one stage for a period not exceeding three years, without cumulative effect, and not adversely affecting promotion”. This precisely matches the description of a Minor Penalty under Rule 34(v) of the CISF Rules, 2001.
– Options B (Compulsory retirement), C (Dismissal from service), and D (Reduction to a lower time scale/grade/post/service with a bar to promotion) are explicitly listed as Major Penalties under Rule 34(viii), Rule 34(x), and Rule 34(vii) respectively.

– The distinction between minor and major penalties is important for disciplinary proceedings, as the procedure for imposing major penalties is more elaborate, usually requiring a formal inquiry (as per Rule 36 of CISF Rules).
– Rule 34 lists ten types of penalties, with (i) to (v) being Minor Penalties and (vi) to (x) being Major Penalties.

109. In which of the following circumstances can an enrolled member of the

In which of the following circumstances can an enrolled member of the Central Industrial Security Force be placed under suspension?
1. Where a disciplinary proceeding against him/her is contemplated or pending.
2. Where a case against him/her in respect of any criminal offence is under investigation, inquiry or trial.
3. Where in the opinion of the competent authority, the member of the Force had engaged himselffherself in activities prejudicial to the interest of the security of the State.
Select the correct answer using the code given below:

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

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is D, as an enrolled member of the Central Industrial Security Force can be placed under suspension in all three listed circumstances according to the CISF Rules.

Rule 32(1) of the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001 (as amended) specifies the grounds for placing a member of the Force under suspension.
Statement 1: Where a disciplinary proceeding against him/her is contemplated or pending. This is a valid ground for suspension under Rule 32(1)(a).
Statement 2: Where a case against him/her in respect of any criminal offence is under investigation, inquiry or trial. This is a valid ground for suspension under Rule 32(1)(b).
Statement 3: Where in the opinion of the competent authority, the member of the Force had engaged himself/herself in activities prejudicial to the interest of the security of the State. This is a valid ground for suspension under Rule 32(1)(c).
Since all three circumstances are listed as grounds for suspension in the CISF Rules, all statements are correct.

Suspension is not a penalty in itself but rather an interim measure. It is usually ordered to prevent the member from influencing the investigation, tampering with evidence, or if their continued presence is considered detrimental to discipline, security, or the public interest while a serious inquiry or trial is ongoing. The period of suspension can be reviewed and extended.

110. In an industrial establishment, no workman can go on strike and no emp

In an industrial establishment, no workman can go on strike and no employer can declare a lock-out within how many days of conclusion of conciliation proceedings?

[amp_mcq option1=”7 days” option2=”15 days” option3=”30 days” option4=”60 days” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is A. As per the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, no workman can go on strike and no employer can declare a lock-out within 7 days of the conclusion of conciliation proceedings.

Sections 22 and 23 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 prohibit strikes and lock-outs during the pendency of conciliation proceedings and for a specific period thereafter.
Section 22 (Prohibition of strikes and lock-outs in public utility services) and Section 23 (General prohibition of strikes and lock-outs) both contain provisions that prohibit strikes and lock-outs during the pendency of any conciliation proceedings before a conciliation officer or a Board and “seven days after the conclusion of any such proceedings”.
This means that after the conciliation proceedings have concluded (either by settlement, failure report submitted to the government, or reference to a tribunal), there is a cooling-off period of 7 days during which strikes and lock-outs are prohibited.

The purpose of this prohibition and the 7-day period is to provide a window for the parties to reflect on the outcome of conciliation, or for the government to consider further action (like referring the dispute for adjudication) without the pressure of immediate industrial action.