Skip to content
GK24
Prime
Indian PolityMediumAsked in: CDS · CDS-I 2022, GK

According to the Constitution of India, which one of the following statements is not correct ?

  1. A.The executive powers of the Union shall be vested in the President of India.
  2. B.Parliament, by law, can confer functions on authorities other than the President of India.
  3. C.The President of India is elected by an electoral college consisting of all Members of Parliament and all Members of all State Legislatures.
  4. D.A person, having held office as the President, shall be eligible for election to that office for the second term.

Correct answer

C. The President of India is elected by an electoral college consisting of all Members of Parliament and all Members of all State Legislatures.

Explanation

The correct answer is C. Under Article 54, the President is elected only by the elected members of both Houses of Parliament and the elected members of the State Legislative Assemblies, so a college of all members of Parliament and all State Legislatures is wrong. Nominated members of either House, and members of State Legislative Councils, have no vote; after the 70th Amendment, the elected members of the Assemblies of Delhi and Puducherry also vote. The election uses proportional representation by the single transferable vote, and it is held by secret ballot. Option A is correct because Article 53(1) vests the executive power of the Union in the President, to be exercised directly or through subordinate officers. Option B is correct because Article 53(3)(b) says nothing prevents Parliament from conferring functions by law on authorities other than the President. Option D is correct because Article 57 makes a person who holds or has held the office eligible for re-election; Dr Rajendra Prasad was elected twice. Exam tip: President's electoral college = elected MPs + elected MLAs (including Delhi and Puducherry); nominated members and MLCs do not vote.

Practice Questions

View all
Q1.Indian PolityHard

In which case did the Supreme Court recognise a living will, or advance medical directive, as part of the right to die with dignity?

  1. A.Aruna Shanbaug versus Union of India, 2011
  2. B.Common Cause versus Union of India, 2018
  3. C.Gian Kaur versus State of Punjab, 1996
  4. D.P. Rathinam versus Union of India, 1994
Show answer
Correct answer: B. Common Cause versus Union of India, 2018

A Constitution Bench held that the right to die with dignity is part of the right to life under Article 21, and that an adult of sound mind may draw up an advance directive, popularly called a living will, refusing life support if he later becomes terminally ill or goes…

Q2.Indian PolityMedium

Hussainara Khatoon versus State of Bihar, 1979, is associated with which right under Article 21?

  1. A.Right to a speedy trial
  2. B.Right to privacy
  3. C.Right to shelter
  4. D.Right to a clean environment
Show answer
Correct answer: A. Right to a speedy trial

The petition, India's first reported public interest litigation, brought to light thousands of undertrial prisoners in Bihar jails who had been locked up longer than the maximum sentence for their alleged offence.

Q3.Indian PolityEasy

Article 21A provides free and compulsory education to children of which age group?

  1. A.Birth to six years
  2. B.Six to fourteen years
  3. C.Six to eighteen years
  4. D.Fourteen to eighteen years
Show answer
Correct answer: B. Six to fourteen years

Article 21A, inserted by the 86th Amendment, 2002, says that the State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years in such manner as the State may by law determine, and the Right to Education Act, 2009, works out that promise…

Q4.Indian PolityMedium

In which case did the Supreme Court hold that the right to livelihood is a part of the right to life under Article 21?

  1. A.Olga Tellis versus Bombay Municipal Corporation
  2. B.Chameli Singh versus State of Uttar Pradesh
  3. C.Hussainara Khatoon versus State of Bihar
  4. D.Subhash Kumar versus State of Bihar
Show answer
Correct answer: A. Olga Tellis versus Bombay Municipal Corporation

The Court held that the right to life includes the right to livelihood, because no person can live without the means of living, and that pavement and slum dwellers could not be evicted without a fair hearing.

Q5.Indian PolityHard

Under Article 359, the enforcement of which pair of fundamental rights cannot be suspended during a national emergency?

  1. A.Articles 19 and 21
  2. B.Articles 20 and 21
  3. C.Articles 14 and 21
  4. D.Articles 21 and 22
Show answer
Correct answer: B. Articles 20 and 21

Article 359 lets the President suspend the right to move any court for the enforcement of fundamental rights while a national emergency is in force, but the 44th Amendment Act, 1978, passed after the experience of the 1975 Emergency, placed Article 20, on protection against conviction for offences, and Article…