Consider the following statements regarding Zonal Councils structure and functional scope:
1. The Zonal Councils were established under the States Reorganisation Act of 1956 to provide a forum for inter-state cooperation and coordination.
2. The North Eastern Council was created by a separate Act of Parliament, the North Eastern Council Act of 1971, rather than the 1956 Act.
3. The Union Home Minister serves as the common Chairman for all five Zonal Councils in the country.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
The Zonal Councils were indeed established by the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, to promote inter-state cooperation, while the North Eastern Council was created separately by the North Eastern Council Act, 1971, to address the specific needs of the northeastern states. The Union Home Minister serves as the ex-officio Chairman of all five Zonal Councils, which are advisory bodies designed to foster coordination on matters of common interest. As all three statements accurately reflect the statutory provisions and organizational structure of these bodies, they are all correct.
Consider the following statements regarding Mutual delegation of functions between Union and States:
1. The 42nd Amendment Act of 1976 introduced Article 258B to facilitate the transfer of legislative powers from the State List to the Union List, effectively increasing the scope of mutual delegation beyond executive functions.
2. Article 258(1) provides for the delegation of judicial powers from the Union to the State judiciary, a provision that was utilized during the 1962 emergency to expedite the disposal of cases related to the Defence of India Act.
3. Article 258(1) of the Constitution empowers the President to entrust, with the consent of the State Government, any executive functions of the Union to that State.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 3 is correct as Article 258(1) empowers the President, with the consent of the State Government, to entrust executive functions of the Union to that State. Statement 1 is incorrect because there is no Article 258B in the Constitution, and the 42nd Amendment did not facilitate the transfer of legislative powers between lists. Statement 2 is incorrect because Article 258(1) pertains strictly to executive functions, not judicial powers, and the Constitution does not provide for the delegation of judicial functions between the Union and States.
Consider the following statements regarding Inter-State Council composition and mandate:
1. The composition of the Inter-State Council includes all Chief Ministers of States and Chief Ministers of Union Territories having Legislative Assemblies.
2. The Prime Minister of India serves as the Chairman of the Inter-State Council.
3. Article 263 of the Indian Constitution empowers the President to constitute a council if it appears that the public interests would be served by the establishment of such an entity.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
The Inter-State Council is established under Article 263 by the President to promote coordination between states, and it is chaired by the Prime Minister. Its composition includes the Prime Minister as Chairman, Chief Ministers of all states, Chief Ministers of Union Territories with Legislative Assemblies, and Administrators of UTs without Legislative Assemblies, along with six Union Cabinet Ministers nominated by the Prime Minister. All three statements are factually correct as they align with the constitutional mandate and the established composition rules under the Inter-State Council Rules, 1990.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional provisions for inter-state water sharing tribunals:
1. Under the 2019 Amendment, the Chairperson of the permanent tribunal is appointed by the President of India in consultation with the Chief Justice of the respective High Courts of the involved riparian states.
2. The Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal was established in 1990 under the River Boards Act of 1956, which functions as the primary legislative framework for managing inter-state river basin development.
3. The Supreme Court retains original jurisdiction under Article 131 to adjudicate inter-state water disputes, and the 1956 Act serves as a supplementary mechanism for states to bypass judicial litigation.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the Chairperson of the permanent tribunal is appointed by the Central Government on the recommendation of a Selection Committee, not the Chief Justice of High Courts. Statement 2 is incorrect as the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal was established under the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956, not the River Boards Act, 1956. Statement 3 is incorrect because Article 262(2) of the Constitution explicitly bars the Supreme Court and any other court from exercising jurisdiction over inter-state water disputes, thereby making the tribunal's adjudication final and exclusive.
Consider the following statements regarding Inter-State Council composition and mandate:
1. The Inter-State Council is tasked with investigating and discussing subjects in which some or all of the States, or the Union and one or more of the States, have a common interest.
2. Six Union Cabinet Ministers, including the Minister of Home Affairs, are nominated by the Prime Minister as permanent invitees to the Inter-State Council.
3. Administrators of Union Territories not having Legislative Assemblies are included as members of the Inter-State Council.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
The Inter-State Council, established under Article 263, is mandated to investigate and discuss subjects of common interest between the Union and States. Its composition, as per the 1990 presidential order, includes the Prime Minister as Chairman, all Chief Ministers, and Administrators of Union Territories (with or without legislatures) as members, along with six Union Cabinet Ministers nominated by the Prime Minister as permanent invitees. All three statements are factually accurate according to the constitutional provisions and the established rules of the Council.
Consider the following statements regarding Full Faith and Credit Clause under Article 261:
1. The Seventh Schedule of the Constitution places the regulation of the effect of judicial proceedings under the Concurrent List, which allows State Legislatures to enact independent laws regarding the recognition of out-of-state decrees.
2. The Parliament is empowered under Article 261(c) to determine the mode in which the acts, records, and judicial proceedings referred to in the article shall be proved and the effect thereof.
3. The Supreme Court in the 1962 case of State of Bihar v. Sonabati Kumari clarified that Article 261 provides for the automatic enforcement of criminal convictions across state borders without the need for state-level executive intervention.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct as Article 261(3) explicitly empowers Parliament to prescribe the manner and effect of proving acts, records, and judicial proceedings. Statement 1 is incorrect because the recognition of public acts, records, and judicial proceedings falls under the Union List (Entry 12), not the Concurrent List, thereby limiting State legislative autonomy in this domain. Statement 3 is incorrect because Article 261 applies specifically to civil proceedings; criminal convictions are governed by the Code of Criminal Procedure and specific extradition-like arrangements between states, as the Constitution does not mandate automatic cross-border enforcement of criminal judgments.
Consider the following statements regarding Inter-state council vs National Development Council:
1. The National Development Council was created by a resolution of the Planning Commission in 1950, and its administrative functions are overseen by the Ministry of Finance.
2. The National Development Council was set up in August 1952 as a non-constitutional body to strengthen and mobilize the effort and resources of the nation in support of the Five Year Plans.
3. The Inter-State Council was established in 1990 under Article 263 of the Constitution following the recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the National Development Council (NDC) was established in 1952 by a Cabinet resolution, not the Planning Commission, and its administrative support is provided by the NITI Aayog (formerly Planning Commission), not the Ministry of Finance. Statement 2 is correct as the NDC was set up in August 1952 as an extra-constitutional, non-statutory body to ensure cooperation between the Centre and states for Five Year Plans. Statement 3 is correct because the Inter-State Council was indeed established in 1990 by a Presidential order under Article 263, acting upon the recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission to promote center-state and inter-state coordination.
Consider the following statements regarding Legislative competence over inter-state river valley development:
1. Under the provisions of the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956, the decision of a Tribunal constituted for a specific dispute is final and binding on the parties to the dispute and is given the same effect as an order or decree of the Supreme Court.
2. The Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal, initially constituted in 1969, issued its first report in 1973 and was subsequently reconstituted in 2004 to address further requests for water allocation from the riparian states.
3. The Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal, constituted in 1969, submitted its final report and decision in 1980, which addressed the allocation of water among the basin states of Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, and Odisha.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as Section 6 of the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956, grants the Tribunal's final award the status of a Supreme Court decree. Statement 2 is correct because the Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal (KWDT-I) was established in 1969, delivered its report in 1973, and was reconstituted as KWDT-II in 2004 to handle subsequent allocation requests. Statement 3 is correct as the Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal, also formed in 1969, finalized its award in 1980, effectively adjudicating water sharing among the five specified riparian states.
Consider the following statements regarding Legislative competence over inter-state river valley development:
1. The Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956, was amended in 2002 to incorporate the recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission, which proposed the creation of a permanent tribunal to handle all ongoing river water conflicts.
2. Entry 56 of the Union List in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution empowers the Parliament to provide for the regulation and development of inter-State rivers and river valleys to the extent such regulation is declared by Parliament by law to be expedient in the public interest.
3. The Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956, was enacted by Parliament under the authority granted by Article 262 of the Constitution to adjudicate disputes relating to waters of inter-State rivers.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct as Entry 56 of the Union List grants Parliament the power to regulate inter-state rivers if declared expedient in the public interest, while Statement 3 is correct because Article 262 empowers Parliament to provide for the adjudication of disputes relating to inter-state river waters, leading to the enactment of the 1956 Act. Statement 1 is incorrect because the 2002 amendment to the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act was based on the recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission regarding the time-bound disposal of cases and the creation of a data bank, but it did not mandate a single permanent tribunal, a feature only introduced by the 2019 Amendment Act.
Consider the following statements regarding Role of Governor in inter-state coordination:
1. Article 263 of the Constitution empowers the President to establish an Inter-State Council, which serves as a platform for Governors to discuss issues of common interest between states.
2. The Inter-State Water Disputes Act of 1956 provides for the Governor to act as the presiding officer of the tribunal, a mechanism used in the 1990 Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal formation.
3. The Zonal Councils, established under the States Reorganisation Act of 1956, include the Governors of the respective states as invitees or participants to facilitate regional coordination.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as Article 263 empowers the President to establish an Inter-State Council to inquire into and advise upon disputes between states. Statement 3 is correct because the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, established Zonal Councils where Governors act as advisors or participants to foster regional cooperation. Statement 2 is incorrect because the Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956, mandates that tribunals are constituted by the Central Government with members appointed by the Chief Justice of India, and Governors have no statutory role as presiding officers in these judicial bodies.
Consider the following statements regarding Inter-state council vs National Development Council:
1. The First Five Year Plan was approved by the National Development Council in 1951, and its secretariat is provided by the Ministry of Home Affairs to ensure coordination between states.
2. Article 263 allows the President to establish the Inter-State Council, and the body held its inaugural meeting in New Delhi under the chairmanship of the Union Home Minister in 1990.
3. The Inter-State Council provides for the adjudication of inter-state water disputes, a function that was transferred to it from the River Boards Act of 1956 during the 1990 reorganization.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the National Development Council (NDC) was established in 1952, not 1951, and its secretariat is provided by NITI Aayog (formerly the Planning Commission), not the Ministry of Home Affairs. Statement 2 is incorrect because, while Article 263 empowers the President to establish the Inter-State Council, the body is chaired by the Prime Minister, not the Union Home Minister. Statement 3 is incorrect because the Inter-State Council is a recommendatory body for policy coordination and does not handle the adjudication of inter-state water disputes, which is governed by the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956.
Consider the following statements regarding Freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse across India:
1. Under Article 304(b), the legislature of a State may impose reasonable restrictions on the freedom of trade, commerce, or intercourse with or within that State as may be required in the public interest, provided the Bill receives the previous sanction of the President.
2. Article 301 of the Constitution declares that trade, commerce, and intercourse throughout the territory of India shall be free, subject to the other provisions of Part XIII.
3. The Inter-State Council established under Article 263 serves as the primary adjudicatory body for resolving disputes arising from trade barriers, and it has functioned as a judicial tribunal since its inception in 1990.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as Article 304(b) empowers State legislatures to impose reasonable restrictions in the public interest, contingent upon the President's prior sanction. Statement 2 is correct because Article 301 establishes the constitutional guarantee of freedom of trade, commerce, and intercourse throughout India, subject to the regulatory provisions of Part XIII. Statement 3 is incorrect because the Inter-State Council under Article 263 is a recommendatory body tasked with coordinating policy and investigating disputes, not a judicial tribunal, and Parliament is empowered under Article 307 to appoint an appropriate authority for carrying out the purposes of Articles 301 to 304.
Consider the following statements regarding Adjudication of disputes relating to waters of inter-state rivers:
1. The Inter-State River Water Disputes Act was enacted by Parliament in 1956 to address the legal complexities arising from water sharing between states.
2. Under the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, the decision of a water disputes tribunal, once published by the Central Government in the Official Gazette, has the same force as an order or decree of the Supreme Court.
3. Article 262 of the Indian Constitution empowers Parliament to provide by law for the adjudication of any dispute or complaint with respect to the use, distribution, or control of the waters of any inter-state river.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
All three statements are correct. The Inter-State River Water Disputes Act was enacted in 1956 under the authority granted by Article 262 of the Constitution, which empowers Parliament to legislate on the adjudication of inter-state water disputes. Furthermore, Section 6 of the Act stipulates that the final decision of a tribunal, once notified by the Central Government in the Official Gazette, holds the same legal force and binding nature as a decree of the Supreme Court, effectively barring the jurisdiction of other courts in such matters.
Consider the following statements regarding Parliamentary power to restrict freedom of trade and commerce:
1. Article 303(1) prohibits both Parliament and state legislatures from making laws that give preference to one state over another, and this provision was modeled after the Commerce Clause found in the 1787 United States Constitution.
2. The Supreme Court in the Atiabari Tea Co. Ltd. v. State of Assam (1961) case clarified that the freedom guaranteed under Article 301 is not absolute and is subject to the regulatory powers of the Parliament.
3. The Inter-State Council established under Article 263 serves as the primary body for reviewing parliamentary legislation concerning trade restrictions, and it was first constituted following the 1983 Sarkaria Commission recommendation.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct because the Atiabari Tea Co. case established that while Article 301 guarantees freedom of trade, it is subject to reasonable restrictions under Articles 302-304. Statement 1 is incorrect because Article 303(1) specifically restricts Parliament's power to give preference to one state over another, but it was modeled after the Australian Constitution, not the US Commerce Clause. Statement 3 is incorrect because the Inter-State Council is a constitutional body under Article 263 for coordinating policy, not for reviewing the constitutionality of parliamentary legislation, and it was first constituted in 1990, not immediately following the 1983 commission.
Consider the following statements regarding Inter-state council vs National Development Council:
1. The Prime Minister serves as the Chairman of the National Development Council, which includes all Union Cabinet Ministers and Chief Ministers of all States as members.
2. The Inter-State Council is chaired by the Prime Minister and includes the Chief Ministers of all States and Union Territories with Legislative Assemblies as its members.
3. The Sarkaria Commission, which proposed the formal creation of the Inter-State Council, was appointed by the Government of India in June 1983.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
All three statements are correct. The National Development Council, established in 1952, is chaired by the Prime Minister and comprises all Union Cabinet Ministers and Chief Ministers to ensure coordination in national planning. The Inter-State Council, established in 1990 under Article 263, is also chaired by the Prime Minister and includes all Chief Ministers and administrators of UTs to facilitate inter-state coordination. Finally, the Sarkaria Commission was indeed appointed in June 1983 to review Centre-State relations, and its recommendation led to the formal establishment of the Inter-State Council.
Consider the following statements regarding Jurisdiction of Supreme Court in inter-state disputes under Article 131:
1. The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 131 includes the power to review the constitutional validity of international treaties signed by the Union government if such treaties affect the territorial integrity of a state as defined in the 1956 States Reorganisation Act.
2. Article 131 functions as the primary legal avenue for the Supreme Court to resolve boundary disputes between states, incorporating the recommendations of the 1953 Fazl Ali Commission as the binding legal standard for judicial determination.
3. In matters concerning the division of assets and liabilities between successor states under the 2000 Reorganization Acts, Article 131 provides the Supreme Court with the authority to appoint an arbitrator to resolve financial disputes before the commencement of judicial proceedings.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Article 131 covers disputes between the Centre and States or between States involving a question of law or fact on which the existence or extent of a legal right depends, but it does not extend to reviewing international treaties, which are matters of executive policy, nor does it mandate the use of the 1953 Fazl Ali Commission as a binding legal standard for boundary adjudication. Furthermore, Article 131 grants the Supreme Court original jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes directly and does not empower the Court to appoint an arbitrator for financial disputes, as such matters are typically handled through statutory bodies or tribunals established under specific Reorganization Acts.
Consider the following statements regarding Zonal Councils structure and functional scope:
1. The Zonal Councils are advisory bodies that make recommendations with regard to matters of common interest, such as economic and social planning or border disputes.
2. The Chief Ministers of the states included in each zone act as the Vice-Chairman of the respective Zonal Council by rotation, holding office for a period of one year.
3. The Zonal Councils were constituted under Article 263 of the Indian Constitution, which provides for the establishment of an Inter-State Council to facilitate coordination between states.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as Zonal Councils are statutory advisory bodies established to foster cooperation on issues like socio-economic planning and interstate disputes. Statement 2 is correct because the Chief Ministers of the states in each zone serve as Vice-Chairman by rotation, each holding the office for a one-year term. Statement 3 is incorrect because Zonal Councils were established under the States Reorganisation Act of 1956, whereas Article 263 pertains to the Inter-State Council, which is a distinct constitutional body established by the President.
Consider the following statements regarding Cooperative federalism and institutional mechanisms:
1. The Inter-State Council was established in 1990 under Article 263 of the Constitution, following the recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission.
2. The River Boards Act of 1956 provides for the establishment of boards to advise the government on the regulation of interstate rivers, with the Chief Justice of India appointing the board members.
3. The Finance Commission is constituted every five years under Article 280, and its recommendations regarding the distribution of net proceeds of taxes are binding on the Parliament.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the Inter-State Council was indeed established in 1990 via a Presidential order based on the Sarkaria Commission's recommendations under Article 263. Statement 2 is incorrect because the River Boards Act empowers the Central Government, not the Chief Justice of India, to establish boards. Statement 3 is incorrect because the Finance Commission is constituted every five years or earlier as deemed necessary, and its recommendations are advisory in nature, not binding on the Parliament.
Consider the following statements regarding Adjudication of disputes relating to waters of inter-state rivers:
1. The Supreme Court of India maintains original jurisdiction under Article 131 to adjudicate inter-state water disputes, provided the river basin covers more than three states and involves a minimum of two riparian territories.
2. The Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal was constituted in 1990 to resolve the long-standing water sharing conflict between the states of Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and the Union Territory of Puducherry.
3. The Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal, constituted in 1969, submitted its final report and decision in 1980 regarding the allocation of water among the states of Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, and Odisha.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because Article 262 of the Constitution explicitly excludes the Supreme Court's jurisdiction over inter-state water disputes, empowering Parliament to provide for adjudication by tribunals instead. Statement 2 is correct as the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal was established in 1990 under the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956, to address the dispute between Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Puducherry. Statement 3 is correct because the Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal, constituted in 1969, delivered its final award in 1980, effectively allocating the river's water among the five riparian states of Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, and Odisha.
Consider the following statements regarding Zonal Councils structure and functional scope:
1. The Administrator of the Union Territory of Delhi is a permanent member of the Northern Zonal Council, as established by the 1956 Act to oversee regional infrastructure projects.
2. The Zonal Councils hold the authority to issue binding directives to state governments on matters concerning river water sharing, provided the consensus is reached by a two-thirds majority of member states.
3. The Zonal Council Secretariat functions under the administrative control of the Ministry of External Affairs, which coordinates the participation of states sharing international borders.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
All statements are incorrect: Zonal Councils are advisory bodies established under the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, and do not possess the authority to issue binding directives on any matter, including river water sharing. The Administrator of Delhi is not a member of the Northern Zonal Council, and the Zonal Council Secretariat functions under the administrative control of the Ministry of Home Affairs, not the Ministry of External Affairs.
Consider the following statements regarding Role of Governor in inter-state coordination:
1. The 1990 Inter-State Council notification provides for the Governor to chair the Standing Committee of the Council, a role that was formalised during the V.P. Singh administration.
2. The Governor of a state is empowered by Article 262 to refer inter-state river water disputes directly to the Supreme Court, a provision invoked during the 2002 Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal proceedings.
3. The States Reorganisation Act of 1956 encompasses the creation of the National Integration Council, which functions under the chairmanship of the Governor of the state where the meeting is convened.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
All three statements are incorrect. The Inter-State Council's Standing Committee is chaired by the Union Home Minister, not the Governor; Article 262 empowers the Parliament to adjudicate river water disputes, explicitly excluding the Supreme Court's jurisdiction; and the National Integration Council is chaired by the Prime Minister, not state Governors, and was established in 1961, not under the 1956 States Reorganisation Act.
Consider the following statements regarding Role of Governor in inter-state coordination:
1. The Sarkaria Commission report of 1988 suggested that Governors should act as a bridge between the Union and the States, particularly in the context of inter-state water dispute resolution.
2. Under the North Eastern Council Act of 1971, the Governors of the eight North Eastern states serve as members of the Council to coordinate developmental and security-related inter-state policies.
3. The Seventh Schedule of the Constitution includes the administration of Zonal Councils under the Union List, which allows the Governor to exercise executive oversight over inter-state infrastructure projects.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the Sarkaria Commission emphasized the Governor's role as a vital link between the Union and States, including facilitating communication in inter-state disputes. Statement 2 is correct because the North Eastern Council Act, 1971 (as amended in 2002) mandates that Governors of the eight North Eastern states are members of the Council to ensure regional coordination. Statement 3 is incorrect because Zonal Councils were established under the States Reorganisation Act of 1956, not the Seventh Schedule, and Governors do not possess executive oversight over inter-state infrastructure projects through this mechanism.
Consider the following statements regarding Extra-territorial operation of state laws:
1. The Extradition Act of 1962 provides the legal framework for the surrender of fugitive criminals to foreign states with which India has an extradition treaty or arrangement.
2. Section 4 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, extends the application of the Code to offences committed by any citizen of India in any place without and beyond India.
3. The Supreme Court ruling in the Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (1989) case addressed the issue of territorial nexus in the context of corporate taxation and extra-territorial jurisdiction.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as the Extradition Act, 1962, governs the surrender of fugitives to foreign nations under bilateral treaties or arrangements. Statement 2 is correct because Section 4 of the IPC establishes the principle of extra-territorial jurisdiction, making Indian citizens liable for offences committed anywhere globally. Statement 3 is correct as the Supreme Court in Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT (1989) clarified the territorial nexus doctrine, affirming that a state law can have extra-territorial operation if there is a sufficient connection between the object and the state.
Consider the following statements regarding Inter-state trade and commerce restrictions under Article 304:
1. The Supreme Court in the Automobile Transport (Rajasthan) Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan (1962) case established that regulatory measures or compensatory taxes are outside the scope of Article 301, and these measures are subject to the parliamentary approval process defined in Article 307.
2. Under Article 304(b), a State Legislature can impose reasonable restrictions on the freedom of trade, commerce, or intercourse with or within that State as may be required in the public interest.
3. Article 302 empowers the Parliament to impose restrictions on the freedom of trade between one State and another, and the 44th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1978 added the requirement of judicial review for such parliamentary laws.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct as Article 304(b) explicitly allows State Legislatures to impose reasonable restrictions on trade in the public interest, provided they receive the prior sanction of the President. Statement 1 is incorrect because, while the Automobile Transport case held that regulatory and compensatory taxes are outside the scope of Article 301, they do not require parliamentary approval under Article 307, which instead deals with the appointment of an authority to carry out the purposes of Articles 301-304. Statement 3 is incorrect because Article 302 empowers Parliament to restrict trade, but the 44th Amendment did not introduce a specific requirement for judicial review of such laws; judicial review is an inherent feature of the Constitution under Article 13 and Article 32.
Consider the following statements regarding Mutual delegation of functions between Union and States:
1. Under Article 258(2), a law made by Parliament which applies in any State may confer powers and impose duties upon the State or its officers, notwithstanding that the matter relates to a subject in the State List.
2. Article 258A, inserted by the Seventh Amendment Act of 1956, allows the Governor of a State to entrust, with the consent of the Government of India, any executive functions of the State to the Union.
3. Under the framework of Article 258A, the Governor of a State acts in their individual discretion to delegate functions to the Union, a process that was formalized by the Administrative Reforms Commission in its 1966 report on Centre-State relations.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as Article 258(2) empowers Parliament to confer powers and duties upon a State or its officers regarding matters in the State List through legislation. Statement 2 is correct because Article 258A was indeed inserted by the Seventh Amendment Act, 1956, to enable the Governor to entrust State executive functions to the Union with the latter's consent. Statement 3 is incorrect because the Governor does not act in their individual discretion; they must act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, and the provision was established by the Constitution Amendment, not by the Administrative Reforms Commission.
Consider the following statements regarding Legislative competence over inter-state river valley development:
1. Article 262 of the Constitution provides that the Supreme Court or any other court shall have jurisdiction in respect of any dispute or complaint with respect to the use, distribution, or control of the waters of any inter-State river if the Parliament passes a resolution to that effect.
2. The River Boards Act, 1956, was invoked by the Union Government in 1972 to establish the Narmada River Board, which facilitated the consensus leading to the 1979 award regarding the height of the Sardar Sarovar Dam.
3. The River Boards Act, 1956, provides for the establishment of River Boards for the regulation and development of inter-State rivers and river valleys in consultation with the State Governments concerned.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 3 is correct as the River Boards Act, 1956, empowers the Union to establish boards for inter-state river regulation in consultation with states. Statement 1 is incorrect because Article 262 explicitly bars the Supreme Court and other courts from exercising jurisdiction over inter-state water disputes, leaving it to Parliament to provide for adjudication. Statement 2 is incorrect because, despite the 1956 Act, no River Board has been established to date, and the Narmada dispute was resolved through a tribunal constituted under the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956, not a River Board.
Consider the following statements regarding Extra-territorial operation of state laws:
1. The State of Bombay v. R.M.D. Chamarbaugwala (1957) judgment established that a state law imposing a tax on betting and gambling is valid even if the prize competition is conducted outside the state, provided the activities have a nexus with the state.
2. The Inter-State Water Disputes Act of 1956 provides for the resolution of river water conflicts, and under its framework the 1990 Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal was constituted to exercise extra-territorial jurisdiction over riparian states.
3. The 1967 judgment in Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar clarified that the sale of goods is deemed to have taken place in a state if the goods are actually delivered there for consumption, even if the contract of sale was executed elsewhere.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the Supreme Court held in R.M.D. Chamarbaugwala (1957) that a state law can have extra-territorial operation if there is a sufficient territorial nexus between the state and the subject matter of the legislation. Statement 3 is correct because the Tata Iron and Steel Co. case (1958) established the 'nexus theory,' allowing states to tax sales if the goods are delivered for consumption within their territory, regardless of where the contract was signed. Statement 2 is incorrect because while the Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956, provides for tribunals, these bodies exercise statutory jurisdiction under federal law rather than 'extra-territorial jurisdiction' over sovereign states, as they operate within the constitutional framework of Article 262.
Consider the following statements regarding Regional Councils under the States Reorganisation Act:
1. The States Reorganisation Act of 1956 initially established six Zonal Councils, with the sixth council specifically created to oversee the administration of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.
2. The Inter-State Council, established under Article 263 of the Constitution, functions as the executive secretariat for the Zonal Councils to ensure the implementation of their policy recommendations.
3. The Zonal Councils were granted the power to issue binding directives to state governments regarding the sharing of river waters under the framework of the 1956 Act.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
The States Reorganisation Act, 1956, established five Zonal Councils, not six, and the North Eastern Council was later created by a separate Act in 1971. Zonal Councils are advisory bodies meant to foster inter-state cooperation, not executive or judicial ones; therefore, they lack the power to issue binding directives on river water sharing, which falls under the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act. Furthermore, the Zonal Councils are not linked to the Inter-State Council (Article 263), which is a distinct constitutional body chaired by the Prime Minister to coordinate policy between the Centre and States.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional provisions for inter-state water sharing tribunals:
1. The Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal, constituted in 1969, operates under the administrative supervision of the Inter-State Council, which provides the technical data required for final adjudication.
2. The Seventh Schedule of the Constitution places 'Water' under the Union List (Entry 56), granting the central government the authority to regulate water supplies, irrigation, and canals for all river systems.
3. Article 262 of the Constitution empowers the Parliament to provide by law for the adjudication of any dispute or complaint with respect to the use, distribution, or control of the waters of, or in, any inter-State river or river valley.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 3 is correct as Article 262 empowers Parliament to legislate on inter-state water disputes, leading to the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956. Statement 1 is incorrect because water tribunals are quasi-judicial bodies established under the 1956 Act, not under the Inter-State Council, which is a constitutional body under Article 263 for coordinating policy. Statement 2 is incorrect because 'Water' (specifically water supplies, irrigation, and canals) is a State Subject under Entry 17 of the State List, while the Union's power under Entry 56 of the Union List is limited only to the regulation and development of inter-state rivers and river valleys.
Consider the following statements regarding Coordination of state police forces in inter-state crime:
1. The Zonal Councils, created under the States Reorganisation Act of 1956, serve as advisory forums for discussing issues of common interest including internal security and police cooperation.
2. The Inter-State Gangs (Special Provisions) Act, where adopted by states, allows for the creation of joint task forces to track organized criminal syndicates operating across multiple jurisdictions.
3. The Inter-State River Water Disputes Act of 1956 includes provisions for the creation of a joint police board, which monitors the movement of criminal suspects along inter-state border regions.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as Zonal Councils were established under the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, to foster inter-state cooperation on issues like internal security. Statement 2 is correct as various states have enacted specific legislation or adopted protocols to form joint task forces for combating organized crime syndicates that operate across borders. Statement 3 is incorrect because the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956, is exclusively concerned with the adjudication of water-sharing conflicts and contains no provisions related to police boards or criminal surveillance.
Consider the following statements regarding Coordination of state police forces in inter-state crime:
1. The Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS) project, launched in 2009, provides a centralized database for state police forces to share real-time information on inter-state offenders.
2. Under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the admissibility of electronic records generated by inter-state police coordination platforms is governed by the provisions of Section 65B.
3. The National Investigation Agency (NIA) Act of 2008 empowers the agency to investigate scheduled offenses across state boundaries without seeking prior permission from individual state governments.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as CCTNS, launched in 2009 under the National e-Governance Plan, creates a nationwide networking infrastructure for real-time data sharing among police stations. Statement 2 is correct because Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act (now replaced by Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam) provides the mandatory legal framework for the admissibility of electronic evidence in Indian courts. Statement 3 is correct as the NIA Act, 2008 grants the agency suo motu powers to investigate scheduled offenses across states, overriding the need for prior state consent required under the general provisions of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act.
Consider the following statements regarding Legal status of inter-state compacts and agreements:
1. The North Eastern Council was created by the North Eastern Council Act of 1971 to coordinate regional development, and it operates as a specialized agency under the direct administrative control of the Ministry of Finance.
2. The Southern Zonal Council includes the states of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and the Union Territory of Puducherry, and it serves as the final appellate authority for inter-state boundary demarcations.
3. The Inter-State Migrant Workmen Act of 1979 provides for the regulation of employment of inter-state migrant workers and functions as a constitutional mechanism to resolve labor jurisdiction disputes between state governments.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the North Eastern Council functions under the administrative control of the Ministry of Development of North Eastern Region (DoNER), not the Ministry of Finance. Statement 2 is incorrect as Zonal Councils are merely advisory bodies and possess no judicial or appellate authority to resolve inter-state boundary disputes, which fall under the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 131. Statement 3 is incorrect because the Inter-State Migrant Workmen Act, 1979 is a piece of labor legislation aimed at protecting workers' rights and does not serve as a constitutional mechanism for resolving labor jurisdiction disputes between state governments.
Consider the following statements regarding Legal status of inter-state compacts and agreements:
1. The River Boards Act of 1956 provides for the creation of boards to advise the government on the development of inter-state river basins, and these boards possess the authority to allocate water shares between riparian states.
2. The Inter-State Council, established in 1990 under the recommendation of the Sarkaria Commission, functions as a judicial body with the power to issue binding decrees on fiscal disputes between the Union and the States.
3. Article 262 of the Constitution empowers the Parliament to provide by law for the adjudication of any dispute or complaint with respect to the use, distribution, or control of the waters of any inter-State river.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 3 is correct as Article 262 empowers Parliament to legislate for the adjudication of inter-state river water disputes, excluding the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in such matters. Statement 1 is incorrect because the River Boards Act, 1956, only empowers boards to advise the government on development and regulation, not to allocate water shares. Statement 2 is incorrect because the Inter-State Council is a recommendatory constitutional body under Article 263, not a judicial body, and it lacks the power to issue binding decrees.
Consider the following statements regarding Regional Councils under the States Reorganisation Act:
1. The Chief Ministers of the states included in each zone act as the Vice-Chairman of the respective Zonal Council by rotation, holding office for a period of one year at a time.
2. The Union Home Minister serves as the common Chairman for all five Zonal Councils currently operating in India.
3. The Zonal Councils were established by Part III of the States Reorganisation Act of 1956 to provide a platform for inter-state cooperation.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
All three statements are correct: Zonal Councils were established under Part III of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, to foster inter-state cooperation. The Union Home Minister serves as the common Chairman for all five Zonal Councils, while the Chief Ministers of the states within each zone act as Vice-Chairmen by rotation, each holding office for a period of one year.
Consider the following statements regarding Full Faith and Credit Clause under Article 261:
1. The Inter-State Council established under Article 263 serves as the primary adjudicatory body for disputes arising from the non-recognition of public records between states under Article 261.
2. The final judgments or orders delivered or passed by civil courts in any part of the territory of India are capable of execution anywhere within those territories according to the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
3. Article 261 of the Indian Constitution ensures that full faith and credit is given throughout the territory of India to public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of the Union and of every State.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because Article 261 does not designate the Inter-State Council as an adjudicatory body; disputes regarding the enforcement of public acts are matters for the judiciary to interpret under the law made by Parliament. Statement 2 is correct as Article 261(3) explicitly mandates that final judgments or orders of civil courts are executable anywhere in India, subject to the procedural framework of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Statement 3 is correct because Article 261(1) serves as a constitutional guarantee ensuring that public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of both the Union and States are accorded full faith and credit across the entire territory of India.
Consider the following statements regarding Freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse across India:
1. Article 303(2) permits the Parliament to enact laws that grant preference to one State over another for the purpose of dealing with a situation arising from scarcity of goods in any part of the territory of India, a power that was invoked during the 1962 national emergency.
2. The Parliament is empowered under Article 302 to impose such restrictions on the freedom of trade, commerce, or intercourse between one State and another as may be required in the public interest, provided the legislation does not give preference to one State over another.
3. The Zonal Councils, created under the States Reorganisation Act of 1956, possess the constitutional authority to issue binding directives to State governments regarding the removal of local tax barriers on the movement of essential commodities.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct because Article 302 empowers Parliament to impose restrictions on trade and commerce in the public interest, provided it does not discriminate between states. Statement 1 is incorrect because while Article 303(2) allows for such preferences during scarcity, it is a constitutional provision, not a power invoked specifically via the 1962 emergency. Statement 3 is incorrect because Zonal Councils are statutory advisory bodies established under the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, and they lack the constitutional authority to issue binding directives to state governments.
Consider the following statements regarding Freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse across India:
1. The Finance Commission, constituted under Article 280, maintains a dedicated secretariat to oversee the implementation of Article 301 and holds the power to withhold grants to States that impose discriminatory taxes on inter-state trade.
2. Under the Seventh Schedule, the power to regulate inter-state trade and commerce is listed in the Concurrent List, allowing both the Union and the States to enact conflicting legislation provided the State law receives the Governor's assent.
3. Article 305 protects existing laws and laws providing for State monopolies, and it was amended by the 44th Constitutional Amendment Act to include specific protections for nationalized transport services.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because Article 307 empowers Parliament to appoint an authority to carry out the purposes of Articles 301-304, not the Finance Commission. Statement 2 is incorrect as 'inter-state trade and commerce' is exclusively a Union List subject (Entry 42), not Concurrent. Statement 3 is incorrect because Article 305 was amended by the 4th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1955, not the 44th, to protect laws relating to state monopolies and nationalized services.
Consider the following statements regarding Coordination of state police forces in inter-state crime:
1. The 2006 Supreme Court directives in the Prakash Singh case established the National Police Commission, which serves as the primary body for resolving jurisdictional conflicts between state police forces.
2. The Inter-State Council, established under Article 263 of the Constitution, facilitates coordination between states to investigate inter-state crimes through the National Crime Records Bureau.
3. The 1986 Police Act provides for the establishment of a federal police force, and under this framework, the Union Home Ministry coordinates inter-state investigations through the Bureau of Police Research and Development.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct as Article 263 empowers the President to establish the Inter-State Council to investigate and discuss subjects of common interest, including public order and police coordination. Statement 1 is incorrect because the Prakash Singh case (2006) mandated police reforms like the establishment of State Security Commissions, not the National Police Commission, which was formed in 1977. Statement 3 is incorrect because there is no '1986 Police Act' governing federal police; instead, the Union Home Ministry coordinates inter-state investigations primarily through the National Investigation Agency (NIA) and the MHA's own administrative mechanisms, not the Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPR&D), which is a think tank.
Consider the following statements regarding Adjudication of disputes relating to waters of inter-state rivers:
1. The Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal, established in 1969, operates under the administrative jurisdiction of the Ministry of Power, which coordinates the technical data collection for the basin states.
2. The Inter-State River Water Disputes (Amendment) Act of 2002 introduced the concept of a permanent tribunal, which replaced the ad-hoc tribunal system previously governed by the 1956 legislation.
3. The River Boards Act of 1956 was established to advise the Government of India on the regulation and development of inter-state rivers and river valleys.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 3 is correct as the River Boards Act, 1956, empowers the Central Government to establish boards to advise states on the regulation and development of inter-state rivers. Statement 1 is incorrect because water disputes are under the administrative jurisdiction of the Ministry of Jal Shakti, not the Ministry of Power. Statement 2 is incorrect because the permanent tribunal mechanism was introduced by the Inter-State River Water Disputes (Amendment) Act, 2019, not 2002, which previously relied on ad-hoc tribunals.
Consider the following statements regarding Cooperative federalism and institutional mechanisms:
1. The North Eastern Council was set up by the North Eastern Council Act of 1971, and it functions as a constitutional body under the direct administrative control of the Ministry of Finance.
2. The National Development Council was formed in 1952 to strengthen the federal approach to planning, and its membership includes the Union Cabinet Ministers and the Governors of all states.
3. The Zonal Councils were created by the States Reorganisation Act of 1956, and the Prime Minister serves as the permanent chairman of each of the five regional bodies.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the North Eastern Council is a statutory body under the Ministry of Development of North Eastern Region (DoNER), not the Ministry of Finance. Statement 2 is incorrect as the National Development Council (NDC) includes the Chief Ministers of all states and members of the NITI Aayog (formerly Planning Commission), not the Governors. Statement 3 is incorrect because the Union Home Minister serves as the chairman of all five Zonal Councils, while the Prime Minister is not the chairman of these bodies.
Consider the following statements regarding Mutual delegation of functions between Union and States:
1. The Inter-State Council established under Article 263 acts as the primary authority for overseeing the implementation of Article 258, and it maintains a registry of all executive functions delegated by the Union to the States since 1990.
2. In the case of State of Rajasthan v. Union of India (1977), the Supreme Court noted that the executive power of the Union is co-extensive with its legislative power, subject to the provisions of Article 258 regarding delegation.
3. The mutual delegation of functions between the Union and the States serves to reduce the administrative burden on the Centre while utilizing the existing machinery of the State governments for national schemes.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because Article 263 deals with the coordination between states through the Inter-State Council, whereas Article 258 pertains to the delegation of Union functions to states, and no such registry exists under the Council's mandate. Statement 2 is correct as the Supreme Court in the 1977 Rajasthan case affirmed that the Union's executive power extends to all matters where Parliament has legislative competence, subject to the constitutional provisions for delegation. Statement 3 is correct because the mutual delegation mechanism under Articles 258 and 258A is designed to enhance administrative efficiency by allowing the Centre to leverage state infrastructure for national-level implementation.
Consider the following statements regarding Inter-state migration and domicile rights:
1. The 2002 National Policy on Migration suggested the creation of inter-state migration cards, and this policy was formally adopted by the Inter-State Council during its 15th meeting in New Delhi.
2. The Sixth Schedule of the Constitution provides for the administration of tribal areas in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, and Mizoram, and it contains specific clauses that restrict the migration of non-tribal citizens into these autonomous districts.
3. The 1973 Mulki Rules judgment by the Supreme Court upheld the validity of residential requirements in Telangana, and these rules remain the primary legal basis for domicile-based job reservations in the region.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect as no such 'National Policy on Migration' was formally adopted by the Inter-State Council in 2002. Statement 2 is incorrect because while the Sixth Schedule provides for autonomous administration, it does not contain specific clauses restricting the migration of non-tribal citizens; rather, it empowers Autonomous District Councils to regulate land use and trade. Statement 3 is incorrect because the Mulki Rules were effectively superseded by the Six-Point Formula and the subsequent 371-D amendment to the Constitution, which replaced local residential requirements with a different framework for public employment.
Consider the following statements regarding Inter-State Council composition and mandate:
1. The Inter-State Council was established in 1990 by a presidential order following the recommendation of the Sarkaria Commission.
2. The Inter-State Council Secretariat, which functions under the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, provides administrative support for the meetings of the National Integration Council.
3. The Standing Committee of the Inter-State Council, chaired by the Union Home Minister, was reconstituted in 2021 to process matters for the Zonal Councils established under the States Reorganisation Act of 1956.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the Inter-State Council was established in 1990 under Article 263 of the Constitution, following the Sarkaria Commission's recommendation. Statement 2 is incorrect because the Inter-State Council Secretariat functions under the Ministry of Home Affairs, not the Ministry of Personnel, and it provides support to the Inter-State Council, not the National Integration Council. Statement 3 is incorrect because, while the Standing Committee is chaired by the Union Home Minister, its primary mandate is to process matters for the Inter-State Council, and it is distinct from the Zonal Councils, which are statutory bodies established under the States Reorganisation Act of 1956.
Consider the following statements regarding Inter-state trade and commerce restrictions under Article 304:
1. Article 304(a) of the Constitution empowers the State Legislature to impose taxes on goods imported from other States or Union territories, provided similar goods manufactured in that State are subjected to similar taxes.
2. Article 303(2) provides the Parliament with the authority to grant preference to one State over another for the purpose of dealing with a situation arising from scarcity of goods, a power that was invoked during the 1965 food crisis.
3. The Supreme Court in the Atiabari Tea Co. Ltd. v. State of Assam (1961) case held that the freedom of trade, commerce, and intercourse throughout the territory of India under Article 301 is not confined to inter-State trade but extends to intra-State trade as well.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as Article 304(a) allows states to impose non-discriminatory taxes on imported goods to ensure a level playing field with locally produced goods. Statement 3 is correct because the Supreme Court in the Atiabari Tea Co. case (1961) interpreted Article 301 to encompass both inter-state and intra-state trade, protecting the economic unity of India. Statement 2 is incorrect because while Article 303(2) empowers Parliament to grant preferences to deal with scarcity, it is a constitutional provision, not a power invoked specifically by a historical event like the 1965 food crisis.
Consider the following statements regarding Regional Councils under the States Reorganisation Act:
1. The Administrator of a Union Territory is included as a member of the Zonal Council for the zone in which the Union Territory is geographically located.
2. The North Eastern Council was created by a separate Act of Parliament, the North Eastern Council Act of 1971, rather than the States Reorganisation Act of 1956.
3. The Zonal Councils are advisory bodies that discuss matters of common interest such as border disputes, linguistic minorities, and inter-state transport.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct because the States Reorganisation Act of 1956 mandates that the Administrator of each Union Territory within a zone serves as a member of its respective Zonal Council. Statement 2 is correct as the North Eastern Council was established by the North Eastern Council Act, 1971, to specifically address the unique developmental and security needs of the North Eastern states, distinct from the five Zonal Councils created by the 1956 Act. Statement 3 is correct because Zonal Councils function as high-level advisory forums for fostering cooperation among states on socio-economic issues, linguistic minority rights, and inter-state infrastructure, though their recommendations are not binding.
Consider the following statements regarding Inter-State River Water Disputes Act adjudication mechanisms:
1. The Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal submitted its final report in 1979, and the 2019 amendment grants the tribunal the power to issue interim orders that remain in force until the President of India grants formal assent to the final verdict.
2. The Interstate River Water Disputes Act provides for the appointment of tribunal members by the Chief Justice of India, who selects candidates from a panel of retired Supreme Court judges nominated by the Ministry of Jal Shakti.
3. Under the 1956 Act, the decision of a water tribunal carries the same weight as an order of the High Court, and parties can seek a review of the award by filing a petition in the High Court of the state where the river originates.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the 2019 Amendment Act mandates the constitution of a permanent Disputes Resolution Committee (DRC) and a single permanent tribunal, rather than granting the tribunal power to issue interim orders until Presidential assent. Statement 2 is incorrect as tribunal members are nominated by the Chief Justice of India from a panel provided by a Selection Committee, not the Ministry of Jal Shakti. Statement 3 is incorrect because, under Article 262 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court and High Courts are barred from the jurisdiction of water disputes; tribunal awards have the same force as a decree of the Supreme Court, not a High Court.
Consider the following statements regarding Jurisdiction of Supreme Court in inter-state disputes under Article 131:
1. The 1973 Kesavananda Bharati judgment clarified that Article 131 serves as a mechanism for the Supreme Court to issue advisory opinions to the President on matters concerning the legislative competence of State Assemblies in inter-state river basin management.
2. The 1994 S.R. Bommai case established that the Supreme Courtâs jurisdiction under Article 131 extends to the dissolution of State Legislative Assemblies when such actions are challenged by a coalition of neighboring states citing regional instability.
3. Article 131 allows the Supreme Court to entertain suits brought by a state against another state regarding the violation of fundamental rights of residents, specifically where such violations arise from the implementation of inter-state migration policies.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
All three statements are incorrect because Article 131 of the Constitution confers original jurisdiction upon the Supreme Court exclusively for disputes between the Government of India and one or more States, or between two or more States, involving questions of law or fact on which the existence or extent of a legal right depends. Statement 1 is false as Article 131 pertains to original jurisdiction, not advisory jurisdiction (which falls under Article 143), and the Kesavananda Bharati case dealt with the basic structure doctrine, not river basin management. Statement 2 is incorrect because the S.R. Bommai case focused on the President's power under Article 356 and judicial review of the proclamation of emergency, not inter-state disputes over assembly dissolution. Statement 3 is false because Article 131 excludes disputes involving private individuals or the fundamental rights of residents, as it is strictly limited to legal rights arising between federal entities.
Consider the following statements regarding Legal status of inter-state compacts and agreements:
1. The Zonal Councils were established under the States Reorganisation Act of 1956 to provide a common meeting ground for states to exchange views and experiences on major issues of economic and social planning.
2. The Inter-State Water Disputes Act of 1956 allows the Central Government to constitute a tribunal for the settlement of water disputes if the state governments fail to reach a negotiated settlement.
3. Under Article 263, the President is empowered to establish an Inter-State Council to inquire into and advise upon disputes which may have arisen between States.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
All three statements are correct. The Zonal Councils were indeed established by the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, to foster inter-state cooperation; the Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956, provides a statutory mechanism for the Central Government to set up tribunals when negotiations fail; and Article 263 empowers the President to establish an Inter-State Council to investigate and advise on disputes between states, as well as to discuss subjects of common interest.
Consider the following statements regarding Inter-state trade and commerce restrictions under Article 304:
1. The Inter-State Council, established under Article 263 in 1990, serves as the primary appellate body for resolving disputes arising from State-level trade restrictions imposed under the authority of Article 304(b).
2. The proviso to Article 304(b) states that no Bill or amendment for the purposes of clause (b) shall be introduced or moved in the Legislature of a State without the previous sanction of the President.
3. In the Jindal Stainless Ltd. v. State of Haryana (2016) judgment, a nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court clarified that compensatory taxes do not fall outside the purview of Article 304(a).
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the Inter-State Council is a recommendatory body under Article 263 for coordination, not an appellate body for trade disputes; such disputes are adjudicated by the judiciary. Statement 2 is correct as Article 304(b) mandates that any state bill imposing reasonable restrictions on trade must receive the President's prior sanction to ensure it does not violate national economic unity. Statement 3 is correct because the 2016 Jindal Stainless Ltd. judgment overruled previous precedents, establishing that compensatory taxes are not immune and must satisfy the non-discrimination test under Article 304(a).
Consider the following statements regarding Inter-State River Water Disputes Act adjudication mechanisms:
1. The Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal was constituted in 1990 following the failure of the 1924 agreement between Mysore and Madras, and its final award is subject to ratification by the Parliament of India before implementation.
2. The Inter-State River Water Disputes Act includes provisions for the creation of a National Water Board, which functions as the primary appellate authority for reviewing the technical findings of ad-hoc water tribunals.
3. The Inter-State River Water Disputes (Amendment) Act, 2019, provides for the establishment of a permanent Disputes Resolution Committee to resolve water disputes through mediation before referring the matter to a tribunal.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 3 is correct because the 2019 Amendment mandates a Dispute Resolution Committee (DRC) to attempt amicable settlement through mediation before a tribunal is constituted. Statement 1 is false because the final award of a tribunal is equivalent to a decree of the Supreme Court and does not require Parliamentary ratification. Statement 2 is false because the Act does not provide for a National Water Board as an appellate authority; instead, the 2019 Amendment introduced a permanent Tribunal with multiple benches to replace ad-hoc bodies, and tribunal awards are final and binding.
Consider the following statements regarding Extra-territorial operation of state laws:
1. The Supreme Court in the A.H. Wadia v. Commissioner of Income Tax (1949) case affirmed that the legislature of a Dominion has the power to enact laws with extra-territorial effect provided there is a sufficient territorial nexus.
2. Under the doctrine of territorial nexus, a state legislature can tax income or property located outside its borders if there exists a real connection between the state and the subject matter of the legislation.
3. Article 245(2) of the Constitution of India provides that no law made by Parliament shall be deemed to be invalid on the ground that it would have extra-territorial operation.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as the A.H. Wadia case established that a legislature can enact laws with extra-territorial effect if a sufficient territorial nexus exists. Statement 2 is correct because the doctrine of territorial nexus allows state legislatures to tax subjects outside their borders, provided there is a real and substantial connection between the state and the subject matter. Statement 3 is correct as Article 245(2) explicitly grants the Indian Parliament the authority to enact laws with extra-territorial operation, ensuring they cannot be challenged on that specific ground.
Consider the following statements regarding Inter-state migration and domicile rights:
1. Article 16(2) of the Indian Constitution prohibits discrimination in public employment on the grounds of place of birth or residence, subject to the exceptions provided under Article 16(3) for the Parliament to prescribe residential requirements.
2. The Supreme Court in the Dr. Pradeep Jain v. Union of India (1984) case observed that the concept of 'sons of the soil' is constitutionally impermissible as it undermines the unity and integrity of India.
3. The Public Employment (Requirement as to Residence) Act, 1957, was enacted by Parliament to allow for specific residential qualifications for certain classes of appointments in the states of Andhra Pradesh, Manipur, Tripura, and Himachal Pradesh.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as Article 16(2) bars discrimination based on residence, while Article 16(3) empowers Parliament to create exceptions for specific public appointments. Statement 2 is correct because the Supreme Court in Dr. Pradeep Jain v. Union of India (1984) held that 'sons of the soil' policies violate the constitutional vision of a unified India and equality of opportunity. Statement 3 is correct as the Public Employment (Requirement as to Residence) Act, 1957, was specifically enacted to allow residential qualifications for certain posts in the mentioned states, though most of its provisions have since expired.
Consider the following statements regarding Parliamentary power to restrict freedom of trade and commerce:
1. The power granted to Parliament under Article 302 is subject to the limitation that it cannot give preference to one state over another by virtue of any entry relating to trade and commerce in the Union List or Concurrent List.
2. The proviso to Article 303(2) allows Parliament to enact legislation that provides for preference to one state over another for the purpose of dealing with a situation arising from scarcity of goods in any part of the territory of India.
3. Article 302 of the Indian Constitution empowers Parliament to impose restrictions on the freedom of trade, commerce, or intercourse between one state and another as may be required in the public interest.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Article 302 empowers Parliament to impose restrictions on inter-state trade in the public interest, while Article 303(1) restricts Parliament and State Legislatures from giving legislative preference to one state over another. Statement 1 and 2 are correct because Article 303(2) provides a specific exception to this non-discrimination rule, allowing Parliament to enact laws that grant preference to a state specifically to address the scarcity of goods within India. All three statements accurately reflect the constitutional provisions governing the regulation of trade, commerce, and intercourse under Part XIII of the Indian Constitution.
Consider the following statements regarding Inter-state migration and domicile rights:
1. The States Reorganisation Act of 1956 introduced the concept of Zonal Councils to address migration issues, and these councils function under the direct administrative control of the Ministry of Home Affairs since the 1960 amendment.
2. The Inter-State Migrant Workmen Act of 1979 governs the registration of establishments employing migrant labor, and it establishes a national domicile registry maintained by the Office of the Labour Commissioner.
3. The 1955 Citizenship Act provides for the registration of overseas citizens, and it includes provisions that grant domicile status to migrants moving between states for employment in the public sector.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because Zonal Councils were established under the States Reorganisation Act of 1956, but they are advisory bodies chaired by the Union Home Minister, not under direct administrative control for migration issues. Statement 2 is incorrect as the Inter-State Migrant Workmen Act, 1979, mandates the registration of establishments and contractors but does not establish a national domicile registry, as domicile is a state-subject matter. Statement 3 is incorrect because the Citizenship Act, 1955, deals with acquisition and loss of Indian citizenship and does not contain provisions granting domicile status to internal migrants for public sector employment, which is governed by Article 16(3) of the Constitution and relevant state laws.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional provisions for inter-state water sharing tribunals:
1. The 2019 Act provides for the creation of a single permanent tribunal with multiple benches, replacing the previous system of ad-hoc tribunals and requiring the tribunal to deliver a final verdict within a fixed period of three years.
2. The Inter-State River Water Disputes (Amendment) Act, 2019 introduced the provision for a permanent Disputes Resolution Committee (DRC) to attempt amicable settlement of disputes before referring them to a formal tribunal.
3. The Inter-State Water Disputes Act of 1956 was enacted under the authority of Article 262, enabling the Central Government to constitute a tribunal for resolving water sharing conflicts when negotiations between riparian states fail.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the 2019 Amendment Act mandates a two-year timeline for the tribunal's verdict, extendable by a maximum of one year, rather than a fixed three-year period. Statement 2 is correct as the 2019 Act mandates the formation of a permanent Disputes Resolution Committee (DRC) to resolve disputes through negotiations before they reach the tribunal. Statement 3 is correct because Article 262 empowers Parliament to provide for the adjudication of inter-state water disputes, leading to the enactment of the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956.
Consider the following statements regarding Full Faith and Credit Clause under Article 261:
1. The principle of full faith and credit originates from the United States Constitution, specifically Article IV, Section 1, which influenced the drafting of Article 261 of the Indian Constitution.
2. The Law Commission of India in its 14th Report recommended that the evidentiary value of foreign public documents be treated as equivalent to domestic records under the scope of Article 261.
3. The Indian Evidence Act of 1872 includes specific provisions in Section 78 that outline the procedure for certifying public documents of foreign nations to ensure they receive full faith and credit within Indian courts.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as Article 261 of the Indian Constitution is inspired by the Full Faith and Credit Clause of Article IV, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, ensuring that public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of one state are recognized across others. Statement 2 is incorrect because the 14th Report of the Law Commission dealt with the Reform of Judicial Administration and did not propose equating foreign public documents with domestic records under Article 261. Statement 3 is incorrect because Section 78 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, pertains to the proof of public documents of sovereign states, but it does not establish the constitutional 'Full Faith and Credit' principle, which is strictly limited to the territory of India under Article 261.
Consider the following statements regarding Parliamentary power to restrict freedom of trade and commerce:
1. The Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956, introduced changes to the Seventh Schedule that influenced the scope of legislative entries regarding inter-state trade and commerce.
2. Article 304(b) permits the legislature of a state to impose reasonable restrictions on the freedom of trade, commerce, or intercourse with or within that state as may be required in the public interest, provided the bill receives the previous sanction of the President.
3. The authority of Parliament to restrict trade under Article 302 is distinct from the power of state legislatures under Article 304, as the former does not require the prior recommendation of the President for the introduction of a bill.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as the 7th Amendment reorganized legislative powers, refining the scope of entries in the Seventh Schedule concerning trade. Statement 2 is correct because Article 304(b) mandates that state laws imposing reasonable restrictions on trade must receive the President's previous sanction to ensure national economic unity. Statement 3 is correct because Article 302 grants Parliament plenary power to restrict trade in the public interest without requiring Presidential assent, unlike the restrictive conditions imposed on state legislatures under Article 304.
Consider the following statements regarding Inter-State River Water Disputes Act adjudication mechanisms:
1. The Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal was established in 1969 under the constitutional provisions of Article 263, which provides for the coordination between states through the Inter-State Council to settle hydrological data discrepancies.
2. The Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956, empowers the Central Government to constitute a tribunal for the adjudication of a water dispute when a state government's request for a negotiation settlement fails.
3. The Supreme Court of India holds original jurisdiction over inter-state river water disputes under Article 262, which allows the judiciary to intervene directly if a state claims a violation of the riparian rights established in the 1956 Act.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct as the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956, mandates the Central Government to constitute a tribunal if a dispute cannot be settled through negotiations. Statement 1 is incorrect because tribunals are established under Article 262, not Article 263, which pertains to the Inter-State Council for general coordination. Statement 3 is incorrect because Article 262(2) explicitly bars the Supreme Court and any other court from exercising jurisdiction over disputes adjudicated under this Act, making the tribunal's award final and binding.
Consider the following statements regarding Cooperative federalism and institutional mechanisms:
1. The Goods and Services Tax Council was introduced by the 101st Constitutional Amendment Act, and the Union Finance Minister acts as the chairperson with a voting weight of 50 percent for the Central government.
2. The Inter-State Water Disputes Act of 1956 provides for the adjudication of water-related conflicts, and the decision of the tribunal established under this act is equivalent to a decree of the High Court.
3. The NITI Aayog replaced the Planning Commission in 2015, and its Governing Council consists of the Prime Minister and the Chief Ministers of states, who hold the power to approve the annual Union Budget.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the Union Finance Minister's vote carries one-third weight, while the States collectively hold two-thirds. Statement 2 is incorrect because the tribunal's decision is final and binding, equivalent to a decree of the Supreme Court, not the High Court. Statement 3 is incorrect because the NITI Aayog's Governing Council has no role in approving the Union Budget, which is a constitutional prerogative of the Parliament.
Consider the following statements regarding Jurisdiction of Supreme Court in inter-state disputes under Article 131:
1. The Inter-State Water Disputes Act of 1956 empowers the Supreme Court to adjudicate upon the distribution of river waters, effectively bypassing the tribunal mechanism established under Article 262.
2. Article 131 of the Constitution grants the Supreme Court original jurisdiction in disputes involving private citizens and the Union government, provided the dispute involves a substantial question of law regarding the interpretation of the Seventh Schedule.
3. Under the original jurisdiction defined in Article 131, the Supreme Court hears appeals from High Courts concerning inter-state trade and commerce barriers, provided the dispute involves at least two states and the Union of India.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because Article 262 explicitly bars the Supreme Court's jurisdiction over inter-state water disputes, which are exclusively adjudicated by tribunals established under the Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956. Statement 2 is incorrect as Article 131 covers only disputes between the Centre and States or between States, excluding private citizens. Statement 3 is incorrect because Article 131 defines the Supreme Court's 'original' jurisdiction, whereas appeals from High Courts fall under its 'appellate' jurisdiction (Articles 132-134), and the Supreme Court cannot hear such matters as an original suit.