• Option C is correct.
• Article 1 describes India, that is, Bharat as a ‘Union of States’ rather than a ‘Federation of States’. This provision deals with two things: one, name of the country, and two, type of polity.
• Option C is correct and B is incorrect. According to Dr B R Ambedkar, the phrase ‘Union of States’ has been preferred to ‘Federation of States’ for two reasons: one, the Indian Federation is not the result of an agreement among the states like the American Federation; and two, the states have no right to secede from the federation. The federation is a Union because it is indestructible. The country is an integral whole and divided into different states only for the convenience of administration.
• Statement A is incorrect. In India, the states are given representation in the Rajya Sabha on the basis on population where the membership varies from 1 to 31. While, In US the principle of equality of representation of states in the Upper House is fully recognised.
• Statement D is incorrect. There is no such provision in the constitution which allows two or more states to override the union government in law making.
Source)

• Statement 1 is incorrect. The article 261 empowers the Parliament of India for the adjudication of inter-state water disputes.
• Article 262 of the Constitution provides for the adjudication of inter-state water disputes. It makes two provisions:
• Parliament may by law provide for the adjudication of any dispute or complaint with respect to the use, distribution and control of waters of any inter-state river and river valley.
• Parliament may also provide that neither the Supreme Court nor any other court is to exercise jurisdiction in respect of any such dispute or complaint.
• Statement 2 is correct. Under this provision of article 262, the Parliament has enacted two laws [the River Boards Act (1956) and the Inter-State Water Disputes Act (1956)]. The River Boards Act provides for the establishment of river boards for the regulation and development of inter-state river and river valleys. A river board is established by the Central government on the request of the state governments concerned to advise them.

• Option b is the correct answer.
• Article 368 in Part XX of the Constitution deals with the powers of Parliament to amend the Constitution and its procedure.
• Statement 1 is correct. The bill regarding the amendments to the Constitution can be introduced either by a minister or by a private member (any Member of Parliament who is not a minister). It also does not require prior permission of the President.
• Statement 2 is incorrect. The bill concerning constitutional amendment must be passed in each House by a special majority, that is, a majority of the total membership of the House and a majority of two-thirds of the members of the House present and voting.
• But in case of amending the federal provisions of the Constitution then it must be ratified by the legislature of half the states by a simple majority. Thus, not in all the cases, consent of half the states is needed.
• Statement 3 is incorrect. After duly passed by both the Houses of Parliament and ratified by the state legislatures, where necessary, the bill is presented to the President for assent. The President must give his assent to the bill. He can neither withhold his assent to the bill nor return the bill for reconsideration of the Parliament. After the president’s assent, the bill becomes an Act (i.e., a constitutional amendment act) and the Constitution stands amended in accordance with the terms of the Act.

• Option D is the correct answer.
• Under Article 352, the President can declare a national emergency when the security of India or a part of it is threatened by war or external aggression or armed rebellion.
• Option A is incorrect. The President, however, can proclaim a national emergency only after receiving a written recommendation from the cabinet (and not Council of Ministers). Thus, an emergency can be declared only on the concurrence of the cabinet and not merely on the advice of the Prime Minister. This provision was introduced by the 44th Amendment Act of 1978 to eliminate any possibility of the Prime Minister alone taking a decision in this regard.
• Option B is incorrect. The declaration of a National Emergency was made immune from the judicial review by the 38th Amendment Act of 1975. But, this provision was subsequently deleted by the 44th Amendment Act of 1978. This was also affirmed by the Supreme Court in the Minerva Mills case (1980).
• In this case, the Supreme Court held that the proclamation of a national emergency can be challenged in a court on the ground of malafide or that the declaration was based on wholly extraneous and irrelevant facts or is absurd or perverse.
• Option C is incorrect. The proclamation of Emergency must be approved by both the Houses of Parliament within one month from the date of its issue. If approved by both the Houses of Parliament, the emergency continues for six months, and can be extended to an indefinite period with an approval of the Parliament for every six months. This provision for periodical parliamentary approval was added by the 44th Amendment Act of 1978.
• Option D is correct. During a national emergency, the Parliament becomes empowered to make laws on any subject mentioned in the State List. However, the legislative power of a state legislature is not suspended. But the state becomes subject to the overriding power of the Parliament. Thus, the normal distribution of the legislative powers between the Centre and states is suspended, though the state Legislatures are not suspended. In brief, the Constitution becomes unitary rather than federal.

• Article 164 states that there should be a tribal welfare minister in Chattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya
• Pradesh and Odisha. Originally this provision was applicable to Bihar, MP and Odisha.
• The 94th Constitutional Amendment Act 2006 removed Bihar and added Chattisgarh and Jharkhand. Hence, option A is correct.

• All the given options are under the purview of panchayats under the 11th schedule. This schedule places the following functional items under the purview of the Panchayats:
1. Agriculture, including agricultural extension.
2. Land improvement, implementation of land reforms, land consolidation and soil conservation.
3. Minor irrigation, water management and watershed development.
4. Animal husbandry, dairying and poultry.
5. Fisheries.
6. Social forestry and farm forestry.
7. Minor forest produce.
8. Small scale industries, including food processing industries.
9. Khadi, village and cottage industries.
10. Rural housing.
11. Drinking water.
12. Fuel and fodder.
13. Roads, culverts, bridges, ferries, waterways and other means of communication.
14. Rural electrification, including distribution of electricity.
15. Non-conventional energy sources.
16. Poverty alleviation programme.
17. Education, including primary and secondary schools.
18. Technical training and vocational education.
19. Adult and non-formal education.
20. Libraries.
21. Cultural activities.
22. Markets and fairs.
23. Health and sanitation, including hospitals, primary health centres and dispensaries.
24. Family welfare.
25. Women and child development.
26. Social welfare, including welfare of the handicapped and mentally retarded.
27. Welfare of the weaker sections, and in particular, of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes.
28. Public distribution system.
29. Maintenance of community assets

• All the pairs are correctly matched.
• 167: Duties of the chief minister with regard to the furnishing of information to governor, etc.
• 226: Power of high courts to issue certain writs
• 169: Abolition or creation of legislative councils in states

• Statement 1 is correct. The power to make laws under Article 33 is conferred only on Parliament and not on state legislatures. Any such law made by Parliament cannot be challenged in any court on the ground of contravention of any of the fundamental rights.
Hence, statement 2 is incorrect.
• Statement 3 is incorrect. Martial law has not been defined anywhere in the Constitution. It is implicit. There is no specific or express provision in the Constitution that authorizes the executive to declare Martial Law. However, the article 34 provides for the restrictions on fundamental rights while Martial Law is in force in any area.
• Article 33 empowers the Parliament to restrict or abrogate the fundamental rights of the members of armed forces, para-military forces, police forces, intelligence agencies and analogous forces. The objective of this provision is to ensure the proper discharge of their duties and the maintenance of discipline among them.

Statements 1 and 2 are correct. statement 3 is incorrect.
• Articles 214 to 231 in Part VI of the Constitution deal with the organisation, independence, jurisdiction, powers, procedures and so on of the high courts.
• The high court occupies the top position in the judicial administration of a state. In the Indian single integrated judicial system, the high court operates below the Supreme Court but above the subordinate courts. The judiciary in a state consists of a high court and a hierarchy of subordinate courts. Hence, statement 2 is correct.
• The institution of high court originated in India in 1862 when the high courts were set up at Calcutta, Bombay and Madras. In 1866, a fourth high court was established at Allahabad. In the course of time, each province in British India came to have its own high court. After 1950, a high court existing in a province became the high court for the corresponding state. Hence, statement 2 is correct.
• The Constitution of India provides for a high court for each state, but the Seventh Amendment Act of 1956 authorised the Parliament to establish a common high court for two or more states or for two or more states and a union territory. The territorial jurisdiction of a high court is co-terminus with the territory of a state. Similarly, the territorial jurisdiction of a common high court is co-terminus with the territories of the concerned states and union territory. Hence, statement 3 is incorrect.

• Article 15 is limited to citizens, while article 14 extends to all persons and is not limited to citizens. A corporation, which is a juristic person, is also entailed to the benefit of this article. Thus, statement 1 is correct.
• The Principle of equality in article 14 is the uniformity of treatment to all in all respects. It means that all persons similarly circumstanced shall be treated alike both in the privileges conferred and liabilities imposed by the laws.
Thus, statement 2 is correct as article 15 states that the State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.
• Statement 3 is incorrect. Article 14 is not absolute and there are a number of exceptions to it. There arises certain immunity to certain individuals. For example, foreign Diplomats enjoy immunity from the Countries Judicial process. Even Article 361 extends immunity to the President of India and Governors of the States, Public Officers and Judges. But exception is not granted according to social and educational status as in article 15(4).