Indian Polity · MCQs

Amendment of the Constitution MCQs

100questions in the set

Practise all 100 questions Read the Amendment of the Constitution notes

Try it

5 questions to try

From the 100 in PrepShark’s Amendment of the Constitution set (Indian Polity). Pick an answer, then open the explanation.

Question 01
In Waman Rao v. Union of India (1981), the Supreme Court held that amendments made to the Constitution, including additions to the Ninth Schedule, would be open to challenge on the ground of violating the basic structure only if they were made on or after:
1. Option A: 24 April 1973
2. Option B: 31 July 1980
3. Option C: 26 January 1950
4. Option D: 25 June 1975
Answer and explanation
Answer: A. 24 April 1973
**Why A is correct.** **24 April 1973** is the date of the **Kesavananda Bharati** judgment; Waman Rao applied the doctrine **prospectively** from that day. **Why B is incorrect.** 31 July 1980 is the date of the **Minerva Mills** judgment. **Why C is incorrect.** 26 January 1950 is the commencement of the Constitution; the doctrine did not exist then. **Why D is incorrect.** 25 June 1975 is the date of the **proclamation of Emergency**.
Question 02
The Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951 was enacted by:
1. Option A: a joint sitting of Parliament convened by the President
2. Option B: the first Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha elected after the general elections of 1951–52
3. Option C: the Provisional Parliament, that is, the Constituent Assembly functioning as the legislature
4. Option D: the Constituent Assembly before the Constitution came into force on 26 January 1950
Answer and explanation
Answer: C. the Provisional Parliament, that is, the Constituent Assembly functioning as the legislature
**Why C is correct.** Until the first elections, the Constituent Assembly functioned as the **Provisional Parliament** under **Article 379**; it passed the **1st Amendment in 1951**. **Why A is incorrect.** There is **no joint sitting** for an amendment Bill, and the Provisional Parliament was unicameral anyway. **Why B is incorrect.** The first elected Houses met only in **1952**, after the Amendment. **Why D is incorrect.** An amendment presupposes a Constitution **already in force**; nothing could be amended before 26 January 1950.
Question 03
Consider the following pairs: 1. — Retirement age of High Court judges raised from 60 to 62 years 2. — Increase in the salaries of judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts 3. — Insertion of Articles 323A and 323B on tribunals Which of the pairs given above is/are correctly matched?
1. Option A: 1 only
2. Option B: 1 and 2 only
3. Option C: 2 and 3 only
4. Option D: 1, 2 and 3
Answer and explanation
Answer: B. 1 and 2 only
**Pair 1 is correctly matched.** The **15th Amendment** raised the retirement age of **High Court** judges to **62**. **Pair 2 is correctly matched.** The **54th Amendment** revised **judges' salaries**. **Pair 3 is not correctly matched.** **Part XIVA** (Articles 323A and 323B) was inserted by the **42nd Amendment, 1976**.
Question 04
Before the 52nd Amendment (1985) used it for the anti-defection provisions, the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution had earlier contained:
1. Option A: the matters to be entrusted to Municipalities
2. Option B: the terms and conditions of Sikkim's association with the Union
3. Option C: laws validated against challenge under Part III
4. Option D: the list of languages recognised by the Constitution
Answer and explanation
Answer: B. the terms and conditions of Sikkim's association with the Union
**Why B is correct.** The **35th Amendment, 1974** placed the terms of Sikkim's **association** with India in a **Tenth Schedule**; it was omitted when Sikkim became a full State in 1975, leaving the Schedule's number free. **Why A is incorrect.** Municipal matters are in the **Twelfth Schedule** (74th Amendment). **Why C is incorrect.** Validated laws are in the **Ninth Schedule** under Article 31B. **Why D is incorrect.** Languages have always been in the **Eighth Schedule**.
Question 05
With reference to I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967), consider the following statements: 1. The case was decided by a bench of eleven judges. 2. The decision was by a narrow majority of six to five. 3. The leading majority opinion held that Article 368, as it then stood, laid down only the procedure for amendment, and located the power to amend in the residuary legislative power of Parliament. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
1. Option A: 1 only
2. Option B: 1 and 2 only
3. Option C: 2 and 3 only
4. Option D: 1, 2 and 3
Answer and explanation
Answer: D. 1, 2 and 3
**Statement 1 is correct.** Golaknath was heard by an **eleven-judge bench**, the largest up to that time. **Statement 2 is correct.** The majority was **6:5**, led by **Chief Justice K. Subba Rao**. **Statement 3 is correct.** The leading opinion read the unamended Article 368 as **procedural only**, tracing the substantive power to **Articles 245, 246 and 248** read with the residuary entry — which is why the **24th Amendment** later wrote 'constituent power' into Article 368 itself.

Indian Polity

More Indian Polity MCQs

All Indian Polity notes