Daily Static Quiz Prelims Practice 2027
Option (b) is correct — Article 343(1) declares Hindi in Devanagari as the Union's official language, Article 343(2) allowed English to continue for fifteen years (until 1965), and Article 343(3) let Parliament extend it further, leading to the Official Languages Act, 1963. Option (a) is wrong — English was never abolished from 1950; the transitional provision allowed gradual shift, and English use continues. Option (c) is wrong — the Eighth Schedule originally listed 14 languages, not 22, and English is not included at all. Option (d) is wrong — Article 345 empowers the State Legislature, not Parliament, to adopt the State's official language(s); Parliament cannot override this State subject.
- Administrative Tribunals in India are established under Article 323A of the Constitution, which was inserted by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976.
- The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has jurisdiction over disputes relating to service matters of employees of the Central Government and Union Territory administrations.
- Decisions of Administrative Tribunals are final and not subject to review by High Courts under Articles 226 and 227, as Article 323A explicitly excludes such jurisdiction.
- The Supreme Court in the L. Chandra Kumar case (1997) held that judicial review by High Courts under Articles 226 and 227 over Tribunal decisions cannot be excluded.
Statements 1, 2 and 4 are correct. Article 323A was inserted by the 42nd Amendment (1976), enabling tribunals for public servants' service disputes. The Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 established the CAT, handling Central Government, UT, and certain PSU employees' service matters. In L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997), the Supreme Court held judicial review under Articles 226/227 is a Basic Structure feature and cannot be excluded. Statement 3 is incorrect — while Article 323A(2)(d) originally sought to exclude High Court jurisdiction, L. Chandra Kumar struck down that exclusion as unconstitutional, so it no longer represents current law.
Option (b) is correct — Article 348(1) mandates English for Supreme Court and High Court proceedings and authoritative legal texts until Parliament provides otherwise, while Article 348(2) lets a Governor, with prior Presidential consent, authorise Hindi or another State official language in that State's High Court (though judgments remain in English unless the President directs otherwise). Option (a) is wrong — it reverses the mandated language; it's English, not Hindi. Option (c) is wrong — the 1963 Act didn't replace Article 348, and Presidential assent remains mandatory. Option (d) is wrong — Article 345 governs State Legislature/executive language, not judicial proceedings, and doesn't override Article 348.
- The UPSC conducts examinations for appointments to the All India Services and Central Services, and also advises on matters relating to methods of recruitment.
- The Chairman and Members of the UPSC are appointed by the President and can be removed only by the same procedure as that of a Supreme Court judge.
- A member of the UPSC, on ceasing to hold office, is ineligible for further employment under the Government of India or any State Government.
- The UPSC's annual report on its work is submitted to the President, who causes it to be laid before each House of Parliament.
Statements 1, 3 and 4 are correct. Under Article 320, the UPSC conducts examinations for All India and Central Services and advises on recruitment methods. Under Article 319, the Chairman is ineligible for further government employment after ceasing office (a Member may become Chairman of the UPSC or a State PSC but not other government roles). Under Article 323, the UPSC's annual report goes to the President, who lays it before Parliament with a memorandum on unaccepted advice. Statement 2 is incorrect — UPSC Chairman/Members are removed by the President on grounds of misbehaviour after a Supreme Court inquiry under Article 317(1), not by parliamentary address like Supreme Court judges.
Option (b) is correct — the NGT, established under the NGT Act, 2010, is a statutory (not constitutional) tribunal handling civil environmental cases, forest conservation, and biodiversity, making India the third country after Australia and New Zealand with such a dedicated tribunal. Option (a) is wrong — it's statutory, not constitutional, and Article 323B (covering taxation, elections, land reforms) doesn't list environment. Option (c) is wrong — appeals lie before the Supreme Court under Section 22 of the Act, consistent with the L. Chandra Kumar principle. Option (d) is wrong — the NGT adjudicates civil liability and compensation, not criminal imprisonment, which follows through regular criminal courts.
