UPSC Static Quiz – Polity : 1 October 2025

UPSC Static Quiz – Polity : 1 October 2025 We will post 5 questions daily on static topics mentioned in the UPSC civil services preliminary examination syllabus. Each week will focus on a specific topic from the syllabus, such as History of India and Indian National Movement, Indian and World Geography, and more. We are excited to bring you our daily UPSC Static Quiz, designed to help you prepare for the UPSC Civil Services Preliminary Examination. Each day, we will post 5 questions on static topics mentioned in the UPSC syllabus. This week, we are focusing on Indian and World Geography.

Why Participate in the UPSC Static Quiz?

Participating in daily quizzes helps reinforce your knowledge and identify areas that need improvement. Regular practice will enhance your recall abilities and boost your confidence for the examination. By covering various topics throughout the week, you ensure a comprehensive revision of the syllabus.

#### Quiz-summary

0 of 5 questions completed

Questions:

#### Information

Best of Luck! 🙂

You have already completed the quiz before. Hence you can not start it again.

Quiz is loading...

You must sign in or sign up to start the quiz.

You have to finish following quiz, to start this quiz:

0 of 5 questions answered correctly

Your time:

Time has elapsed

You have reached 0 of 0 points, (0)

#### Categories

• Not categorized 0%

• Question 1 of 5 1. Question Consider the following statements regarding the Preamble of the Indian Constitution: The Preamble is based on the ‘Objectives Resolution’ drafted and moved by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. The Supreme Court, in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), held that the Preamble is a part of the Constitution and can be amended, subject to the doctrine of basic structure. The terms ‘Socialist’ and ‘Secular’ were part of the original Preamble as adopted in 1949. How many of the above statements are correct? (a) Only one (b) Only two (c) All three (d) None Correct Solution: A Statement 1 is incorrect. The Preamble is based on the ‘Objectives Resolution,’ but it was drafted and moved by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru in the Constituent Assembly on December 13, 1946, not Dr. B.R. Ambedkar.17 Statement 2 is correct. In the landmark Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala (1973) case, the Supreme Court overruled its earlier opinion in the Berubari Union case (1960) and held that the Preamble is an integral part of the Constitution. It also affirmed that the Preamble can be amended under Article 368, provided that such amendment does not alter the ‘basic structure’ of the Constitution.19 Statement 3 is incorrect. The terms ‘Socialist’ and ‘Secular’ (along with ‘Integrity’) were not part of the original Preamble adopted on November 26, 1949. They were added to the Preamble by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976. Incorrect Solution: A Statement 1 is incorrect. The Preamble is based on the ‘Objectives Resolution,’ but it was drafted and moved by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru in the Constituent Assembly on December 13, 1946, not Dr. B.R. Ambedkar.17 Statement 2 is correct. In the landmark Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala (1973) case, the Supreme Court overruled its earlier opinion in the Berubari Union case (1960) and held that the Preamble is an integral part of the Constitution. It also affirmed that the Preamble can be amended under Article 368, provided that such amendment does not alter the ‘basic structure’ of the Constitution.19 Statement 3 is incorrect. The terms ‘Socialist’ and ‘Secular’ (along with ‘Integrity’) were not part of the original Preamble adopted on November 26, 1949. They were added to the Preamble by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976.

#### 1. Question

Consider the following statements regarding the Preamble of the Indian Constitution:

• The Preamble is based on the ‘Objectives Resolution’ drafted and moved by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar.

• The Supreme Court, in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), held that the Preamble is a part of the Constitution and can be amended, subject to the doctrine of basic structure.

• The terms ‘Socialist’ and ‘Secular’ were part of the original Preamble as adopted in 1949.

How many of the above statements are correct?

• (a) Only one

• (b) Only two

• (c) All three

Solution: A

• Statement 1 is incorrect. The Preamble is based on the ‘Objectives Resolution,’ but it was drafted and moved by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru in the Constituent Assembly on December 13, 1946, not Dr. B.R. Ambedkar.17

• Statement 2 is correct. In the landmark Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala (1973) case, the Supreme Court overruled its earlier opinion in the Berubari Union case (1960) and held that the Preamble is an integral part of the Constitution. It also affirmed that the Preamble can be amended under Article 368, provided that such amendment does not alter the ‘basic structure’ of the Constitution.19

• Statement 3 is incorrect. The terms ‘Socialist’ and ‘Secular’ (along with ‘Integrity’) were not part of the original Preamble adopted on November 26, 1949. They were added to the Preamble by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976.

Solution: A

• Question 2 of 5 2. Question With reference to the Fundamental Rights under the Indian Constitution, consider the following: Right to Property was deleted from the list of Fundamental Rights and made a legal right under Article 300-A by the 42nd Amendment Act. Article 19 guarantees six freedoms only to the citizens of India. The scope of Article 21 (Protection of Life and Personal Liberty) has been significantly expanded by the Supreme Court to include rights such as the right to a dignified life and the right to privacy. Fundamental Rights are absolute and cannot be suspended even during a National Emergency. How many of the above statements are correct? (a) Only one (b) Only two (c) Only three (d) All four Correct Solution: B The Right to Property (formerly Article 31 and 19(1)(f)) was deleted from Part III and made a legal right under Article 300-A by the 44th Amendment Act, 1978, not the 42nd Amendment Act. So, this statement is incorrect. Statement 2 is The six freedoms enumerated in Article 19 (freedom of speech and expression, assembly, association, movement, residence, and profession) are available only to citizens of India and not to foreigners. Statement 3 is correct. Through judicial interpretation in cases like Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India and Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, the Supreme Court has vastly expanded the ambit of Article 21 to include numerous implicit rights, such as the right to live with human dignity, right to a clean environment, right to livelihood, and the right to privacy. Statement 4 is incorrect. Fundamental Rights are not absolute and are subject to reasonable restrictions. Furthermore, during a National Emergency (Article 352), Fundamental Rights under Article 19 are automatically suspended (Article 358), and the President can suspend the enforcement of other Fundamental Rights (except Articles 20 and 21) by an order (Article 359). Incorrect Solution: B The Right to Property (formerly Article 31 and 19(1)(f)) was deleted from Part III and made a legal right under Article 300-A by the 44th Amendment Act, 1978, not the 42nd Amendment Act. So, this statement is incorrect. Statement 2 is The six freedoms enumerated in Article 19 (freedom of speech and expression, assembly, association, movement, residence, and profession) are available only to citizens of India and not to foreigners. Statement 3 is correct. Through judicial interpretation in cases like Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India and Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, the Supreme Court has vastly expanded the ambit of Article 21 to include numerous implicit rights, such as the right to live with human dignity, right to a clean environment, right to livelihood, and the right to privacy. Statement 4 is incorrect. Fundamental Rights are not absolute and are subject to reasonable restrictions. Furthermore, during a National Emergency (Article 352), Fundamental Rights under Article 19 are automatically suspended (Article 358), and the President can suspend the enforcement of other Fundamental Rights (except Articles 20 and 21) by an order (Article 359).

#### 2. Question

With reference to the Fundamental Rights under the Indian Constitution, consider the following:

• Right to Property was deleted from the list of Fundamental Rights and made a legal right under Article 300-A by the 42nd Amendment Act.

• Article 19 guarantees six freedoms only to the citizens of India.

• The scope of Article 21 (Protection of Life and Personal Liberty) has been significantly expanded by the Supreme Court to include rights such as the right to a dignified life and the right to privacy.

• Fundamental Rights are absolute and cannot be suspended even during a National Emergency.

How many of the above statements are correct?

• (a) Only one

• (b) Only two

• (c) Only three

• (d) All four

Solution: B

• The Right to Property (formerly Article 31 and 19(1)(f)) was deleted from Part III and made a legal right under Article 300-A by the 44th Amendment Act, 1978, not the 42nd Amendment Act. So, this statement is incorrect.

• Statement 2 is The six freedoms enumerated in Article 19 (freedom of speech and expression, assembly, association, movement, residence, and profession) are available only to citizens of India and not to foreigners.

• Statement 3 is correct. Through judicial interpretation in cases like Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India and Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, the Supreme Court has vastly expanded the ambit of Article 21 to include numerous implicit rights, such as the right to live with human dignity, right to a clean environment, right to livelihood, and the right to privacy.

• Statement 4 is incorrect. Fundamental Rights are not absolute and are subject to reasonable restrictions. Furthermore, during a National Emergency (Article 352), Fundamental Rights under Article 19 are automatically suspended (Article 358), and the President can suspend the enforcement of other Fundamental Rights (except Articles 20 and 21) by an order (Article 359).

Solution: B

• Question 3 of 5 3. Question With reference to the effects of a Proclamation of National Emergency, consider the following statements: The executive power of the Union extends to giving directions to any state as to the manner in which its executive power is to be exercised. The Parliament becomes empowered to make laws on any subject mentioned in the State List. The President can, by order, modify the constitutional distribution of revenues between the Centre and the states. The life of the Lok Sabha can be extended by a law of Parliament for one year at a time, for any number of times. How many of the above statements is/are correct? (a) Only one (b) Only two (c) Only three (d) All four Correct Solution: D Statement 1 is correct. According to Article 353(a), while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, the executive power of the Union shall extend to the giving of directions to any State as to the manner in which the executive power thereof is to be exercised. This allows the Centre to exert control over state administration. Statement 2 is correct. According to Article 353(b) and Article 250, while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, the Parliament shall have the power to make laws for the whole or any part of the territory of India with respect to any of the matters enumerated in the State List. This suspends the normal distribution of legislative powers. Statement 3 is correct. According to Article 354, the President may, while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, by order direct that all or any of the provisions of Articles 268 to 279 (which deal with the distribution of revenues) shall have effect subject to such exceptions or modifications as he thinks fit. Such an order must be laid before each House of Parliament. Statement 4 is correct. According to the proviso to Article 83(2), while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, the normal five-year term of the Lok Sabha may be extended by Parliament by law for a period not exceeding one year at a time. This extension can be repeated any number of times, but it cannot continue beyond a period of six months after the Proclamation has ceased to operate. Incorrect Solution: D Statement 1 is correct. According to Article 353(a), while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, the executive power of the Union shall extend to the giving of directions to any State as to the manner in which the executive power thereof is to be exercised. This allows the Centre to exert control over state administration. Statement 2 is correct. According to Article 353(b) and Article 250, while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, the Parliament shall have the power to make laws for the whole or any part of the territory of India with respect to any of the matters enumerated in the State List. This suspends the normal distribution of legislative powers. Statement 3 is correct. According to Article 354, the President may, while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, by order direct that all or any of the provisions of Articles 268 to 279 (which deal with the distribution of revenues) shall have effect subject to such exceptions or modifications as he thinks fit. Such an order must be laid before each House of Parliament. Statement 4 is correct. According to the proviso to Article 83(2), while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, the normal five-year term of the Lok Sabha may be extended by Parliament by law for a period not exceeding one year at a time. This extension can be repeated any number of times, but it cannot continue beyond a period of six months after the Proclamation has ceased to operate.

#### 3. Question

With reference to the effects of a Proclamation of National Emergency, consider the following statements:

• The executive power of the Union extends to giving directions to any state as to the manner in which its executive power is to be exercised.

• The Parliament becomes empowered to make laws on any subject mentioned in the State List.

• The President can, by order, modify the constitutional distribution of revenues between the Centre and the states.

• The life of the Lok Sabha can be extended by a law of Parliament for one year at a time, for any number of times.

How many of the above statements is/are correct?

• (a) Only one

• (b) Only two

• (c) Only three

• (d) All four

Solution: D

• Statement 1 is correct. According to Article 353(a), while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, the executive power of the Union shall extend to the giving of directions to any State as to the manner in which the executive power thereof is to be exercised. This allows the Centre to exert control over state administration.

• Statement 2 is correct. According to Article 353(b) and Article 250, while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, the Parliament shall have the power to make laws for the whole or any part of the territory of India with respect to any of the matters enumerated in the State List. This suspends the normal distribution of legislative powers.

• Statement 3 is correct. According to Article 354, the President may, while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, by order direct that all or any of the provisions of Articles 268 to 279 (which deal with the distribution of revenues) shall have effect subject to such exceptions or modifications as he thinks fit. Such an order must be laid before each House of Parliament.

• Statement 4 is correct. According to the proviso to Article 83(2), while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, the normal five-year term of the Lok Sabha may be extended by Parliament by law for a period not exceeding one year at a time. This extension can be repeated any number of times, but it cannot continue beyond a period of six months after the Proclamation has ceased to operate.

Solution: D

• Question 4 of 5 4. Question Consider the following statements about the amendment of the Indian Constitution: The establishment of a new state under Article 3 requires a constitutional amendment under Article 368. An amendment to abolish the Legislative Council in a state, as provided under Article 169, is deemed to be an amendment of the Constitution for the purposes of Article 368. Any amendment related to the provisions of the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution requires a special majority of the Parliament. How many of the above statements is/are correct? (a) Only one (b) Only two (c) All three (d) None Correct Solution: D Statement 1 is incorrect. Article 4(2) of the Constitution explicitly states that any law made under Article 2 (admission or establishment of new states) or Article 3 (formation of new states and alteration of areas, boundaries or names of existing states) shall not be deemed to be an amendment of the Constitution for the purposes of Article 368. Such changes can be made by Parliament through an ordinary legislative process requiring only a simple majority. Statement 2 is incorrect. Article 169 lays down the procedure for the abolition or creation of Legislative Councils in states. Article 169(2) specifies that any such law made by Parliament “shall not be deemed to be an amendment of this Constitution for the purposes of article 368.” This process also requires only a simple majority in Parliament, although it can only be initiated if the legislative assembly of the concerned state passes a resolution to that effect by a special majority. Statement 3 is incorrect. The Fifth Schedule deals with the administration and control of Scheduled Areas and Scheduled Tribes. Paragraph 7 of the Fifth Schedule itself provides the mechanism for its amendment. It states that Parliament may from time to time by law amend any of the provisions of this Schedule and that no such law “shall be deemed to be an amendment of this Constitution for the purposes of article 368.” Therefore, amendments to the Fifth Schedule can also be made by a simple majority of Parliament. Incorrect Solution: D Statement 1 is incorrect. Article 4(2) of the Constitution explicitly states that any law made under Article 2 (admission or establishment of new states) or Article 3 (formation of new states and alteration of areas, boundaries or names of existing states) shall not be deemed to be an amendment of the Constitution for the purposes of Article 368. Such changes can be made by Parliament through an ordinary legislative process requiring only a simple majority. Statement 2 is incorrect. Article 169 lays down the procedure for the abolition or creation of Legislative Councils in states. Article 169(2) specifies that any such law made by Parliament “shall not be deemed to be an amendment of this Constitution for the purposes of article 368.” This process also requires only a simple majority in Parliament, although it can only be initiated if the legislative assembly of the concerned state passes a resolution to that effect by a special majority. Statement 3 is incorrect. The Fifth Schedule deals with the administration and control of Scheduled Areas and Scheduled Tribes. Paragraph 7 of the Fifth Schedule itself provides the mechanism for its amendment. It states that Parliament may from time to time by law amend any of the provisions of this Schedule and that no such law “shall be deemed to be an amendment of this Constitution for the purposes of article 368.” Therefore, amendments to the Fifth Schedule can also be made by a simple majority of Parliament.

#### 4. Question

Consider the following statements about the amendment of the Indian Constitution:

• The establishment of a new state under Article 3 requires a constitutional amendment under Article 368.

• An amendment to abolish the Legislative Council in a state, as provided under Article 169, is deemed to be an amendment of the Constitution for the purposes of Article 368.

• Any amendment related to the provisions of the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution requires a special majority of the Parliament.

How many of the above statements is/are correct?

• (a) Only one

• (b) Only two

• (c) All three

Solution: D

• Statement 1 is incorrect. Article 4(2) of the Constitution explicitly states that any law made under Article 2 (admission or establishment of new states) or Article 3 (formation of new states and alteration of areas, boundaries or names of existing states) shall not be deemed to be an amendment of the Constitution for the purposes of Article 368. Such changes can be made by Parliament through an ordinary legislative process requiring only a simple majority.

• Statement 2 is incorrect. Article 169 lays down the procedure for the abolition or creation of Legislative Councils in states. Article 169(2) specifies that any such law made by Parliament “shall not be deemed to be an amendment of this Constitution for the purposes of article 368.” This process also requires only a simple majority in Parliament, although it can only be initiated if the legislative assembly of the concerned state passes a resolution to that effect by a special majority.

• Statement 3 is incorrect. The Fifth Schedule deals with the administration and control of Scheduled Areas and Scheduled Tribes. Paragraph 7 of the Fifth Schedule itself provides the mechanism for its amendment. It states that Parliament may from time to time by law amend any of the provisions of this Schedule and that no such law “shall be deemed to be an amendment of this Constitution for the purposes of article 368.” Therefore, amendments to the Fifth Schedule can also be made by a simple majority of Parliament.

Solution: D

• Question 5 of 5 5. Question With reference to the nature of Indian Federalism, consider the following statements: The term ‘Federation’ has been explicitly used in Article 1 of the Constitution of India to define the nature of the polity. The states in India have no right to secede from the Union, making it an “indestructible union of destructible states”. The Indian federal system is a result of an agreement among the pre-existing sovereign states to form a Union. The Constitution provides for a dual polity but not dual citizenship. How many of the above statements are correct? a) Only one b) Only two (c) Only three (d) All four Correct Solution: B Statement 1 is incorrect. Article 1 of the Constitution describes India as a ‘Union of States’, not a ‘Federation’. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar clarified that the phrase ‘Union of States’ was preferred for two reasons: first, the Indian federation is not the result of an agreement among the states to join a federation, and second, the states have no right to secede from the federation. Statement 2 is correct. The Supreme Court has repeatedly described India as an “indestructible union of destructible states.” The Union government can alter the boundaries of the states or create new states without their consent, as laid down in Article 3. However, the states themselves cannot break away from the Union, thus affirming the indestructibility of the Union. Statement 3 is incorrect. Unlike the American federation, which was formed by an agreement among independent states, the Indian federal system was not. India was already a political whole which was converted into a federation. This is a key feature that gives the Indian system a strong unitary bias, as highlighted by constitutional experts like D. Basu. Statement 4 is correct. The Indian Constitution establishes a dual polity with a clear division of powers between the Centre and the states. However, it provides for only a single citizenship, that is, the Incorrect Solution: B Statement 1 is incorrect. Article 1 of the Constitution describes India as a ‘Union of States’, not a ‘Federation’. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar clarified that the phrase ‘Union of States’ was preferred for two reasons: first, the Indian federation is not the result of an agreement among the states to join a federation, and second, the states have no right to secede from the federation. Statement 2 is correct. The Supreme Court has repeatedly described India as an “indestructible union of destructible states.” The Union government can alter the boundaries of the states or create new states without their consent, as laid down in Article 3. However, the states themselves cannot break away from the Union, thus affirming the indestructibility of the Union. Statement 3 is incorrect. Unlike the American federation, which was formed by an agreement among independent states, the Indian federal system was not. India was already a political whole which was converted into a federation. This is a key feature that gives the Indian system a strong unitary bias, as highlighted by constitutional experts like D. Basu. Statement 4 is correct. The Indian Constitution establishes a dual polity with a clear division of powers between the Centre and the states. However, it provides for only a single citizenship, that is, the

#### 5. Question

With reference to the nature of Indian Federalism, consider the following statements:

• The term ‘Federation’ has been explicitly used in Article 1 of the Constitution of India to define the nature of the polity.

• The states in India have no right to secede from the Union, making it an “indestructible union of destructible states”.

• The Indian federal system is a result of an agreement among the pre-existing sovereign states to form a Union.

• The Constitution provides for a dual polity but not dual citizenship.

How many of the above statements are correct?

• a) Only one

• b) Only two

• (c) Only three

• (d) All four

Solution: B

• Statement 1 is incorrect. Article 1 of the Constitution describes India as a ‘Union of States’, not a ‘Federation’. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar clarified that the phrase ‘Union of States’ was preferred for two reasons: first, the Indian federation is not the result of an agreement among the states to join a federation, and second, the states have no right to secede from the federation.

• Statement 2 is correct. The Supreme Court has repeatedly described India as an “indestructible union of destructible states.” The Union government can alter the boundaries of the states or create new states without their consent, as laid down in Article 3. However, the states themselves cannot break away from the Union, thus affirming the indestructibility of the Union.

• Statement 3 is incorrect. Unlike the American federation, which was formed by an agreement among independent states, the Indian federal system was not. India was already a political whole which was converted into a federation. This is a key feature that gives the Indian system a strong unitary bias, as highlighted by constitutional experts like D. Basu.

Statement 4 is correct. The Indian Constitution establishes a dual polity with a clear division of powers between the Centre and the states. However, it provides for only a single citizenship, that is, the

Solution: B

Join our Official Telegram Channel HERE for Motivation and Fast Updates

Join our Twitter Channel HERE

Follow our Instagram Channel HERE

Stay Consistent

Consistency is key in UPSC preparation. By making the UPSC Static Quiz a part of your daily routine, you will steadily improve your knowledge base and exam readiness. Join us every day to tackle new questions and make your journey towards UPSC success more structured and effective.