UPSC Static Quiz – Polity : 14 October 2025

UPSC Static Quiz – Polity : 14 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 President of India’s role in a Constitution Amendment Bill: A Constitution Amendment Bill can be introduced in either House of Parliament without the prior recommendation of the President. After the Bill is passed by both Houses, the President can return the Bill for reconsideration of the Parliament. The 24th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1971, made it obligatory for the President to give his assent to a Constitution Amendment Bill. How many of the above statements is/are correct? (a) Only one (b) Only two (c) All three (d) None Correct Solution: B Statement 1 is correct. Unlike Money Bills, which require the prior recommendation of the President for their introduction, a Constitution Amendment Bill can be introduced in either the Lok Sabha or the Rajya Sabha without any such prior recommendation. The process is initiated by a member of the house (either a minister or a private member). Statement 2 is incorrect. The President of India has veto powers over ordinary bills, including the suspensive veto, which allows him to return a bill (if it is not a Money Bill) for reconsideration by Parliament. However, this power does not extend to Constitution Amendment Bills. The President must give his assent to a Constitution Amendment Bill when it is presented to him after being duly passed by both Houses. Statement 3 is correct. This statement provides the legal basis for why statement 2 is incorrect. Prior to 1971, the President’s role was ambiguous. The 24th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1971, explicitly amended Article 368 to clarify the matter. It substituted the words “it shall be presented to the President who shall give his assent to the Bill” with “it shall be presented to the President for his assent and upon such assent being given to the Bill”. It effectively removed any discretion the President might have had and made his assent mandatory. Incorrect Solution: B Statement 1 is correct. Unlike Money Bills, which require the prior recommendation of the President for their introduction, a Constitution Amendment Bill can be introduced in either the Lok Sabha or the Rajya Sabha without any such prior recommendation. The process is initiated by a member of the house (either a minister or a private member). Statement 2 is incorrect. The President of India has veto powers over ordinary bills, including the suspensive veto, which allows him to return a bill (if it is not a Money Bill) for reconsideration by Parliament. However, this power does not extend to Constitution Amendment Bills. The President must give his assent to a Constitution Amendment Bill when it is presented to him after being duly passed by both Houses. Statement 3 is correct. This statement provides the legal basis for why statement 2 is incorrect. Prior to 1971, the President’s role was ambiguous. The 24th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1971, explicitly amended Article 368 to clarify the matter. It substituted the words “it shall be presented to the President who shall give his assent to the Bill” with “it shall be presented to the President for his assent and upon such assent being given to the Bill”. It effectively removed any discretion the President might have had and made his assent mandatory.

#### 1. Question

Consider the following statements regarding the President of India’s role in a Constitution Amendment Bill:

• A Constitution Amendment Bill can be introduced in either House of Parliament without the prior recommendation of the President.

• After the Bill is passed by both Houses, the President can return the Bill for reconsideration of the Parliament.

• The 24th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1971, made it obligatory for the President to give his assent to a Constitution Amendment Bill.

How many of the above statements is/are correct?

• (a) Only one

• (b) Only two

• (c) All three

Solution: B

• Statement 1 is correct. Unlike Money Bills, which require the prior recommendation of the President for their introduction, a Constitution Amendment Bill can be introduced in either the Lok Sabha or the Rajya Sabha without any such prior recommendation. The process is initiated by a member of the house (either a minister or a private member).

• Statement 2 is incorrect. The President of India has veto powers over ordinary bills, including the suspensive veto, which allows him to return a bill (if it is not a Money Bill) for reconsideration by Parliament. However, this power does not extend to Constitution Amendment Bills. The President must give his assent to a Constitution Amendment Bill when it is presented to him after being duly passed by both Houses.

• Statement 3 is correct. This statement provides the legal basis for why statement 2 is incorrect. Prior to 1971, the President’s role was ambiguous. The 24th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1971, explicitly amended Article 368 to clarify the matter. It substituted the words “it shall be presented to the President who shall give his assent to the Bill” with “it shall be presented to the President for his assent and upon such assent being given to the Bill”. It effectively removed any discretion the President might have had and made his assent mandatory.

Solution: B

• Question 2 of 5 2. Question Consider the following statements: The ‘Objectives Resolution’ moved by Jawaharlal Nehru in the Constituent Assembly was unanimously adopted without any amendments. The members of the Constituent Assembly from the Princely States were directly elected by the people of those states. The Drafting Committee of the Constitution was chaired by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and consisted of seven members in total. The Indian Independence Act of 1947 made the Constituent Assembly a fully sovereign body. 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. The Objectives Resolution, which laid down the philosophical foundations of the Constitution, was moved by Jawaharlal Nehru on December 13, 1946. While it was a foundational document, it was not adopted unanimously without amendments. It was adopted by the Assembly on January 22, 1947, but only after considerable debate. The resolution itself was not amended, but its adoption was postponed to allow members from the Muslim League and Princely States to join the deliberations. Statement 2 is incorrect. The representatives of the Princely States who joined the Constituent Assembly were not elected by the people. They were nominated by the heads of the princely states. The Assembly was thus a partly elected (from British Indian provinces) and partly nominated body. Statement 3 is correct. The Drafting Committee was the most important committee, tasked with preparing the draft of the new Constitution. It was set up on August 29, 1947, and was chaired by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. It consisted of seven members in total. Statement 4 is correct. The Indian Independence Act of 1947 ended British rule and declared India an independent and sovereign state. It empowered the Constituent Assembly to frame and adopt any constitution for the country and to repeal any act of the British Parliament, including the Independence Act itself. This conferred a fully sovereign status on the Assembly. Incorrect Solution: B Statement 1 is incorrect. The Objectives Resolution, which laid down the philosophical foundations of the Constitution, was moved by Jawaharlal Nehru on December 13, 1946. While it was a foundational document, it was not adopted unanimously without amendments. It was adopted by the Assembly on January 22, 1947, but only after considerable debate. The resolution itself was not amended, but its adoption was postponed to allow members from the Muslim League and Princely States to join the deliberations. Statement 2 is incorrect. The representatives of the Princely States who joined the Constituent Assembly were not elected by the people. They were nominated by the heads of the princely states. The Assembly was thus a partly elected (from British Indian provinces) and partly nominated body. Statement 3 is correct. The Drafting Committee was the most important committee, tasked with preparing the draft of the new Constitution. It was set up on August 29, 1947, and was chaired by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. It consisted of seven members in total. Statement 4 is correct. The Indian Independence Act of 1947 ended British rule and declared India an independent and sovereign state. It empowered the Constituent Assembly to frame and adopt any constitution for the country and to repeal any act of the British Parliament, including the Independence Act itself. This conferred a fully sovereign status on the Assembly.

#### 2. Question

Consider the following statements:

• The ‘Objectives Resolution’ moved by Jawaharlal Nehru in the Constituent Assembly was unanimously adopted without any amendments.

• The members of the Constituent Assembly from the Princely States were directly elected by the people of those states.

• The Drafting Committee of the Constitution was chaired by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and consisted of seven members in total.

• The Indian Independence Act of 1947 made the Constituent Assembly a fully sovereign body.

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. The Objectives Resolution, which laid down the philosophical foundations of the Constitution, was moved by Jawaharlal Nehru on December 13, 1946. While it was a foundational document, it was not adopted unanimously without amendments. It was adopted by the Assembly on January 22, 1947, but only after considerable debate. The resolution itself was not amended, but its adoption was postponed to allow members from the Muslim League and Princely States to join the deliberations. Statement 2 is incorrect. The representatives of the Princely States who joined the Constituent Assembly were not elected by the people. They were nominated by the heads of the princely states. The Assembly was thus a partly elected (from British Indian provinces) and partly nominated body.

• Statement 3 is correct. The Drafting Committee was the most important committee, tasked with preparing the draft of the new Constitution. It was set up on August 29, 1947, and was chaired by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. It consisted of seven members in total.

Statement 4 is correct. The Indian Independence Act of 1947 ended British rule and declared India an independent and sovereign state. It empowered the Constituent Assembly to frame and adopt any constitution for the country and to repeal any act of the British Parliament, including the Independence Act itself. This conferred a fully sovereign status on the Assembly.

Solution: B

• Question 3 of 5 3. Question The Punchhi Commission, which also examined Centre-State relations, made recommendations concerning: Amendments to Articles 355 and 356 to prevent their misuse, suggesting localized emergency provisions. Giving Governors fixed tenures and ensuring they are not active politicians. Greater state involvement in the treaty-making process when treaties affect matters on the State List. Abolition of All-India Services to enhance state autonomy. Which of the statements given above are correct? (a) 1 and 3 only (b) 1, 2 and 3 only (c) 2 and 4 only (d) 1, 2, 3 and 4 Correct Solution: B The Punchhi Commission (2007-2010) provided several recommendations on Centre-State relations. Statement 1 is correct. The Commission recommended amendments to Articles 355 and 356 to prevent misuse of President’s Rule. It suggested that instead of imposing emergency rule over an entire state, the Centre should focus on specific troubled areas, advocating for ‘localized emergency’ provisions. Statement 2 is correct. Similar to the Sarkaria Commission, the Punchhi Commission also made recommendations regarding the office of the Governor, including aspects related to their appointment, tenure, and suitability, emphasizing that individuals appointed should not have been active in politics for some time before appointment, and suggesting mechanisms for ensuring a more consultative appointment process and security of tenure. Statement 3 is correct. The Commission recommended that the Union’s treaty-making power be regulated concerning matters in the State List, ensuring greater state representation and involvement in treaties affecting their internal affairs. Statement 4 is incorrect. The Punchhi Commission, like the Sarkaria Commission, generally supported the continuation and strengthening of All-India Services as a unifying factor, rather than their abolition. Incorrect Solution: B The Punchhi Commission (2007-2010) provided several recommendations on Centre-State relations. Statement 1 is correct. The Commission recommended amendments to Articles 355 and 356 to prevent misuse of President’s Rule. It suggested that instead of imposing emergency rule over an entire state, the Centre should focus on specific troubled areas, advocating for ‘localized emergency’ provisions. Statement 2 is correct. Similar to the Sarkaria Commission, the Punchhi Commission also made recommendations regarding the office of the Governor, including aspects related to their appointment, tenure, and suitability, emphasizing that individuals appointed should not have been active in politics for some time before appointment, and suggesting mechanisms for ensuring a more consultative appointment process and security of tenure. Statement 3 is correct. The Commission recommended that the Union’s treaty-making power be regulated concerning matters in the State List, ensuring greater state representation and involvement in treaties affecting their internal affairs. Statement 4 is incorrect. The Punchhi Commission, like the Sarkaria Commission, generally supported the continuation and strengthening of All-India Services as a unifying factor, rather than their abolition.

#### 3. Question

The Punchhi Commission, which also examined Centre-State relations, made recommendations concerning:

• Amendments to Articles 355 and 356 to prevent their misuse, suggesting localized emergency provisions.

• Giving Governors fixed tenures and ensuring they are not active politicians.

• Greater state involvement in the treaty-making process when treaties affect matters on the State List.

• Abolition of All-India Services to enhance state autonomy.

Which of the statements given above are correct?

• (a) 1 and 3 only

• (b) 1, 2 and 3 only

• (c) 2 and 4 only

• (d) 1, 2, 3 and 4

Solution: B

• The Punchhi Commission (2007-2010) provided several recommendations on Centre-State relations.

• Statement 1 is correct. The Commission recommended amendments to Articles 355 and 356 to prevent misuse of President’s Rule. It suggested that instead of imposing emergency rule over an entire state, the Centre should focus on specific troubled areas, advocating for ‘localized emergency’ provisions.

• Statement 2 is correct. Similar to the Sarkaria Commission, the Punchhi Commission also made recommendations regarding the office of the Governor, including aspects related to their appointment, tenure, and suitability, emphasizing that individuals appointed should not have been active in politics for some time before appointment, and suggesting mechanisms for ensuring a more consultative appointment process and security of tenure.

• Statement 3 is correct. The Commission recommended that the Union’s treaty-making power be regulated concerning matters in the State List, ensuring greater state representation and involvement in treaties affecting their internal affairs.

• Statement 4 is incorrect. The Punchhi Commission, like the Sarkaria Commission, generally supported the continuation and strengthening of All-India Services as a unifying factor, rather than their abolition.

Solution: B

• The Punchhi Commission (2007-2010) provided several recommendations on Centre-State relations.

• Question 4 of 5 4. Question Consider the following statements regarding the legislative relations between the Union and the States: The Parliament has exclusive power to make laws with respect to any matter enumerated in the Union List. A law made by the Parliament on a state subject during a National Emergency ceases to have effect on the expiration of six months after the emergency has ceased to operate. Which of the above statements are correct? (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2 Correct Solution: C Statement 1 is correct. Article 246(1) of the Constitution clearly states that Parliament has the exclusive power to legislate on any of the matters enumerated in List I (the Union List) in the Seventh Schedule. This forms the basis of the Centre’s legislative authority. Statement 2 is correct. Article 250 provides that while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, Parliament shall have the power to make laws for the whole or any part of India with respect to any matter in the State List. The proviso to this article states that any such law made by Parliament shall, to the extent of the incompetency, cease to have effect on the expiration of a period of six months after the Proclamation has ceased to operate. Incorrect Solution: C Statement 1 is correct. Article 246(1) of the Constitution clearly states that Parliament has the exclusive power to legislate on any of the matters enumerated in List I (the Union List) in the Seventh Schedule. This forms the basis of the Centre’s legislative authority. Statement 2 is correct. Article 250 provides that while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, Parliament shall have the power to make laws for the whole or any part of India with respect to any matter in the State List. The proviso to this article states that any such law made by Parliament shall, to the extent of the incompetency, cease to have effect on the expiration of a period of six months after the Proclamation has ceased to operate.

#### 4. Question

Consider the following statements regarding the legislative relations between the Union and the States:

• The Parliament has exclusive power to make laws with respect to any matter enumerated in the Union List.

• A law made by the Parliament on a state subject during a National Emergency ceases to have effect on the expiration of six months after the emergency has ceased to operate.

Which of the above statements are correct?

• (a) 1 only

• (b) 2 only

• (c) Both 1 and 2

• (d) Neither 1 nor 2

Solution: C

• Statement 1 is correct. Article 246(1) of the Constitution clearly states that Parliament has the exclusive power to legislate on any of the matters enumerated in List I (the Union List) in the Seventh Schedule. This forms the basis of the Centre’s legislative authority.

• Statement 2 is correct. Article 250 provides that while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, Parliament shall have the power to make laws for the whole or any part of India with respect to any matter in the State List. The proviso to this article states that any such law made by Parliament shall, to the extent of the incompetency, cease to have effect on the expiration of a period of six months after the Proclamation has ceased to operate.

Solution: C

• Question 5 of 5 5. Question Which of the following statements about the Fundamental Rights under Article 19 is correct? a) The rights under Article 19 can be suspended during both external and internal emergencies. b) The rights under Article 19 are suspended only during an external emergency, not internal emergencies. c) The rights under Article 19 cannot be suspended under any circumstances. d) The rights under Article 19 are suspended automatically during any emergency. Correct solution: B The Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 19 are automatically suspended only during an external emergency (resulting from war or external aggression), not during internal emergencies (such as armed rebellion). This distinction reflects the seriousness of external threats to national security while maintaining certain freedoms during internal unrest. The rights under Article 19 include important freedoms like speech, assembly, and movement, but these freedoms are subject to reasonable restrictions during national emergencies for the sake of public order and security. Incorrect solution: B The Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 19 are automatically suspended only during an external emergency (resulting from war or external aggression), not during internal emergencies (such as armed rebellion). This distinction reflects the seriousness of external threats to national security while maintaining certain freedoms during internal unrest. The rights under Article 19 include important freedoms like speech, assembly, and movement, but these freedoms are subject to reasonable restrictions during national emergencies for the sake of public order and security.

#### 5. Question

Which of the following statements about the Fundamental Rights under Article 19 is correct?

• a) The rights under Article 19 can be suspended during both external and internal emergencies.

• b) The rights under Article 19 are suspended only during an external emergency, not internal emergencies.

• c) The rights under Article 19 cannot be suspended under any circumstances.

• d) The rights under Article 19 are suspended automatically during any emergency.

solution: B

The Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 19 are automatically suspended only during an external emergency (resulting from war or external aggression), not during internal emergencies (such as armed rebellion). This distinction reflects the seriousness of external threats to national security while maintaining certain freedoms during internal unrest. The rights under Article 19 include important freedoms like speech, assembly, and movement, but these freedoms are subject to reasonable restrictions during national emergencies for the sake of public order and security.

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.