Every UPSC Prelims question on this topic, 2016–2026, newest first. Tap an option to check yourself; the answer and explanation open below it.
Asked in 8 of 11 years · most in 2019 (4)
UPSC syllabus: “Indian Polity and Governance-Constitution, Political System, Panchayati Raj, Public Policy, Rights Issues, etc.” See the full syllabus →
In India, separation of judiciary from the executive is enjoined by
Answer & explanation▾
Answer: (b) a Directive Principle of State Policy
Article 50, in Part IV (Directive Principles of State Policy), asks the State to work towards keeping the judiciary apart from the executive in its public services. It is a directive to the State, not a Preamble ideal, a Schedule entry or a mere convention.
✓(b)Article 50 ('Separation of judiciary from executive') is one of the Directive Principles in Part IV of the Constitution.
✗(a)The Preamble speaks of justice, liberty, equality and fraternity; it does not mention separating the judiciary from the executive.
✗(d)The separation is not left to convention; the Constitution itself states it in Article 50, although, being a Directive Principle, it cannot be enforced in court.
Remember · Article 50, a Directive Principle in Part IV, enjoins separation of the judiciary from the executive; like other DPSPs it is not enforceable in court.
Constitution of India, Part IV, Article 50 ↗“50. Separation of judiciary from executive.—The State shall take steps to separate the judiciary from the executive in the public services of the State.”
Question and answer: UPSC's official GS Paper I (2020, Series A) —
paper ↗ · answer key ↗.
Explanation: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify). Permalink ·
In India, Legal Services Authorities provide free legal services to which of the following type of citizens?
1.Person with an annual income of less than ₹ 1,00,000
2.Transgender with an annual income of less than ₹ 2,00,000
3.Member of Other Backward Classes (OBC) with an annual income of less than ₹ 3,00,000
4.All Senior Citizens
Select the correct answer using the code given below:
Answer & explanation▾
Answer: (a) 1 and 2 only
Section 12 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 lists who gets free legal aid: SC/ST members, women, children, persons with disability, industrial workmen, persons in custody and people below an income ceiling set by the State. Low-income persons and transgender persons within the prescribed ceilings qualify; being OBC is not a category, and senior citizens qualify only as State rules allow.
✓1.Section 12 covers anyone whose annual income is below the ceiling the State prescribes; most States' ceilings are ₹1,00,000 or higher, so a person earning less than ₹1 lakh qualifies.
✓2.Delhi's legal aid rules give transgender persons a separate, higher income ceiling (NALSA now lists ₹4,00,000 for Delhi), so a transgender person earning under ₹2 lakh is eligible.
✗3.Section 12 names Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, not Other Backward Classes. An OBC person qualifies only through another category, such as the income ceiling, not because of being OBC.
✗4.NALSA says senior citizens' eligibility depends on each State's rules; Delhi, for example, gives it only below an income ceiling. So not all senior citizens qualify.
Remember · Free legal aid (Section 12, Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987): SC/ST, women, children, disabled, trafficking victims, industrial workmen, persons in custody, disaster victims, and persons below a State-set income ceiling.
Sources
National Legal Services Authority (NALSA), FAQs: who is entitled to free legal services under Section 12 ↗“A member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe (on producing a certificate in this regard); A victim of trafficking in human beings or begar as referred to in Article 23 of the Constitution of India 1950; A woman or a child … Senior citizens’ eligibility for free legal aid depends on the rules framed by the respective State Governments in this regard. … 34. Delhi General –Rs. 3,00,000, Senior citizen- Rs. 4,00,000, Transgender – Rs. 4,00,000”
Question and answer: UPSC's official GS Paper I (2020, Series A) —
paper ↗ · answer key ↗.
Explanation: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify). Permalink ·
1.The Constitution of India defines its 'basic structure' in terms of federalism, secularism, fundamental rights and democracy.
2.The Constitution of India provides for 'judicial review' to safeguard the citizens' liberties and to preserve the ideals on which the Constitution is based.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Answer & explanation▾
Answer: (d) Neither 1 nor 2
UPSC's official answer: (d) · the answer UPSC accepted, and the one that counts in the exam
Also defensible: (b)
Statement 1 is wrong on any reading: the Constitution nowhere defines a 'basic structure'; the doctrine is the Supreme Court's (Kesavananda Bharati, 1973).
Statement 2 puts 'judicial review' in quotes. The term does not occur in the Constitution ('The term judicial review is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution', NCERT), and UPSC's key reads 'provides for' as asking whether the text names it, so both statements fail and the answer is (d).
In substance, however, the Constitution does provide for judicial review: Article 13(2) makes any law that abridges a Fundamental Right void 'to the extent of the contravention', and Article 32(1) guarantees the right to move the Supreme Court to enforce those rights. NCERT says these provisions 'implicitly' give the Court the power of judicial review, and courts strike down laws under them to safeguard liberties, which is what statement 2 says.
Read for substance rather than for the term, statement 2 is correct and the answer is (b).
UPSC's key treats both statements as wrong because neither 'basic structure' nor 'judicial review' is a term the Constitution uses; read for substance, statement 2 holds and the answer is (b). In the exam, when a statement puts a term in quotes and says the Constitution 'defines' or 'provides for' it, UPSC is asking whether the term is in the text.
NCERT Class 11 Indian Constitution at Work, Ch 6 Judiciary ↗“the fact that India has a written constitution and the Supreme Court can strike down a law that goes against fundamental rights, implicitly gives the Supreme Court the power of judicial review”
Constitution of India, Article 13(2) (Legislative Department) ↗“The State shall not make any law which takes away or abridges the rights conferred by this Part and any law made in contravention of this clause shall, to the extent of the contravention, be void.”
This box is Minimalist IAS's analysis, with its sources; it does not change UPSC's answer.
Neither term is written into the Constitution. The 'basic structure' doctrine was laid down by the Supreme Court in Kesavananda Bharati (1973), and the phrase 'judicial review' appears nowhere in the Constitution: the power is implied from the written Constitution and from provisions such as Articles 13 and 32, not provided for by name. Both statements, which put the terms in quotes, are therefore incorrect.
✗1.The Constitution does not mention or define a 'basic structure'. The Supreme Court created the doctrine in 1973, and features such as federalism and secularism have been identified case by case by the courts.
✗2.The term 'judicial review' is not used in the Constitution. Courts derive the power from the written Constitution and from provisions that make laws violating Fundamental Rights void; the statement treats it as something the Constitution expressly provides.
Remember · Basic structure: a judge-made doctrine (Kesavananda Bharati, 1973), not listed in the Constitution. 'Judicial review' is also not a term in the Constitution; the power is implied.
NCERT Class 11 · Indian Constitution at Work, Chapter 9“If you read the Constitution, you will not find any mention of the 'basic structure' of the Constitution. Nowhere does the Constitution say that such and such are part of the basic structure.”
NCERT Class 11 · Indian Constitution at Work, Chapter 6“The term judicial review is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution. However, the fact that India has a written constitution and the Supreme Court can strike down a law that goes against fundamental rights, implicitly gives the Supreme Court the power of judicial review.”
Answer: (d) a part of the Constitution but has no legal effect independently of other parts
In Kesavananda Bharati (1973) the Supreme Court held that the Preamble is a part of the Constitution. But it is non-justiciable: it neither grants nor limits powers on its own, and is used to interpret the other provisions, so it has no legal effect independently of them.
✓(d)The Preamble is part of the Constitution but cannot be enforced in a court by itself; its force comes through helping courts read ambiguous provisions.
✗(b)The 1960 Berubari opinion had said the Preamble was not part of the Constitution, but Kesavananda Bharati (1973) overruled that view.
✗(c)It does not carry the same force as operative articles: it cannot override specific provisions, and where the two conflict, the provisions prevail.
Remember · Preamble: part of the Constitution (Kesavananda Bharati, 1973), amendable without touching the basic structure, amended once (42nd Amendment, 1976), non-justiciable, an aid to interpretation.
Sources
Institute of Secretariat Training and Management (ISTM), Study material on the Constitution of India ↗“The Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati Vs State of Kerala (1973) case overruled its earlier decision of 1960 and made it clear that it is a part of the Constitution … The Preamble is non-justiciable in nature, like the Directive Principles of State Policy, and cannot be enforced in a court of law. It can neither provide substantive power (definite and real power) to the three organs of the State, nor limit their powers”
Question and answer: UPSC's official GS Paper I (2020, Series A) —
paper ↗ · answer key ↗.
Explanation: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify). Permalink ·