Class 11 Political Science Chapter 9 Constitution as a Living Document Important Questions with Answers

प्र. When was India’s Constitution adopted?

उत्तर: On 26 November 1949.

प्र. When did India’s Constitution come into force?

उत्तर: On 26 January 1950.

प्र. Which article is the basic provision for amending the Constitution?

उत्तर: Article 368.

प्र. In which case was the basic structure doctrine put forward?

उत्तर: In the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973).

प्र. To how many years did the 42nd amendment extend the Lok Sabha’s term?

उत्तर: 6 years (it was 5 years before).

प्र. In which year was the Minerva Mills case decided?

उत्तर: In 1980.

प्र. Under whose chairmanship, and when, was the commission to review the Constitution formed?

उत्तर: Under Justice Venkatachaliah’s chairmanship, in the year 2000.

प्र. By 26 January 2024, how many amendments had India’s Constitution seen in total?

उत्तर: 106 amendments.

प्र. State both conditions of special majority.

उत्तर: 1. Those voting in favour of the amendment must be at least half of the House’s total membership.
2. They must also be at least two-thirds of all members who actually take part in the voting.

प्र. For which provisions is ratification by States necessary?

उत्तर: For provisions concerning the distribution of power between the States and the Centre, or concerning representation, ratification by half the State legislatures is necessary.

प्र. State the difference in the President’s role between an amendment bill and an ordinary bill.

उत्तर: For an ordinary bill, the President can send it back to Parliament for reconsideration, but in the case of an amendment bill, the President does not have this power, and must give assent.

प्र. Define the basic structure doctrine.

उत्तर: This doctrine holds that Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, but no amendment can violate the Constitution’s basic structure, and the final authority to decide this rests with the Judiciary.

प्र. Compare the periods 1974-76 and 2001-03.

उत्तर: 1974-76 was a period of Congress dominance (352 Lok Sabha seats), while 2001-03 was a period of coalition politics and bitter rivalry between the BJP and opposing parties, yet both saw ten amendments each.

प्र. Why are the 38th-39th-42nd amendments considered controversial?

उत्तर: These three amendments were made against the backdrop of the Emergency declared in June 1975, and the opposition saw them as the ruling party’s attempt to distort the Constitution’s basic form.

प्र. What do Article 2 and Article 3 say?

उत्तर: Under Article 2, Parliament may by law admit new states into the union. Under Article 3, Parliament may by law increase the area of any state. A simple majority is sufficient for both.

प्र. Explain the difference between “letter” and “spirit” in the context of interpreting the Constitution.

उत्तर: “Letter” means the literal, written language of the Constitution, while “spirit” means the intent and social circumstances behind it. In Kesavananda, the Judiciary decided based on spirit rather than letter.

प्र. Explain why the Constitution is both flexible and rigid.

उत्तर: 1. The Constitution-makers knew the Constitution could have errors, so flexibility was needed to correct them.
2. Some provisions were of a temporary nature, meant to be changed once a new Parliament was formed.
3. At the same time, the Constitution was framing a federal polity, so States’ powers could not be changed without their consent, this needed rigidity.
4. Some other features were so central to the spirit of the Constitution that the makers were anxious to protect them from change, so those provisions had to be made rigid.

प्र. Explain the three ways of amending the Constitution with examples.

उत्तर: 1. Simple majority: some articles (such as Articles 2, 3) can be amended by ordinary law.
2. Special majority: under Article 368, both Houses need a special majority, passed separately.
3. Special majority plus ratification by States: for provisions tied to the federal structure or representation, half the State legislatures must also consent.
4. All three methods make the Constitution flexible or rigid to differing degrees.

प्र. Explain the calculation of special majority using the Lok Sabha example.

उत्तर: 1. The Lok Sabha has 545 members in total.
2. Members voting in favour must be at least half of the total, that is, at least 273.
3. They must also be at least two-thirds of those actually voting.
4. Even if only 300 members are present, at least 273 support is still required, since this condition is based on total membership, not just those present.

प्र. Explain the three categories of amendments with examples.

उत्तर: 1. Technical/administrative: such as the 15th amendment (raising judges’ retirement age), which brings no real change.
2. Born of differing interpretations: when Parliament and the Judiciary’s interpretations clash, Parliament resorts to amendment, as happened in 1970-75.
3. Through political consensus: such as the 61st amendment (voting age), made through mutual agreement among parties.
4. These three show that amendments are the result of practical need, not just political conflict.

प्र. Explain in detail why the 42nd amendment was controversial.

उत्तर: 1. It was made against the backdrop of the Emergency (June 1975), and the opposition saw it as an attempt to distort the Constitution’s basic form.
2. It attempted to challenge the Kesavananda Bharati ruling and extended the Lok Sabha’s term from 5 to 6 years.
3. It restricted the Judiciary’s review powers and changed the Preamble, the Seventh Schedule, and 53 articles.
4. Many opposition MPs were in jail when it was passed, so it was seen as controversial on a wide scale.

प्र. Explain the three contributions of the basic structure doctrine.

उत्तर: 1. It set limits on Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution: no amendment can violate the basic structure.
2. It allowed Parliament to amend any or all parts of the Constitution within this limit.
3. It gave the Judiciary the final authority to decide whether an amendment violates the basic structure.
4. In this way the doctrine balances both the Constitution’s rigidity and its flexibility.

प्र. Give examples of the Judiciary’s informal amendments.

उत्तर: 1. The Judiciary ruled that reservations in jobs and education cannot exceed 50 percent of seats, this is now an accepted principle.
2. In OBC reservation cases, the concept of “creamy layer” was introduced, under which such persons are not entitled to reservation benefits.
3. The Judiciary also contributed through interpretation of provisions concerning the right to education, right to life and liberty, and minorities’ right to educational institutions.
4. These examples show that judicial interpretation alone, without any formal amendment, can change the understanding of the Constitution.

प्र. Explain in detail why the Constitution is called a “living document”.

उत्तर: 1. Like a living being, this document works according to changing circumstances over time and learns from experience.
2. It is known for both stability and its openness to change, this is the hallmark of a democratic constitution.
3. The basic structure doctrine is its biggest example, it is nowhere written in the Constitution’s own text, yet it emerged through judicial interpretation and is now accepted.
4. Both the scope for amendment (flexibility) and the protection of certain provisions (rigidity) together make the Constitution stable as well as adaptable to changing situations.
5. The maturity of political parties and leaders has also kept it working, despite controversies the Constitution’s core spirit has been preserved.
6. So the Constitution is neither rigid nor unstable, it stays living by continuously adapting to changing circumstances.

प्र. Explain in detail the roles of the Kesavananda Bharati and Minerva Mills cases.

उत्तर: 1. In the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), the Supreme Court put forward the basic structure doctrine: Parliament can amend the Constitution to any extent, but cannot violate its basic structure.
2. Following this, the 42nd amendment (1976) attempted to challenge this ruling and establish parliamentary supremacy.
3. In the Minerva Mills case (1980), the Court repeated its earlier stand and reaffirmed the basic structure doctrine once more.
4. Even four decades later, the Kesavananda ruling remains the most significant in interpreting the Constitution.
5. Political parties, the government, and Parliament have all accepted this doctrine, even attempts to review the Constitution did not cross this limit.
6. This shows that the Constitution’s success lies precisely in resolving the tension between the Judiciary and Parliament.

प्र. Explain the Parliament-Judiciary conflict of 1970-1975 with examples.

उत्तर: 1. During this period, there was repeated conflict between Parliament and the Judiciary over interpreting the Constitution.
2. Three main disputes: the relationship between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles, the scope of the right to private property, and the scope of Parliament’s own power to amend the Constitution.
3. When Parliament disagreed with the Judiciary’s interpretation, it resorted to amendment to make its own interpretation authoritative.
4. This conflict reached its peak in the 1973 Kesavananda Bharati case and the 1976 42nd amendment.
5. This entire period can only be fully understood in the context of the politics of that time (including the Emergency).
6. Eventually, the Minerva Mills case (1980) restored the balance in favour of the basic structure doctrine.

प्र. Explain how the maturity of political leadership made the Constitution successful.

उत्तर: 1. After the sharp controversy of 1967-1973, Parliament and the Executive felt the need for a balanced, long-term view.
2. Even when attempts to overturn the Kesavananda ruling failed, political parties did not let the conflict escalate beyond limits.
3. Four decades later, all political parties, the government, and Parliament have accepted the unshakeable idea of the basic structure.
4. Even when the Constitution’s review was discussed (as with the Venkatachaliah Commission), this process stayed within the basic structure’s limits.
5. Debate and disagreement are natural in a democracy, but Indian politicians have learned to give up extreme positions and develop a minimum common understanding.
6. It is exactly this spirit of compromise and maturity that has let the Constitution work successfully for so many decades without breaking down.