Class 11 Political Science Chapter 4 Executive NCERT Solutions

Q. A parliamentary executive means:
(a) Executive where there is a parliament
(b) Executive elected by the parliament
(c) Where the parliament functions as the Executive
(d) Executive that is dependent on support of the majority in the parliament

Answer: (d). The defining feature of a parliamentary system is that the executive (the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers) stays in office only as long as it has the support of the majority in the legislature (the Lok Sabha). The legislature does not become the executive, and the executive’s dependence on majority support is what makes the system “parliamentary”.

Q. Read this dialogue. Which argument do you agree with? Why?
Amit: Looking at the constitutional provisions, it seems that the President is only a rubber stamp.
Shama: The President appoints the Prime Minister. So, he must have the powers to remove the Prime Minister as well.
Rajesh: We don’t need a President. After the election, the Parliament can meet and elect a leader to be the Prime Minister.

Answer:
1. Amit’s view is only partly right. In day-to-day matters the President does act on the Council of Ministers’ binding advice, in that sense the President is mostly a formal head. But this is not the whole picture, the President retains real discretionary powers, asking for reconsideration of advice, the veto and pocket veto, and discretion in appointing the Prime Minister, which matter a great deal whenever there is no clear majority.
2. Shama’s view is incorrect. The power to appoint and the power to remove are not symmetrical. The Prime Minister stays in office only as long as the Lok Sabha’s majority supports them, the President cannot dismiss the Prime Minister at will, that would undermine the accountability the parliamentary system is built on.
3. Rajesh’s view is also weak. The President is not there merely to appoint a Prime Minister, the President is a stable, constitutionally created head who continues even when a government falls, symbolises the nation in foreign affairs and emergencies, and exercises real discretion in choosing the Prime Minister when there is no clear majority.

Q. Match the following:
(i) Works within the particular State in which recruited : (b) State Civil Services
(ii) Works in any central government office located either at the national capital or elsewhere in the country : (d) Central Services
(iii) Works in a particular State to which allotted, can also be sent on deputation to the centre : (c) All India Services
(iv) Works in Indian missions abroad : (a) Indian Foreign Service

Answer: (i)-(b), (ii)-(d), (iii)-(c), (iv)-(a). State Civil Services stay within their recruiting State; Central Services work directly in central government offices; All India Services (IAS, IPS) can be posted to any State and also sent to the centre on deputation; the Indian Foreign Service represents India abroad.

Q. Identify the ministry which may have released the following news items. Would this be a ministry of the central government or the State government? Why?
(a) An official release said that in 2004-05 the Tamil Nadu Textbooks Corporation would release new versions for standards VII, X and XI.
(b) A new railway loop line bypassing the crowded Tiruvallur-Chennai section to help iron ore exporters. The new line, likely to be about 80 km long, will branch off at Puttur and then reach Athipattu near the port.
(c) The three-member sub-divisional committee formed to verify suicide by farmers in Ramayampet mandal has found that the two farmers who committed suicide this month have had economic problems due to failure of crops.

Answer:
(a) State government’s education ministry. Textbooks and school education are a State (or concurrent) subject, and the Tamil Nadu Textbooks Corporation is the State’s own body.
(b) Central government’s railway ministry. Railways is a Union List subject, decisions about new lines and their construction fall under the central Railway Ministry.
(c) State government’s agriculture ministry (or revenue department). Farming, crop failure and farmer welfare are mainly State subjects, and the district/mandal-level committee works under the State government.

Q. While appointing the Prime Minister, the President selects:
(a) Leader of the largest party in the Lok Sabha
(b) Leader of the largest party in the alliance which secures a majority in the Lok Sabha
(c) The leader of the largest party in the Rajya Sabha
(d) Leader of the alliance or party that has the support of the majority in Lok Sabha

Answer: (d). The real criterion is majority support in the Lok Sabha, not just being the single largest party. Often the largest party does not have a majority on its own, in that case the President appoints the leader of whichever party or alliance can command the Lok Sabha’s majority support.

Q. Read this discussion and say which of these statements applies most to India.
Alok: Prime Minister is like a king, he decides everything in our country.
Shekhar: Prime Minister is only ‘first among equals’, he does not have any special powers. All ministers and the PM have similar powers.
Bobby: Prime Minister has to consider the expectations of the party members and other supporters of the government. But after all, the Prime Minister has a greater say in policy making and in choosing the ministers.

Answer: Bobby’s statement applies most to India. Alok’s statement is wrong, the Prime Minister is not an unaccountable king, the PM and the Council of Ministers remain answerable to the Lok Sabha and stay in office only while they have the support of its majority. Shekhar’s statement is also incomplete, in practice the Prime Minister is far more powerful than an ordinary minister, presides over Cabinet meetings, allocates portfolios and sets the direction of policy. Bobby strikes the right balance, the Prime Minister must carry the party and coalition partners along, but ultimately has the greatest say in policymaking and in choosing ministers.

Q. Why do you think is the advice of the Council of Ministers binding on the President? Give your answer in not more than 100 words.

Answer: In a parliamentary system the real executive is the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers. They have the support of the majority in the Lok Sabha and are collectively responsible to it, and through it to the people. The President is elected indirectly and is not answerable to the Lok Sabha. If the President could ignore the Council’s advice, real power would pass to someone the people’s representatives cannot control, bringing back the danger of a personality cult. So Article 74(1) makes the advice binding: the President may ask once for reconsideration, but must accept the reconsidered advice.

Q. The parliamentary system of executive vests many powers in the legislature for controlling the executive. Why, do you think, is it so necessary to control the executive?

Answer:
1. The executive commands the most powerful instruments of the state, administration, bureaucracy, police and security forces, and unchecked, these could be misused against citizens’ liberty.
2. Elected representatives are directly accountable to the people, legislative control ensures the executive cannot act against the people’s wishes at will.
3. Tools like no-confidence motions, question hour and parliamentary committees keep the executive continuously accountable, maintaining transparency and balance in policymaking.
4. Without control, the executive, especially the permanent bureaucracy, could over time grow powerful enough to become insensitive to the public, which is why this control is essential to a healthy democracy.

Q. It is said that there is too much political interference in the working of the administrative machinery. It is suggested that there should be more and more autonomous agencies which do not have to answer to the ministers.
(a) Do you think this will make administration more people-friendly?
(b) Do you think this will make administration more efficient?
(c) Does democracy mean full control of elected representatives over the administration?

Answer:
(a) Not necessarily. Autonomous agencies may escape political pressure, but they are also not directly accountable to the people, that lack of accountability can itself make them arbitrary rather than people-friendly.
(b) To some extent, yes. In specialised, technical areas (such as a central bank or a regulatory body), decisions free of political interference can be faster and better, but this cannot be extended to every area of administration.
(c) No. Democracy does not require elected representatives to control every small administrative detail, its real meaning lies in accountability and transparency, built through both elected oversight and public scrutiny. What is needed is balance, not placing every agency directly under ministers, nor leaving every agency fully independent.

Q. Write an essay of two hundred words on the proposal to have an elected administration instead of an appointed administration.

Answer: The proposal is appealing at first glance, but is full of practical problems.
In favour: Elected officials would be directly accountable to the people, having to face the electorate repeatedly would reduce the scope for arbitrariness. The idea seems to align with democracy’s core principle of direct public participation.
Against: 1. Administration needs technical competence, expertise and experience, which competitive examinations ensure through merit-based selection, elections offer no such guarantee. 2. Elected officials, constantly preoccupied with re-election, would avoid long-term but necessary and unpopular policy decisions. 3. Continuity would suffer, every election would mean a loss of administrative experience and institutional memory. 4. Elected officials might come under pressure to show political loyalty, which could undermine neutrality.
Conclusion: The better path is to keep a merit-based, appointed permanent bureaucracy in place, while making it more transparent and accountable through elected representatives and tools like the Right to Information, rather than making administration entirely elections-based, which is not workable.

Q. Who is in charge of the administration of your school? Who takes important decisions in a school or a university?

Answer. In a school, the Principal (head of the school) is in charge of administration, usually under a managing committee, the school board or the education department. Important decisions, such as the timetable, admissions, fees and discipline, are taken by the Principal with the managing committee or governing body; in a university by the Vice-Chancellor, the Syndicate or Executive Council and the Academic Council. The teachers and office staff then implement these decisions day to day. This shows the two parts of any executive: those who take policy decisions and those who carry them out.

Q. I remember somebody saying that the executive in a democracy is accountable to people. Is that also true of executives in big companies? Aren’t they called CEOs? Who are they accountable to?

Answer. Not in the same way. The executive of a democratic government is accountable to the people, through their elected representatives in the legislature and through periodic elections. The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of a company is accountable to the company’s Board of Directors and, through the Board, to the shareholders who own the company; the CEO must also obey the laws and regulators of the country. Ordinary citizens cannot remove a CEO by voting, while they can remove a government.

Q. Procure a photograph of the SAARC summit meeting or the meeting of G-7 countries and list those who attended the meeting. Can you imagine why those people and not some others are attending the meeting?

Answer. Your list will depend on the photograph. In such a photograph you will find the person who heads the government of each member country: for example, the Prime Minister of India, the President of the United States or France, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Japan or Italy, and the Chancellor of Germany. These people attend because a summit takes decisions on behalf of governments, so each country sends the head of its real executive. In a presidential system that is the President; in a parliamentary system it is the Prime Minister or Chancellor, not the ceremonial head of state such as the President of India, the King of the United Kingdom or the Emperor of Japan. So the photograph tells you which type of executive each country has.

Q. How is the position of the President and Prime Minister in Sri Lanka different from India? Compare the role of Supreme Court in the impeachment of the President in India and Sri Lanka.

Answer. In Sri Lanka the President is directly elected by the people for six years, is the Head of State, the Commander-in-Chief and also the Head of the Government, chooses the Prime Minister and can remove the Prime Minister or ministers. The Prime Minister is therefore subordinate to the President. In India the President is elected indirectly for five years, is only the formal head, acts on the advice of the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister, and cannot dismiss a Prime Minister who has the majority in the Lok Sabha; the Prime Minister is the real head of government. On impeachment: in Sri Lanka, if a resolution is passed by at least half of the members and the Speaker is satisfied that the allegations merit inquiry, the Speaker can refer the matter to the Supreme Court, so the Court has a role. In India the Supreme Court has no role: the President is removed only by Parliament, through the impeachment procedure requiring a special majority, and the only ground is violation of the Constitution.

Q. Neha: It is really very simple. A country having a president has a presidential executive and one with a prime minister has parliamentary executive. How would you explain to Neha that this is not always the case?

Answer. Having a president does not make an executive presidential, and having a prime minister does not make it parliamentary. India has a President, but it has a parliamentary executive, because the President is only the formal head and the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers, responsible to the Lok Sabha, are the real executive; Germany and Italy are similar. France, Russia and Sri Lanka have both a president and a prime minister, yet they have a semi-presidential system in which the president has significant powers. The real test is where effective power lies and to whom the executive is responsible, not the title of the office.

Q. Haven’t we had very strong Prime Ministers? Does it mean that even the parliamentary system is not fool proof against personality cult? That means people and the legislatures have to be constantly vigilant!

Answer. Yes. When one party has a large majority in the Lok Sabha, the Prime Minister’s position becomes unassailable, and powers such as control over the Council of Ministers, command over the bureaucracy, access to the media and projection of the PM’s personality during elections can build a personality cult even in a parliamentary system. The system reduces this danger but does not remove it: the PM still depends on the support of the majority and is answerable to Parliament. That is why the people, the legislature, the opposition, the media and other institutions have to remain constantly vigilant.

Q. Am I just a figurehead or am I asking real questions? Did the textbook writers give me power to ask questions I wish to ask or am I asking questions they have in their mind?

Answer. This margin character jokes about its own position, and the joke matches the President’s position described next to it. Like the President, the character appears to speak in its own name, but its words are written by someone else (the textbook writers), just as the President acts on the advice of the Council of Ministers. Yet the character is not only a figurehead: its questions make students think, just as the President has a right to be informed, can ask the Council of Ministers to reconsider its advice and has some discretion. Your own questions, of course, are real: you are free to ask any question you wish about the chapter.

Q. It is very well to talk of the President as He or She, but has a woman ever become the President?

Answer. Yes. Pratibha Patil became the first woman President of India in 2007 and held office till 2012. Droupadi Murmu became President in 2022; she is also the first person from a Scheduled Tribe to hold the office.

Q. Imagine that the Prime Minister wants to impose ‘President’s rule’ in one State because the State government has failed to effectively curb atrocities against the Dalits in that State. The President has a different position: the provision should be used only sparingly. Which of the following courses are open to the President? a. Tell the Prime Minister that he will not sign on the order promulgating President’s rule. b. Dismiss the Prime Minister. c. Ask the Prime Minister to send CRPF to that State. d. Make a press statement about how the Prime Minister is wrong. e. Discuss the matter with the Prime Minister and try to dissuade him from taking this action, but if he insists, agreeing to sign the said order.

Answer. Course (e) is open to the President. The President has a right to be informed and to express views, and can ask the Council of Ministers to reconsider its advice, but must accept the reconsidered advice (Article 74(1)). So (a) is not open, the President cannot refuse to sign permanently; (b) is not open, the Prime Minister continues as long as he has the majority in the Lok Sabha; (c) is not the President’s decision, the President cannot direct the government’s actions on his own, though he may suggest it in discussion; and (d) is not proper, because the President does not publicly oppose the government whose advice he is bound to follow.

Q. No discussion of government or politics in India, would normally take place without mentioning one office: the Prime Minister of India. Can you imagine why this is so?

Answer. Because the Prime Minister is the most important functionary of the government. The President exercises powers only on the advice of the Council of Ministers, and the Council is headed by the Prime Minister. The PM has the support of the majority in the Lok Sabha, chooses the ministers and allocates portfolios, links the Council of Ministers with the President and Parliament, is involved in all crucial decisions, commands the bureaucracy and represents the country abroad. Nehru called the Prime Minister ‘the linchpin of Government’.

Q. Why do people want to be ministers? This cartoon seems to suggest that it is only for perks and status! Then why is there competition for some portfolios?

Answer. Perks and status are one reason, but not the only one. Ministers head departments and take decisions that affect the whole country, so a ministership gives real power, influence over policy and resources, and a chance to serve one’s constituency, party or social group. Some portfolios, such as home, finance, defence or railways, control far larger budgets and more important decisions than others, and bring more visibility and influence. That is why there is competition for them, especially in coalition governments where partners bargain for important portfolios.

Q. Is it that a person becomes Prime Minister because he/she is powerful or is it that you become powerful once you have become the Prime Minister?

Answer. Both are true. A person becomes Prime Minister because he or she already has power: the support of the majority in the Lok Sabha, usually as the leader of the largest party or of a coalition. Once in office, the PM gains much more power: control over the Council of Ministers, leadership of the Lok Sabha, command over the bureaucracy, access to the media and a role as national leader abroad. But the power actually used depends on political conditions: with a single-party majority the PM is very strong, while in a coalition the PM acts more as a negotiator.

Q. This Chief Minister is not happy even after winning the confidence motion! Can you imagine why this is so?

Answer. Winning a confidence motion only proves that the government has a majority today. In a coalition, that majority depends on many partners and independent members, each of whom has demands for ministerial posts, portfolios and policies. The Chief Minister has to keep negotiating and compromising to keep everyone together, and the support can be withdrawn at any time. So the troubles continue: the CM must act more as a negotiator than as a leader.

Q. Suppose the Prime Minister is to select the Council of Ministers. What will he/she do? a. Select those who are experts in the various subjects. b. Select only those who are from his/her party. c. Select those who are personally loyal and dependable. d. Select those who are supporters of the government. e. Take into account the political weight of the various aspirants and choose from among them.

Answer. In practice the Prime Minister does (e), along with (d). All ministers must be members of Parliament (or become members within six months) and must support the government, so the PM chooses from among the supporters of the government, weighing the political importance of each aspirant: seniority, the support he or she commands, the region and social group represented and, in a coalition, the demands of the partner parties. (b) is not possible in a coalition, where partners must be given posts. Expertise (a) and loyalty (c) may be considered, but they are not the main basis of selection.

Q. Yes, I know that the officers are there to serve the people. But people are always afraid of these officers. And officers also behave as if they were the masters!

Answer. The chapter agrees that this is a common experience: the bureaucracy is often so powerful that people are afraid of approaching a government officer, and it is felt to be insensitive to the demands of ordinary citizens. The remedy suggested is that the democratically elected government should control the bureaucracy, without so much political interference that it becomes a tool of politicians, and that the bureaucracy should be made accountable to citizens. Measures like the Right to Information may make the bureaucracy a little more responsive and accountable.