Class 11 Political Science Chapter 9 Constitution as a Living Document

Class 11 Political Science Chapter 9 Constitution as a Living Document The answer to each chapter is provided in the list so that you can easily browse throughout different chapters NCERT Class 11 Political Science Chapter 9 Constitution as a Living Document and select need one.

Class 11 Political Science Chapter 9 Constitution as a Living Document

Join Telegram channel

Follow us:

Also, you can read the SCERT book online in these sections Solutions by Expert Teachers as per SCERT (CBSE) Book guidelines. These solutions are part of SCERT All Subject Solutions. Here we have given Assam Board Class 11 Political Science Chapter 9 Constitution as a Living Document Solutions for All Subjects, You can practice these here…

Constitution as a Living Document

Chapter – 9

POLITICAL SCIENCE

TEXTUAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

PART – A

Q.1. Choose the correct settlement from the following :

A constitution needs to be amendment from time to time because- 

(i) Circumstances Change and required Suitable change in the constitution.

(ii) A document written at one point of time becomes outdated after some time

(iii) Every generation should have a constitution of its own living.

(iv) It must reflect the philosophy of the existing government.

Ans :- A constitution needs to be amended from time to time because- circumstances change and require suitable changes in the constitution.

Q.2. Write True/ False against the following statements.

(a) The President cannot send back on amendment bill for reconsideration of the parliament.

Ans : True.

(b) Elected representatives alone have the power to amend the constitutions.

Ans :- True.

(c) The Judiciary cannot initiate the process of Constitutional amendment but can effectively change the constitution by interpreting it differently.

Ans : True.

(d) The Parliament can amend any section of the constitution

Ans :- False.

Q.3. Which of the following are involved in the amendment of the Indian constitution? In what way are they involved?

(a) Voters.

(b) President of India.

(c) Parliament.

(d) State legislature.

(e) Governor.

(f) Judiciary.

Ans :- (a) Voters :- are not involved in the amendment of the constitution

(b) President of India :- is involved in the amendment of the constitution. An amendment bill after ratification by the two houses of parliament goes to the President for his signature. Unlike other bills, the president has not powers to send on amendment bill back for reconsideration.

(c) State legislatures :- For some articles of the constitution related to the distribution of powers between the center and States, or articles related to representation,it is necessary that the states are also consulted. Hence in some articles for amendment, help of the State have to ratify that Amendment Bill before it becomes an act.

(d) Parliament :- Both the Houses of the Parliament must Pass the amendment bill before it becomes an act. Third type of amendments are needed special majority in both the House of Parliament separately and after that this amendment or these amendments are reified by at least help of the states also.

(e) Governors :- The Governors have no role in the amendment of Indian constitution except those amendment bills which have to be passed or ratified by help of the States also. In that case Governors also put their Signatures on the bill passed by the respective state legislature.

Q.4. You have read in this chapter that the 42nd amendment was one of the most controversial amendments so. For which of the following were the reasons for this controversy?

(a) It was made during national emergency was itself controversial.

(b) It was made with out the support of special majority.

(c) It was made without ratification by state legislatures.

(d) It continue provisions, which were (Universal)

Ans :- The 42nd amendment was on of the most controversial amendments. The reason of this controversy were-

(a) It was made during emergency and the declaration of that emergency arising was itself controversial

(b) It contained Provisions which were controversial.

Q.5. Which of the following is not a reasonable explanation of the conflict between the legislature and the Judiciary over different amendments?

(a) Different interpretations of the constitution are possible.

(b) In democracy, debates and difference are natural

(c) Constitution has given higher importance to certain rules and principles and also allowed of amendment by special majority.

(d) Legislature can not be entrusted to protect the rights of the citizens.

Judiciary can only decide the constitutionality of a particular law , can not resolve political debate about its need.

Ans:- (d) There has been no conflict on the issue of rights. It is resolved by the constitution itself thought the right to constitutional remedies.

Q.6. Identify the correct statement about the theory of basic structure correct the incorrect statements.

(a) Constitution Specifies the basic tenets : 

Ans :- It is an incorrect statement. There is no mention as such of basic tenets in the constitution. The basic structure theory is an invention of the supreme court.

(b) Legislature can amend all parts of the constitution except the basis structure.

Ans :- It is correct Statement.

(c) Judiciary has defined which aspects of the constitution can be termed as the basic structure and which can not.

Ans :- It is correct Statement.

(d) This theory found its first expression in the Kesavan and Bharati Case and has been discussed in rabraguent Judgements.

Ans :- It is correct statements.

(e) This theory has increased the powers of the Judiciary and has come to be accepted by different political parties and the government.

Ans :- It is correct Statement.

Q.7. From the information that many amendments were made during 2000-2003, which of the following conclusions would you draw?

(a) Judiciary did not interfere in the amendments made during this period.

(b) One political party had a strong majority during this period

(b) There was a strong pressure from the public in favour of certain amendment.

(d) There were no real differences among the parties during this time.

(e) The amendment were of non controversial nature and parties had an agreement on the subject amendments.

Ans :- (c), (d), and (e)

Q.8. Explain the reason for requiring special majority for amending the constitution.

Ans :- Amendment to the constitution requires two different kinds of special majorities; in the first place, those voting in favour of the amendment bill should constitute least half of the total strength of the House. Secondly the supporter of the amendment bill must also constitute two-third of those who actually take part in voting. Both the house of parliament must pass the amendment bill separately. This special majority is required for the reason that it would need at least some opposition parties into confidence so that the amending procedure is based the basic principle that it should be based on board support among the political parties and parliamentarians. In respect of the articles related to distribution of powers between the centre and states or articles related to representation. It is necessary that the states must be consulted.

The powers of the states must not be at the mercy of central government. The constitution have to pass such an amendment bill. The articles related to federal structure, Provisions, about the fundamental rights are also amended in this manner. Thus through wide consensus and limited participation of the states, the constitution of India can be amended. Only help of the states is required due to the reason that the framers of the constitution were most careful to keep this procedure some what flexible even in its more rigid format consent of only help the states and simple majority of the state legislature is sufficiently.

Q.9. Many amendments to the constitution of India have been made due to different interpretations up held by the Judiciary and the Parliament. Explain with examples.

Ans :- Many amendments to the constitutions of India have been made due to different interpretations up held by the Judiciary and the parliament. The first amendment act of 1951 made many changes in the constitution. The reason was that certain flaws were discovered in the working of the constitution and those had to be remedied. The right to freedom of speech and expression as given by Article 19 of the constitution was held by some courts to be so comprehensive that no action could be taken against any individual More over many states had passed laws abolishing Zamindari System but the laws were declared ultra vires by the courts. So it was considered necessary to amend the constitution. In the famous case of Kesavan and Bharati, the parliament’s power to amend the constitution was checked and it has got some specific limits. 

It says that no amendment can violate the basic structure of the constitution. When the Judiciary and to insert an amendment. On the many occasions the parliament has not agreed with the Judicial interpretation and therefore sought to amend the constitution to over come the ruling of the Judiciary.

In the period between 1970 and 1975 such a situation arose frequently. In 1971, the 24th amendment gave the power to parliament to amend any party of the constitution in which the fundamental Rights were also included 42nd amendment in 1976 was the most controversial. 

38th, 39th and 42nd amendment were made in the background of the internal emergency. The 42nd amendment who put restriction powers of the Judiciary. This amendment made changes to the preamble., to the seventh schedule of the constitution and to 53 other articles of the constitution. The 43rd an 44th amendments cancelled most of the changes that were effected by the 38th, 39th and 42nd amendments. The constitutional balance was restored by these amendments. There are some example in which Judicial interpretation changed or understanding of the constitution. As the Supreme Court had held that reservations in jobs and educational institutions can not excelled fifty% of the total seats.

Q.10. If amendment power is with the elected representative Judiciary should have the power to decide the validity of amendments. Do you agree? Given your reason in 100 words.

Ans :- There has been a controversy over the amending power of the parliament. It was advocated that the amending power is with the elected representatives and Judiciary should not have the powers to decide the validity of amendments. But it is not true. In fact, amendments during the period 1970 to 1980 generated a lot of legal and political controversy. The parties that were in opposition during the political period 1971-1976 saw many of these amendments an attempts by the ruling party to subvert the constitution. 

In the 42nd amendment the most Parts of the constitution were amended. If the Judiciary would remain silent then the elected representative can destroy the basic structure also. In terms of Constitutional legal issues, the most serious question that come up again and again from 1950 was about the supremacy of the parliament. In Parliamentary democracy as that obtained in India, the Parliament represent the People and therefore it is expected have an upper Rand over other executive and Judiciary. But at the same time there is the text of the constitution and it has given powers to other organs of the government. Hence the Judiciary should have the powers to other organs of the government. Hence the Judiciary should have the power to decide the Validity of amendment also.

Q.11. Explain the procedure for amendment of the Constitution of india. 

Ans :- Procedure for Amendment of the constitution of India :- The Constitution of India provides for a distinctive amending process when compared to the Constitutions of other nations. It can be described as partly flexible and partly rigid. The Constitution provides for a variety in the amending process. This feature has been commended by Australian academic Sir Kenneth Where who felt that uniformity in the amending process imposed “quite unnecessary restrictions” upon the amendment of parts of a Constitution. An amendment of the Constitution can be initiated only by the introduction of a Bill in either House of Parliament. The Bill must then be passed in each House by a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting. 

There is no provision for a joint sitting in case of disagreement between the two Houses. The Bill, passed by the required majority, is then presented to the President who shall give his assent to the Bill. If the amendment seeks to make any change in any of the provisions mentioned in the proviso to article 368, it must be ratified by the Legislatures of not less than one-half of the States. Although, there is no prescribed time limit for ratification, it must be completed before the amending Bill is presented to the President for his assent. Every constitutional amendment is formulated as a statute. The first amendment is called the “Constitution (First Amendment) Act”, the second, the “Constitution (Second Amendment) Act”, and so forth. Each usually has the long title “An Act further to amend the Constitution of India”.

Dev Kirtonia

Hi, I’m Dev Kirtonia, Founder & CEO of Dev Library. A website that provides all SCERT, NCERT 3 to 12, and BA, B.com, B.Sc, and Computer Science with Post Graduate Notes & Suggestions, Novel, eBooks, Biography, Quotes, Study Materials, and more.