BPSC 132
INDIAN GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS
IGNOU BPSC 132 Solved Free Assignment
BPSC 132 Solved Free Assignment July 2024 & January 2025
Assignment – I
Q 1. Discuss the Basic Structure Doctrine and critically evaluate its impact.
Ans. The Basic Structure Doctrine is one of the most important principles in the Indian Constitution.
It means that there are certain core features or values of the Constitution that cannot be changed or removed by Parliament, even through an amendment.
In simple words, even though Parliament has the power to make changes in the Constitution, it cannot touch the foundation or soul of the Constitution.
This doctrine ensures that the identity and spirit of the Constitution always remain safe, no matter which political party is in power.
The Basic Structure Doctrine was developed by the Supreme Court of India in the Kesavananda Bharati case of 1973.
Before this, there was a lot of confusion and debate about how much power Parliament had to change the Constitution.
The government believed it could amend any part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights.
But some people, including judges and legal experts, felt that allowing Parliament this kind of power could be dangerous for democracy and citizens’ rights.
The Kesavananda Bharati case was a turning point. The Supreme Court gave a historic judgment, saying that while Parliament can amend the Constitution, it cannot destroy or damage its basic structure.
But what exactly is the “basic structure”? The court did not list all the elements clearly in the beginning, but over the years, it identified several essential features.
These include the supremacy of the Constitution, separation of powers between the executive, legislature, and judiciary, rule of law, sovereignty, secularism, federalism, democracy, and judicial review.
The Fundamental Rights, especially the right to equality and freedom, are also considered part of the basic structure.
These principles are so important that removing them would make the Constitution lose its original character.
The impact of the Basic Structure Doctrine has been very powerful and long-lasting. It has acted like a shield to protect the Constitution from misuse of power.
For example, during the Emergency period (1975–1977), the government tried to pass laws that gave it more control and reduced the power of the courts.
But after the Emergency, the Supreme Court struck down such laws because they were against the basic structure. This doctrine saved Indian democracy from turning into a dictatorship.
Another important impact is that it has made the judiciary stronger and more independent. The courts can now examine any constitutional amendment and check whether it violates the basic structure.
If it does, the court can cancel that amendment. This has helped in keeping a balance between the different organs of government.
It stops Parliament from becoming too powerful and helps keep the Constitution stable over time.
However, the Basic Structure Doctrine has also been criticized by some people. One major criticism is that it gives too much power to the judiciary, especially the Supreme Court.
Critics argue that judges are not elected by the people, so they should not have the final say in matters related to constitutional amendments, which are passed by elected representatives.
They say that this takes away the will of the people as expressed through Parliament.
Another criticism is that the concept of “basic structure” is not clearly written in the Constitution.
It was created by judges, and over time, they have added more and more elements to it. This creates uncertainty.
Since the list of basic structure elements is not fixed or defined clearly, it depends on the interpretation of judges, which can vary from case to case.
Some people feel this gives too much flexibility and can be misused.
Despite the criticisms, most legal experts and citizens agree that the Basic Structure Doctrine has protected Indian democracy in difficult times.
It has acted as a check on arbitrary power and made sure that no government can change the essential values of the Constitution for its own benefit.
In a country as diverse and complex as India, having such a safeguard is very important to maintain unity, justice, and freedom.
Q 2. Discuss the parliamentary mechanisms employed to control the executive.
Ans. In a democratic country like India, the Parliament plays a very important role in checking and controlling the power of the Executive (the government).
The Executive, which includes the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers, is responsible for taking decisions and running the country.
But they are answerable to the Parliament, which represents the will of the people.
If the Executive becomes too powerful or takes wrong decisions, it is the duty of the Parliament to raise questions, hold discussions, and take action.
To do this, the Parliament has many tools or mechanisms through which it controls the Executive and keeps a balance in power.
One of the most basic and regular methods of controlling the Executive is the Question Hour.
This happens at the beginning of a parliamentary session when Members of Parliament (MPs) ask questions to ministers about their departments and policies. Ministers are required to give proper answers.
This process helps in bringing out facts and holding the government accountable.
For example, if a scheme is not working well or money is being wasted, MPs can raise the issue during Question Hour, and the concerned minister must respond.
Another important tool is the Zero Hour, which is not officially mentioned in the rules but has become a strong practice.
It starts immediately after Question Hour. During this time, MPs raise urgent public matters without giving prior notice.
This gives a platform to discuss burning issues such as inflation, unemployment, disasters, or corruption.
Though ministers are not bound to answer immediately, it still helps in putting pressure on the government to act or clarify its position.
A more serious method of control is the use of motions and resolutions.
Among them, the Adjournment Motion is powerful because it leads to the suspension of regular business in the House and allows a debate on a serious matter.
If there is a major failure or scandal involving the government, MPs can demand an adjournment motion.
It shows that the issue is of national importance and needs immediate attention. Though such motions are rarely accepted, their very proposal shows the strength of Parliament.
Censure Motions and No-Confidence Motions are direct ways of challenging the government.
A Censure Motion expresses strong disapproval of a particular policy or action of the government.
If it is passed, it sends a strong message that the Parliament does not support that decision.
A No-Confidence Motion, on the other hand, means the Parliament has lost faith in the government. If the motion is passed, the government must resign.
This is a direct way of controlling the Executive and can even lead to a change in leadership.
Parliament also controls the Executive through financial control.
The government cannot spend any money without the approval of Parliament. Every year, the Union Budget is presented, and it has to be passed by both Houses.
During the budget discussion, MPs examine how the government plans to earn and spend money. If they find something unreasonable or unnecessary, they can suggest changes.
There are also tools like Demand for Grants, Cut Motions, and Appropriation Bills, which allow Parliament to reduce or reject funds for specific schemes. This keeps a strict check on government spending.
Parliamentary Committees also play a big role in examining the work of the Executive.
These committees work in detail, often away from the public eye, and include members from different parties.
Committees like the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) and the Estimates Committee go through reports of the government and audit them.
They can call ministers, officers, and experts to give explanations. This kind of behind-the-scenes scrutiny is very effective in ensuring accountability and transparency.
The Parliament also uses debates and discussions as tools to control the Executive.
When important policies or bills are introduced, MPs from all parties give their views. They can criticize, suggest changes, or even oppose the policy altogether.
Such debates help in refining decisions and prevent the government from acting in a one-sided way.
Special discussions like Calling Attention Motions or Short Duration Discussions also allow MPs to raise matters of public interest and seek answers from ministers.
Even though Parliament has many powers, its effectiveness depends on the participation and sincerity of its members.
If MPs take their duties seriously and use these mechanisms wisely, they can prevent the Executive from misusing power.
However, if Parliament becomes weak due to party politics, lack of discussion, or poor attendance, then these mechanisms lose their strength.
Assignment – II
Q 1. Discuss the Marxist perspective on the study of Indian politics.
Ans. The Marxist perspective on Indian politics offers a different and deep understanding of how power, class, and economy shape political life in India.
This view is based on the ideas of Karl Marx, who believed that society is divided into two main classes – the ruling class (bourgeoisie) and the working class (proletariat).
According to Marxists, politics is not just about laws, elections, or leaders.
It is mainly about who controls resources, land, money, and production, and how these economic powers influence political decisions.
When applied to India, Marxist thinkers try to understand how class divisions, inequality, and capitalist interests shape the Indian political system.
Marxist scholars believe that Indian politics is heavily influenced by the interests of the rich and powerful, especially after independence.
Even though India became a democratic country in 1947, where people were given voting rights and constitutional freedoms, Marxists argue that the structure of society remained unequal.
Big landlords, industrialists, and business owners continued to dominate political decisions, while the poor and working classes remained on the margins.
According to them, the Indian state appears neutral and democratic, but in reality, it protects the interests of the elite.
One of the key areas of Marxist study in Indian politics is the agrarian structure.
Many Marxist thinkers have focused on how land is distributed in rural India and how landlords control poor farmers.
They say that even though land reforms were introduced, they were not successful because the ruling class itself came from landlord backgrounds.
Therefore, the rural poor remained powerless and dependent.
The Green Revolution, though praised for increasing food production, is also criticized by Marxists because it mostly benefited rich farmers and deepened inequality in the villages.
Marxist thinkers also examine caste in Indian politics, not just as a social issue but also as a class issue. They argue that caste and class often go together.
For example, upper castes are often landowners and wealthy, while lower castes and Dalits are poor laborers.
So, according to Marxists, caste oppression is closely tied to economic exploitation. They believe that social justice in India cannot be achieved unless there is also economic justice.
Another area of focus is the role of the state and political parties.
Marxist scholars argue that most parties in India, whether left or right, ultimately serve the interests of the capitalist class.
Even welfare policies and development schemes, in their view, are designed not to help the poor in real terms but to maintain the system and prevent protests or revolts.
They also look at how the state uses police, army, and laws to protect the current economic order.
However, the Marxist view has also faced criticism. Some scholars say that Indian society is more complex and cannot be explained by class alone.
Factors like religion, caste, regional identity, and language play a big role in politics, and Marxists are sometimes accused of ignoring them or reducing everything to economics.
Q 2. Elucidate the powers and functions of the Speaker of the Lok Sabha.
Ans. The Speaker of the Lok Sabha is one of the most important and respected positions in the Indian parliamentary system.
The Lok Sabha is the lower house of Parliament, and the Speaker is its presiding officer.
This means the Speaker conducts the proceedings of the house and ensures that debates and discussions are carried out in an orderly manner.
The Speaker is elected by the members of the Lok Sabha soon after a general election.
Though usually chosen from the ruling party, once elected, the Speaker is expected to work in a fair and neutral manner, without favouring any party.
One of the main responsibilities of the Speaker is to maintain order and discipline in the house.
During debates, many MPs want to speak, raise questions, or protest.
The Speaker has the authority to decide who can speak and for how long. If members create disturbance or do not follow rules, the Speaker can warn them, stop them from speaking, or even suspend them for a period of time.
This power helps in keeping the house peaceful and ensuring that serious discussions take place.
Another important function of the Speaker is to interpret and apply the rules of procedure of the Lok Sabha.
Every parliamentary house has a set of rules that guide how meetings are to be conducted.
When there is confusion or disagreement, the Speaker’s decision is final.
No one can challenge the Speaker’s ruling within the house. This gives the Speaker a powerful role in shaping the flow of debates and discussions.
The Speaker also has the power to decide whether a bill is a Money Bill or not. A Money Bill deals only with taxation, borrowing, or government spending.
According to Article 110 of the Constitution, only the Lok Sabha can introduce a Money Bill, and the Speaker’s decision on whether a bill qualifies as a Money Bill is final and cannot be questioned in court.
This gives the Speaker a crucial role in the law-making process, especially when it comes to financial matters.
Apart from presiding over the house, the Speaker also represents the Lok Sabha to the President of India and other outside bodies.
The Speaker is the voice of the house and ensures communication between the executive and the legislature.
The Speaker also heads various parliamentary committees, like the Business Advisory Committee and the Rules Committee, which help in planning the schedule of the house and managing its business.
In matters of defection, the Speaker plays an important role.
According to the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution (Anti-Defection Law), the Speaker has the authority to decide if an MP has defected from their party.
If the Speaker finds that a member has voluntarily given up party membership or voted against the party line without permission, the member can be disqualified from the house.
Even though the Speaker belongs to a political party, once elected, he or she is expected to be impartial and protect the dignity of the house.
It is this neutral character that makes the Speaker a symbol of the entire house and democracy itself.
Q 3. What is a Money Bill? Explain its role and importance in the Indian Parliament.
Ans. In the Indian parliamentary system, a Money Bill is a special type of bill that deals only with matters related to money and finance.
It includes subjects such as taxation, government spending, borrowing of money by the government, and the custody of funds in the Consolidated or Contingency Funds of India.
The concept of the Money Bill is mentioned in Article 110 of the Indian Constitution. This article clearly defines what qualifies as a Money Bill and who has the authority to decide it.
According to Article 110, a bill is considered a Money Bill if it contains only provisions related to: imposition, abolition, remission, alteration, or regulation of any tax; the borrowing of money by the government; the custody of the Consolidated Fund of India or Contingency Fund of India; appropriation of money out of these funds; and the payment of money into or withdrawal of money from these funds.
If a bill contains other topics not directly related to these financial matters, it cannot be considered a Money Bill.
A very important point is that a Money Bill can be introduced only in the Lok Sabha, and only by a minister, usually the Finance Minister.
It cannot be introduced in the Rajya Sabha. Moreover, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha has the final authority to decide whether a bill is a Money Bill or not.
This decision of the Speaker is final and cannot be questioned in any court or even in the Parliament itself.
Once the Money Bill is passed in the Lok Sabha, it is sent to the Rajya Sabha.
However, the Rajya Sabha has very limited powers in this matter. It can only make recommendations within 14 days, but the Lok Sabha can accept or reject those recommendations.
If the Rajya Sabha does not return the bill within 14 days, it is considered as passed by both Houses.
This makes the Lok Sabha more powerful than the Rajya Sabha when it comes to financial matters.
The role and importance of a Money Bill in Indian Parliament are very significant.
Since it deals with taxation and government spending, it directly affects the country’s economy and the lives of its citizens.
Every year, during the Union Budget, the government presents a Money Bill to get approval for collecting money through taxes and spending on development programs like health, education, infrastructure, defence, and welfare schemes.
Without the approval of the Lok Sabha, the government cannot spend a single rupee from the Consolidated Fund of India.
The process of passing a Money Bill also ensures that the elected representatives of the people have the final say in how public money is spent.
This reflects the principle of popular sovereignty, where the people, through their representatives in the Lok Sabha, control the government’s finances.
It also keeps the Executive accountable to the Legislature.
Assignment – III
Q 1. Define Judicial Review and explain its importance.
Ans. Judicial Review is the power of the judiciary, especially the Supreme Court and High Courts, to examine whether the laws passed by the legislature or actions taken by the executive are in line with the Constitution of India.
If any law or action goes against the Constitution, the courts can declare it null and void. This power comes mainly from Article 13 and Article 32 of the Indian Constitution.
Judicial Review is very important in a democracy like India.
It acts as a protector of the Constitution and ensures that no branch of government misuses its power. It also protects the Fundamental Rights of citizens.
For example, if a law unfairly limits a citizen’s right to freedom or equality, the courts can strike it down through Judicial Review.
This process helps maintain a balance of power among the three branches of government – legislature, executive, and judiciary.
Judicial Review also promotes constitutional values like justice, equality, and liberty.
It stops the government from becoming too powerful and ensures that every law or policy respects the basic structure of the Constitution.
In this way, Judicial Review plays a vital role in safeguarding democracy and the rule of law in India.
Q 2. How does the concept of Collective Responsibility operate in the Indian parliamentary system?
Ans. The concept of Collective Responsibility is a key feature of the Indian parliamentary system.
It means that the Council of Ministers, headed by the Prime Minister, works as a team and is collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha, the lower house of Parliament.
This idea is mentioned in Article 75(3) of the Indian Constitution. It ensures that all ministers support government decisions in public, even if they personally disagree in private.
If the Lok Sabha passes a no-confidence motion against the government, then the entire Council of Ministers, including the Prime Minister, must resign.
This shows that the government stays in power only as long as it has the support of the majority in the Lok Sabha.
Collective Responsibility also means that every minister is responsible for each decision made by the Cabinet.
If one minister makes a mistake, the whole government must take the blame. This encourages teamwork, unity, and accountability within the government.
It prevents ministers from blaming each other and helps maintain trust between the executive and the legislature.
In this way, Collective Responsibility strengthens democratic governance and ensures that the government functions in a coordinated and responsible manner under the watch of the people’s representatives.
Q 3. What is Question Hour in the Indian Parliament, and what purpose does it serve?
Ans. Question Hour is the first hour of every sitting of the Indian Parliament, both in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, where members of Parliament (MPs) ask questions to ministers about the functioning of the government.
It usually takes place from 11 AM to 12 noon on working days.
During this hour, ministers are required to give factual and direct answers, making it one of the most lively and important parts of parliamentary proceedings.
The main purpose of Question Hour is to hold the government accountable to the legislature.
By asking questions, MPs can raise issues of public interest, demand explanations, and seek information about policies, decisions, and performance of different ministries.
This helps in keeping the government transparent and responsive to the needs of the people.
It also allows the opposition to highlight shortcomings in governance and push the government to act more responsibly.
There are three types of questions: Starred (requiring oral answers), Unstarred (written answers), and Short Notice Questions (asked with less notice on urgent matters).
Overall, Question Hour is a powerful tool in a democracy, as it gives the Parliament a chance to check, question, and influence the executive branch of the government.
Q 4. Briefly describe the procedure for removing a Judge of the Supreme Court of India.
Ans. The procedure for removing a Judge of the Supreme Court of India is detailed in Article 124(4) of the Indian Constitution.
A judge can be removed only on the grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity.
The process begins when a removal motion is signed by at least 100 members of the Lok Sabha or 50 members of the Rajya Sabha.
This motion is then submitted to the Speaker or the Chairman, depending on the House.
If the Speaker or Chairman admits the motion, a three-member committee is formed to investigate the charges.
If the committee finds the judge guilty, the motion is taken up for voting in both Houses of Parliament.
For the judge to be removed, the motion must be passed in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha by a two-thirds majority of members present and voting, and by a majority of the total membership of each House.
Once both Houses pass the motion, it is sent to the President of India, who then issues an order for the judge’s removal.
This process is very strict and detailed to ensure the independence and fairness of the judiciary
Q 5. Explain the dominant party system in Indian politics.
Ans. The dominant party system in Indian politics refers to a situation where one political party remains in power for a long period, consistently winning elections and enjoying widespread support, while other parties exist but are not strong enough to challenge its position effectively.
Unlike a one-party system, where only one party is legally allowed to exist, in a dominant party system, multiple parties do compete, but one party keeps dominating the political landscape.
In India, the Indian National Congress was the dominant party after independence. From 1947 to the late 1960s, Congress won several general elections and ruled both at the Centre and in most states.
It had strong leadership, mass support, and was seen as the party that led India to freedom.
During this time, although opposition parties like the Communists, Socialists, and Jan Sangh existed, they were not strong enough to form a government.
The dominance of Congress was not just electoral; it also influenced the administration, policymaking, and national identity.
However, this dominance started to decline in the late 1970s, especially after the Emergency period (1975–77).
New coalitions and regional parties began rising, challenging the Congress-led system.
IGNOU BPSC 131 Solved Free Assignment