The cockroach dilemma facing India’s political parties

* Bharatiya Jana Sangh | Dr. Shyama Prasad Mukherjee: This is correctly matched. Dr. Shyama Prasad Mukherjee was the founder and first president of the Bharatiya Jana Sangh (BJS), the forerunner of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). * Socialist Party | C. Rajagopalachari: This is incorrect. C. Rajagopalachari founded the Swatantra Party, advocating free-market principles. The Socialist Party was established in the year 1934 and had leaders like Acharya Narendra Dev, Jayaprakash Narayan, Yusuf Mehrali, Mino Masani, Acchut Patwardhan and Ashok Mehta.  * Congress for Democracy | Jagjivan Ram: This is correctly matched. Congress for Democracy (CFD) was a political party founded by Jagjivan Ram in 1977 after breaking away from the Indian National Congress. It was a short-lived party, formed during the Emergency to oppose Indira Gandhi's regime. It later merged with the Janata Party. * Swatantra Party | Acharya Narendra Dev: This is incorrect. The Swatantra Party was founded by C. Rajagopalachari in 1959, advocating for free-market economic policies and opposing the socialist policies of the Congress. Acharya Narendra Dev was associated with the Socialist Party and is regarded as one of its key leaders.  Therefore, only two pairs are correctly matched. Hence, the answer is B.

Statement 1 is Correct: The Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms (Government of India Act, 1919) not only retained the separate electorates for Muslims (first introduced by the Morley-Minto Reforms of 1909) but explicitly extended them to Sikhs, Indian Christians, Anglo-Indians, and Europeans. This institutionalized community-based representation, directly fostering political alliances based on community. Statement 2 is Correct: The British utilized separate electorates as a strategic tool of "Divide and Rule." By institutionalizing communal and class divisions, the colonial government aimed to fragment and weaken the increasingly unified Indian nationalist movement, which was growing stronger at the time. Statement 3 is Correct: The 1919 constitutional framework tied political representation, legislative power, and administrative favors directly to communal and class identities. Consequently, various minority groups and deprived classes began organizing politically around these specific identities to secure concessions and representation, which laid the genesis for community-based political alliances in India. Therefore, all three statements support the assertion, making the correct option D.

❌ Statement I: Incorrect
*The President of India is NOT a member of the Jury.* ✅ Statement II: Correct
*The Prime Minister of India is the Chairperson of the Jury.* ✅ Statement III: Correct
*The Chief Justice of India (or a Supreme Court Judge nominated by the CJI) is a Jury member.* ✅ Statement IV: Correct
*The Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha (or leader of largest opposition party) is a Jury member.* Correct Answer: Statements II, III, and IV are correct.

* Delimitation commissions have been set up four times in the past — 1953, 1962, 1972 and 2002 — under Delimitation Commission Acts of 1952, 1962, 1972 and 2002.   * The Delimitation Commission is appointed by the President of India and works in collaboration with the Election Commission of India. The Delimitation Commission in India is a high-power body whose orders have the force of law and cannot be called into question before any court.  * The Commission’s orders are laid before the Lok Sabha and the legislative assemblies concerned, but they cannot effect any modifications in the orders. * Composition: Retired Supreme Court Judge, Chief Election Commissioner and respective state election commissioners.

Statement 1 is Correct: In standard mediation and conflict resolution practices, acknowledging the emotional, historical, and cultural grievances of marginalized groups is a necessary first step. Validating the tribal community's cultural concerns helps build trust and creates a conducive environment before negotiating technical solutions. Statement 2 is Incorrect: While addressing urban health concerns represents the utilitarian principle of the "greatest good for the greatest number," democratic governance and rights-based ethics dictate that this cannot come at the cost of steamrolling the fundamental rights and cultural dignity of a vulnerable minority. In India, tribal land and cultural identities are protected under the Constitution (Fifth and Sixth Schedules) and laws like the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006, and PESA, 1996, which mandate respecting tribal rights and often require community consent. Statement 3 is Correct: Resolving complex public disputes requires inclusive, participatory governance. Creating a multi-stakeholder dialogue platform that brings together opposing parties (tribal leaders, urban representatives) and neutral experts fosters consensus-building, builds mutual understanding, and effectively de-escalates tensions. Statement 4 is Correct: Conducting an independent Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) is a standard governance tool used to objectively evaluate the ecological and human costs of a project. Transparently sharing these findings ensures evidence-based decision-making, counters misinformation, and helps all stakeholders understand the objective realities of the proposed site. Therefore, option A is the correct answer.

Statement 1 is incorrect: The term "basic structure" is not explicitly mentioned in the Indian Constitution. It was first propounded by the Supreme Court in the landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973). The Court ruled that while Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution under Article 368, there are certain features of the Constitution that form its basic structure and cannot be altered or destroyed through amendments by Parliament. Although the basic structure doctrine includes elements such as federalism, secularism, democracy, and fundamental rights, these features are not explicitly listed as the 'basic structure' in the Constitution itself. Statement 2 is incorrect: The Constitution of India does not explicitly mention the power of judicial review. Instead, this power is derived from various provisions, particularly Articles 13, 32, 131-136, 143, 226, and 246. Judicial review allows the Supreme Court and High Courts to examine the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions, ensuring they do not violate fundamental rights or other constitutional provisions. This power is essential in maintaining the supremacy of the Constitution and protecting citizens' rights. Hence, neither of the statements is correct.

Statement 1 is incorrect. In the first Lok Sabha, the single largest party in the opposition was not the Swatantra Party but the Communist Party of India. Statement 2 is correct. In the Lok Sabha, a "Leader of the Opposition" was indeed recognized for the first time in 1969. Statement 3 is incorrect. In the Lok Sabha, if a party does not have a minimum of 75 members, its leader cannot be recognized as the Leader of the Opposition. The requirement is not 75 members but 10% of the total strength of the house, which is 55 members. So, only statement 2 is correct.

* The First Amendment Act, of 1951, added the fourth clause to Article 15 that empowered the government to make any law for the upliftment of socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled * Tribes. The added clause elucidates that in case such special provisions are introduced, they cannot be said to be breaching Article 15 and Article 29(2) of the Constitution. * The need to insert this clause was felt after the decision of the Supreme Court in the State of Madras v. Srimathi Champakam (1951). According to the facts of this case, the Madras government issued an Order that provided reservation on the grounds of religion, race, and caste. This Order was contended to be in breach of Article 15(1) of the Indian Constitution. The Court also gave a literal interpretation to the constitutional provisions and held that reserving seats in public institutions for backward classes violates Articles 15(1) and 29(2). Therefore, to nullify the effect of similar judicial pronouncements, Article 15 was amended. * Similarly, Article 19(1)(a) grants the right to free speech and expression to Indian citizens. This right is considered an essential feature of democracy. However, Article 19(2) specifies the restrictions that can curtail this freedom. The First Amendment to the Indian Constitution altered these restrictions by widening their ambit. The second change, via the Amendment Act of 1951, was made to Clause 6 of Article 19. Note: UPSC deleted this question when the final answer key was issued.

* Statement 1 is incorrect: If the election of a person as President is declared void by the Supreme Court, acts done by him before the date of such declaration of the Supreme Court are not invalidated and continue to remain in force.  * Statement 2 is incorrect: The Supreme Court in 1974 held that the dissolution of the state legislative assembly would not be a ground for preventing the holding of the election on the expiry of the term of the President. Nor can it be grounds to suggest that the election to the office of the President could be held only after the election to the state is held, where the Legislative Assembly of a State is dissolved.  * Statement 3 is incorrect: The Constitution of India does not prescribe any time limit within which the President has to decide concerning a bill presented to him/her for his/her assent. Thus the President of India can simply keep the bills pending for an indefinite period.

Statement 1 is incorrect: The Election Commission of India (ECI) is not a five-member body. It is a three-member body, consisting of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and two Election Commissioners (ECs). However, it originally started as a single-member body in 1950 and became a multi-member commission in 1993. Statement 2 is incorrect: The Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) does not decide the election schedule. The Election Commission of India (ECI) is solely responsible for determining the schedule of general elections and bye-elections. It exercises this power under Article 324 of the Constitution, ensuring free and fair elections in the country. Statement 3 is correct: The Election Commission of India has the authority to resolve disputes related to splits and mergers of recognized political parties. It decides which faction of a party is the legitimate one and, if necessary, allocates party symbols accordingly, based on precedents and internal party strength. Hence, the correct answer is option (D) 3 only.

The article explicitly states that CJP protesters represent 'a horizontal segment of Indian society, concentrated in the BJP strongholds of the Hindi heartland... It is socially diverse but largely located within the young, Hindu-Hindi spectrum, preempting any communal polarisation on the issue.' Options A, B, and D describe characteristics of other protest movements mentioned in the article (Anti-CAA, Farmers' protests, and Anna movement, respectively).

Statement 1 is incorrect: The article states, 'The Kejriwal-Anna movement of 2011 consolidated public anger against the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance and in favour of the Narendra Modi-led BJP.' Statement 2 is correct: The article mentions, 'The farmers forced the government to withdraw the controversial farm laws'. Statement 3 is incorrect: The article notes that 'Both protests [farmers' and CAA] had limited political impact nationally in subsequent elections.'

The article states, 'An opposing view, expressed as hope within the BJP and concern within the Congress, is that this protest could cannibalise the latter.' It further mentions, 'within the Congress, opinions are divided over whether playing second fiddle to the protesters would be useful.' This clearly indicates the dilemma of potential cannibalization versus expanding opposition space.