UPSC Essentials | Daily subject-wise quiz: Polity and Governance MCQs on Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act rules, personality rights and more (Week 143)

2. It directs the district magistrate to endow powers and authority to make Gram Sabhas and Panchayats function as Institutions of Local self-governance.

3. Autonomous councils are covered by PESA.

How many of the statements given above are correct?

(a) Only one

(b) Only two

(c) All three

(d) None

Relevance: The question tests understanding of tribal governance, Fifth Schedule areas, and decentralisation under PESA, a recurring theme in Polity (Prelims).

Explanation

— The Jharkhand Cabinet approved the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act (PESA) rules, empowering Gram Sabhas with wider administrative and decision-making powers in Fifth Schedule areas—regions with a high tribal population—of the state.

About PESA

— PESA is intended to recognise, empower, and promote the Scheduled Tribes’ social, economic, cultural, and political traditions. Hence, statement 1 is correct.

— It also directs the state government to delegate powers and authority to Gram Sabha and Panchayats in order for them to function as Institutions of Local Self Governance, specifically in matters such as enforcing the prohibition on the sale and consumption of intoxicants, owning minor forest produce, preventing land alienation and restoring unlawfully alienated land, managing village markets, exercising control over money lending, and so on. Hence, statement 2 is not correct.

— PESA also empowered the Scheduled Areas’ gram sabha to approve plans and programmes for social and economic development, identify beneficiaries of poverty alleviation programmes, certify gramme Panchayats’ use of funds, protect natural resources, including minor forest produce, and be consulted prior to land acquisition.

— The majority of the North Eastern states in Sixth Schedule Areas (where autonomous councils exist) are not covered by PESA because they have their own autonomous councils for governance. Hence, statement 3 is not correct.

Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.

QUESTION 2

Consider the following statements:

1. The National Awards are considered as “titles” within the meaning of Article 18(1).

2. Civilian awards such as Padma Shri and Bharat Ratna are not to be used as a prefix or suffix to names of the awardees.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 only

(c) Both 1 and 2

(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Relevance: This question tests constitutional provisions (Article 18) along with Supreme Court judgments governing civilian honours. It also links to ethics and constitutional values, frequently asked in Prelims and GS-II.

Explanation

— The Bombay High Court while pointing to the manner in which a plea’s case title was written said that civilian awards such as “Padma Shri” and “Bharat Ratna” are not titles and cannot be used as prefix or suffix to names of the awardees.

— The high court referred to a five-judge Constitution bench decision of the apex court which had held that civilian awards such as Padma Shri and Bharat Ratna are not titles and ought not to be used as prefix or suffix to names of the awardees. Hence, statement 2 is correct.

— The Supreme Court in Balaji Raghavan/SP Anand v. Union of India had answered whether the awards, Bharat Ratna, Padma Vibhushan, Padma Bhushan and Padma Shri are “Titles” within the meaning of Article 18(1) (abolition of titles) of the Constitution.

— The National Awards do not amount to “titles” within the meaning of Article 18(1) and they should not be used as suffixes or prefixes. Hence, statement 1 is not correct.

Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer.

QUESTION 3

With reference to the personality rights, consider the following statements:

1. India has a statute defining these rights.

2. These safeguard an individual’s name, image, likeness, voice, signature and other identifiable traits from unauthorised commercial exploitation.

3. The Indian Constitution does not recognise the moral rights of an individual.

How many of the statements given above are correct?

(a) Only one

(b) Only two

(c) All three

(d) None

Relevance: This question links fundamental rights (Article 21) with emerging jurisprudence on privacy, personality rights, and digital misuse, a growing area in Prelims. It also reflects current legal debates on AI, deep fakes, and celebrity rights, frequently covered in newspapers.

Explanation

— The Delhi High Court restrained the unauthorised commercial use of actor R Madhavan’s image and likeness, ordered the takedown of obscene and AI-generated material circulating online, and barred the sale of merchandise using his persona.

— Personality Rights safeguard an individual’s name, image, likeness, voice, signature and other identifiable traits from unauthorised commercial exploitation. Hence, statement 2 is correct.

— India does not have a standalone statute defining these rights. Instead, courts have assembled them through a combination of intellectual property law and constitutional principles, with personality rights derived from the following: Hence, statement 1 is not correct.

— Section 38A of the Copyright Act grants performers exclusive rights, once consent is provided for commercial use of their performances. Section 38B recognises the moral rights of performers, which lets them retain the ability to “claim to be identified as the performer” and to object to, or seek damages for, any “distortion, mutilation or other modification” of their performance that harms their reputation. There is no provision in the Constitution of India about the moral rights. Hence, statement 3 is correct.

Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer.

QUESTION 4

With reference to the following cases, consider the following pairs:

1. T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v Union of India – Initially to protect forest land in the Nilgiris but soon expanded to cover forest conservation across India.

2. M.C. Mehta v Union of India – Initially focused on the Taj Trapezium Zone and Delhi pollution but later became the primary vehicle for protecting the Aravallis in Delhi and Haryana.

Which of the pairs given above is/are correctly matched?

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 only

(c) Both 1 and 2

(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Relevance: The question tests knowledge of landmark Supreme Court environmental cases and the use of judicial activism/continuing mandamus in environmental governance.

Explanation

— The Supreme Court stayed its previous judgment, where it had accepted the Centre’s definition on classifying the Aravalli hills as any landform at an elevation of 100 metres or more above the local relief. Its assent for the Central government’s classification had raised concerns about the potential proliferation of mining activities and their impact on the local ecology.

— The verdict was the latest chapter in a decades-long series of interventions by the Supreme Court to protect the Aravallis — a range it has repeatedly described as a “green barrier” preventing the Thar Desert from advancing into the Indo-Gangetic plains.

— Since the mid-1990s, the court has relied on two long-running public interest cases to regulate mining, construction, forest loss and urbanisation in the region.

(i) T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v Union of India, was filed in 1995 to protect forest land in the Nilgiris but soon expanded to cover forest conservation across India. Through this case, the court defined “forest” not only by official records but also by ecological features and regulated non-forest activities, such as mining and construction. Hence, pair 1 is correct.

(ii) M.C. Mehta v Union of India, filed in 1985, initially focused on the Taj Trapezium Zone and Delhi pollution but later became the primary vehicle for protecting the Aravallis in Delhi and Haryana. Hence, pair 2 is correct.

Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.

QUESTION 5

With reference to the Language to be used in Parliament, consider the following statements:

1. Business in Parliament shall be transacted only in Hindi.

2. The Chairman of the Business Advisory Committee may permit any member to address the House in his mother tongue.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 only

(c) Both 1 and 2

(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Relevance: This question tests constitutional provisions (Article 120) and procedural rules of Parliament, a core area in Polity for Prelims. It also checks awareness of linguistic diversity and parliamentary functioning, often linked with current debates on language use.

Explanation

— Article 120 of the Constitution of India provides for the language to be used in Parliament.

— Notwithstanding anything in Part XVII, but subject to the provisions of article 348, business in Parliament shall be transacted in Hindi or in English. Hence, statement 1 is not correct.

— Provided that the Chairman of the Council of States or Speaker of the House of the People, or person acting as such, as the case may be, may permit any member who cannot adequately express himself in Hindi or in English to address the House in his mother-tongue. Hence, statement 2 is not correct.

Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.

(Source: Constitution of India)

Previous Daily Subject-Wise-Quiz

Daily Subject-wise quiz — History, Culture, and Social Issues (Week 138)

Daily subject-wise quiz — Polity and Governance (Week 142)

Daily subject-wise quiz —  Science and Technology (Week 142)

Daily subject-wise quiz — Economy (Week 142)

Daily subject-wise quiz — Environment and Geography (Week 142)

Daily subject-wise quiz – International Relations (Week 142)

Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week.

Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – IndianExpress UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.