[MISSION 2022] INSIGHTS CURRENT AFFAIRS ( 19 April 2022 ) REVISION THROUGH MCQS – INSIGHTSIAS

Ans: (d)

Explanation:

• Indra Sawhney Judgement (1992):
  • In November 1992, in the Indra Sawhney Judgement, popularly known as Mandal Judgement, a nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court decided that Article 16(4) of the Constitution did not provide for reservation in promotions.
• 77th Amendment Act:
  • To override the judgement and enable reservations in promotions, the Parliament, through the 77th Constitutional Amendment Act 1995, added a new clause in Article 16 i.e. Article 16(4A), making provision for reservation in promotions for SCs/STs.
• 85th Amendment Act:
  • The 85th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2001 was brought in for also giving consequential seniority to SCs and STs in matters of reservation in promotion.
• Nagraj v/s Union of India Judgement (2006):
  • The 77th and 85th Amendmentin the Constitution were challenged by the General Category employees before a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court.
  • The Court clubbed all these petitions challenging these amendments and gave its verdict in the case of M. Nagraj v/s Union of India in 2006.
  • In its verdict, the Court validated Parliament’s decision to extend reservations for SCs/STs to include promotions (reservation in promotion).

Refer: https://www.insightsonindia.com/2022/04/19/government-lays-down-norms-for-quota-in-promotions/

Ans: (c)

Explanation:

• According to article 128 of the Indian Constitution, the chief justice of India may at any time request a retired judge of the Supreme Court or a retired judge of a high court (who is duly qualified for appointment as a judge of the Supreme Court) to act as a judge of the Supreme Court for a temporary period.
• He can do so only with the previous consent of the president and also of the person to be so appointed.
• As a Court Of Record, High Court can review its judgments under Article 226 Of the Constitution.

Refer: https://www.insightsonindia.com/2022/04/19/pendency-of-cases-in-supreme-court/

Ans: (c)

Explanation:

• S1: The scheme is aimed at enhancing connectivity to remote and regional areas of the country and making air travel affordable.
• It is a key component of Centre’s National Civil Aviation Policy.
• S2: The scheme will be jointly funded by the central government and state governments.
• S3: The Airports Authority of India (AAI) is being designated as the Implementing Agency.

Refer: https://www.insightsonindia.com/2022/04/19/udan-scheme-4/

Ans: (b)

Explanation:

• Lok Adalat is a forum where the cases (or disputes) which are pending in a court or which are at pre-litigation stage (not yet brought before a court) are compromised or settled in an amicable manner.
• The institution of Lok Adalat has been given statutory status under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.
• The Lok Adalat shall have no jurisdiction in respect of any case or matter relating to an offence not compoundable under any law. In other words, the offences which are non-compoundable under any law fall outside the purview of the Lok Adalat.
• Every Lok Adalat organized for an area shall consist of such number of serving or retired judicial officers and other persons of the area as may be specified by the agency organizing such Lok Adalat. Generally, a Lok Adalat consists of a judicial officer as the chairman and a lawyer (advocate) and a social worker as members.

Refer: https://nalsa.gov.in/lok-adalat

Ans: (d)

Explanation:

• The first Lok Adalat camp in the post-independence era was organized in Gujarat in 1982..
• Statutory provisions:
  • Under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 Lok Adalats have been given statutory status.
• Final award:
  • The decision made by the Lok Adalats is considered to be a verdict of a civil court and is ultimate and binding on all parties.
• No appeal:
  • There is no provision for an appeal against the verdict made by Lok Adalat.
  • But, they are free to initiate litigation by approaching the court of appropriate jurisdiction by filing a case by following the required procedure, in exercise of their right to litigate.
• Court fee:
  • There is no court fee payable when a matter is filed in a Lok Adalat. If a matter pending in the court of law is referred to the Lok Adalat and is settled subsequently, the court fee originally paid in the court on the complaints/petition is also refunded back to the parties.
• Nature of Cases to be Referred to Lok Adalat:
  • Any case pending before any court.
  • Any dispute which has not been brought before any court and is likely to be filed before the court.
• Provided that any matter relating to an offence not compoundable under the law shall not be settled in Lok Adalat.

Refer: https://nalsa.gov.in/lok-adalat

Ans: (c)

Explanation:

• After the failure of the Cripps Mission, Gandhiji gave the call “Do or Die”’ in his speech delivered at the Gowalia Tank Maidan.
• The All-India Congress Committee launched a mass protest demanding what Gandhi called “An Orderly British Withdrawal” from India.

Refer: Indian independence movement

Ans: (c)

Explanation:

• The Congress was divided upon its response to India’s entry into World War II. Angry over the decision made by the Viceroy, some Congress leaders favoured launching a revolt against the British despite the gravity of the war in Europe, which threatened Britain’s own freedom. Others, such as Chakravarti Rajagopalachari, advocated offering an olive branch to the British, supporting them in this crucial time in the hope that the gesture would be reciprocated with independence after the war.
• The major leader, Mahatma Gandhi, was opposed to Indian involvement in the war as he would not morally endorse a war and also suspected British intentions, believing that the British were not sincere about Indian aspirations for independence. But Rajagopalachari, backed by Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, Maulana Azad and Jawaharlal Nehru held talks with Cripps and offered full support in return for immediate self-government, and eventual independence.

Refer: Indian independence movement

Ans: (b)

Explanation:

• Cripps Mission was sent by the British Government in March 1942 to India with key objective to secure Indian cooperation and support for British War Efforts. Headed by Sir Stafford Cripps, this mission sought to negotiate an agreement with Indian leaders.
• The proposal of the Cripps mission was that:
  • India would be a dominion associated with the United kingdom.
  • It promised that immediately after the war is stopped, steps would be taken up to set up an elected body charged with the task of making the constitution for India and provisions would be made so that the Indian states could participate in the framing of the constitution.
  • An Indian Union with a dominion status would be set up. It would be free to decide its relations with the Commonwealth and free to participate in the United Nations and other international bodies.
  • After the end of the war, a constituent assembly would be convened to frame a new constitution. Members of this assembly would be partly elected by the provincial assemblies through proportional representation and partly nominated by the princes.
  • The British Government would accept the new constitution subject to two conditions.
    • Any province not willing to join the Union could have a separate constitution and form a separate Union
    • The new constitution- making body and the British Government would negotiate a treaty to effect the transfer of power and to safeguard racial and religious minorities.
  • In the meantime, defence of India would remain in British hands and the governor-general’s powers would remain intact.
• The Congress objected to:
  • The offer of dominion status instead of a provision for complete independence.
  • Representation of the states by nominees and not by elected representatives.
  • Right to provinces to secede as this went against the principle of national unity.
  • Absence of any plan for immediate transfer of power and absence of any real share in defence; the governor- general’s supremacy had been retained, and the demand for governor-general being only the constitutional head had not been accepted.
  • The incapacity of Cripps to go beyond the Draft Declaration and the adoption of a rigid “take it or leave it” attitude added to the deadlock.
• The Muslim League objected because:-
  • Criticised the idea of a single Indian Union.
  • Did not like the machinery for the creation of a constituent assembly and the procedure to decide on the accession of provinces to the Union.
  • Thought that the proposals denied to the Muslims the right to self-determination and the creation of Pakistan.

Refer: Indian independence movement