PSIR Answer Writing Module 2023

Model Answers - Test 08

For any issue related to PSIR Test Series, write only at psirtestseries@shubhraranjan.com

1.Critically analyse the role of President in India’s constitutional setup and in actual political
process. What trends can be inferred on the basis of the analysis of the nature of the
institution?
India has been more successful than have most Asian and African nations at maintaining the
strength of political institutions. Its capacity for political regeneration, rebuilding of weakened
institutions and the creation of new institutions is probably unmatched in the Third World.
However, critics believe that the predominant theme in Indian politics since the early 1970s has
been political decay, a decline in the capacity of political institutions to respond creatively or
even adequately to pressures from society. The Institution of President of India has also been
challenged.
Article 52 says that there shall be a President of India. According to Article 53, the executive
power of the Union shall be vested in the President and shall be exercised by him in accordance
with this Constitution.
Being a parliamentary democracy , the constitution of India envisages the office of President as
the nominal head of the Union. Article 60 on Oath or affirmation by the President holds the
president responsible for preserving, protecting and defending the Constitution for the wellbeing
of the people of India.
In the constituent assembly debate on the power and duties of the President, K.T. Shah criticized
the institution as a “sort of mere gramophone of the Prime Minister.” However, Dr. B.R.
Ambedkar clearly marked out the duties of the president . He said, “Our President is merely a
nominal figurehead. He has no discretion; he has no powers of administration at all.”
However, the constitution allocates executive Powers to the President as all executive actions of
the Government of India are formally taken in his name. The President is an integral part of the
Parliament. He summon or prorogue the Parliament and dissolve the Lok Sabha; addressed the
Parliament at the commencement of the first session; nominates members in the Rajya Sabha
and can promulgate ordinances. The presidents also has ffinancial Powers in matters of Money
bills, annual financial, constituting finance commissions etc. The President has been given
emergency powers under Article 352, Article 356 and Article 360.
The Constitution lays down that the President should act as per the aid and advice of the prime
minister and the Council of Ministers. However, that doesn’t entail that the office of the
President of India is entirely titular in nature. There are certain conditions under which the
President of India can perform an indispensable function of providing a stable democratic
government and preserving the sanctity of the Constitution. For instance, in case no party is able
to get an absolute parliamentary majority in the national elections or the ruling party has lost
its majority, the president has the power to decide which party forms the government. The
president also takes a call on the sitting PM’s advice to dissolve the Parliament and decision on
calling for snap elections, though all presidents have agreed to such advice till date.
If one analyses the tenures of different Presidents , it can be concluded that When strong
national governments with a comfortable parliamentary majority remain in power, the
probability of the president using his discretionary power is limited. This has been witnessed
during the time of one-party dominance of the Congress in the past (1947–1989) and, therefore,
in the present phase of BJP’s political dominance.
Critics believe that the president in India is a "mere rubber stamp", a figurehead. Even Nehru
would say that President is a "head that neither reigns nor governs".
However, James Manor believes otherwise .In chapter “The Presidency”, Book- “Rethinking
Public Institutions in India”), he strongly asserts that Indian presidents are "not entirely rubber
stamps". He gives the examples like that of K.R. Narayanan. Narayanan believed that the office
gives the scope to play the role of a working president, functioning within the boundaries of the
Constitution, as opposed to an executive president.
The nature of the institution also depends on the personality of the President . According to
Professor M. P. Jain,“The influence of the President depends on his personality. A man of
character and ability can exert a potent influence on the affairs of the government”.

2.As India celebrates its 75th year of independence , the glaring irony of a dysfunctional
Parliament can no longer be ignored. Give reasons for the decline of Parliament.
Just after independence many western scholars believed that India could not survive as a single
country, and that it would break up into many parts, with each region or linguistic group seeking
to form a nation of its own. Others believed that it would come under military rule.
However, India has been able to not only survive its democracy but also been able to strengthen
it. This is evident from voter turnouts in elections from 45.67% in 1951 to 67.11% in 2019.
By definition, Parliament is a crucible of criticism, deliberation and consensus-making. However,
its ironical that Parliament appears to be quite ineffective in all its functions.
Major indicators of this decline are shortening sessions, time lost due to disruptions in
proceedings by the opposition and violation of norms and precedents by the government,
rampant absenteeism, actual hours of sitting as a percentage of available hours, phenomenon
of weak legislative federalism via Rajya Sabha in the overall setting of parliamentary federalism,
challenges of new extra-parliamentary mass movements, and judicial activism.
Although the Indian Parliament has witnessed progressive democratization in terms of
representation of various sections of society, it has declined as an effective institution of
accountability. Unlike in Western democracies, the decline of Indian parliament is not due to
strengthening of the executive. Ironically both the executive and the parliament in India have
remained weak during the ‘democratic upsurge’ era, while some non-parliamentary institutions
have succeeded in asserting their autonomy. The emergence of new players representing
sectional interests though increased representation of various sections of society, yet
adversarial politics among these parties led to parliament’s decline.
In the 1950-60s, Parliament, the law-making organ of the State, used to meet, on an average,
125-130 days in a year. This has come down to just 65-70 days in the last decade. In fact, 2017
was the year of the lowest number of sittings 57.
The second indicator is the social inclusion of Parliament. This means, to what extent Parliament
has been able to accommodate the different social communities and groups, making it a
representative of Indian society.
There has been an institutional decay of parliamentary efficacy. As per data from the
Association of Democratic Reforms, 186 MPs out of 543 are facing criminal charges in the
current Lok Sabha. That is, one in every three of our MPs is charged with criminal cases. We, as
a society, have collectively failed to elect honest candidates.
India needs a robust lawmaking process, one that does not bend to executive urgency or
succumb to political expediency. The government must ensure that it identifies the gaps in our
legal system proactively. All its bills should go through pre-legislative scrutiny before being
brought to Parliament. The legislature, on its part, should conduct in-depth scrutiny of
government bills. A simple debate on the floor of Parliament should not be enough for the
legislative institution to stamp its approval. Mandatory scrutiny of bills by parliamentary
committees should become the rule and not the exception. Enacting statutes without proper
scrutiny also wastes the legislature’s time when the government approaches Parliament to
amend such laws

3.Discuss the contribution of Indian judiciary towards the goal of India’s silent revolution.
Rawls has considered Justice as the first virtue of the social institutions. The idea of justice as
practised in India comes from the ancient concept of Dharma. The Preamble of our constitution
mentions "Justice" in substantive terms including all facets like social, economic and political.
In his book “India's Silent Revolution: The Rise of the Lower Castes in North India”, Christophe
Jaffrelot observes that since the 1960s a new assertiveness has characterized India's formerly
silent majority, the lower castes that comprise more than two-thirds of the population. As a
result, we see lower-caste political parties playing important role in the politics of Uttar
Pradesh, Bihar. Jaffrelot argues that this trend constitutes a genuine "democratization" of India
and that the social and economic effects of this "silent revolution" are bound to multiply in the
years to come. The growing political consciousness was first epitomised by Charan Singh’s
efforts to build a peasant movement and then by the demand for job quotas for the low castes
that V.P.Singh articulated in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
Indian judiciary, being an important pillar for social justice in the scheme of constitution, has
played major role in supporting India’s silent revolution.
Article 142(1) of the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court of India to administer complete
justice. As Preamble to the Constitution states, justice is a coalescence of social, economic and
political justice. The SCI is equipped to uphold this three dimensional concept of justice . The
provisions contained in Part III (Fundamental Rights), IV (Directive Principles of State Policy or
‘DPSP’), XVI (Special Provisions Relating to Certain Classes), and like, are interpreted as
furthering the objective of social justice enshrined in the Preamble . Article 38(1), additionally
obliges the State to promote welfare by ensuring social justice to everyone. Adoption of such a
model of ‘social welfare state’ also conforms to the philosophy of socialism imbibed in the
Preamble.
In 1992, the Supreme Court, in its verdict in Indra Sawhney & Others v. Union of India , was of
the opinion that caste was an acceptable indicator of backwardness. The Court gave verdict that
27% central government reservation for OBCs is valid.
In 2014, then chief justice of the Supreme Court constituted the social justice bench to hear
cases concerning socially marginalized groups. However, the bench was done away with after
one year as in the one year of its existence, the bench did not deliver a single judgment.
The Supreme Court of India in Neil Aurelio vs Union of India, 2022 , upheld the constitutional
validity of 27 per cent reservation for the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in the All India Quota
(AIQ) for undergraduate and postgraduate medical and dental courses (MBBS and BDS/M.S.,
M.D. and MDS). The judgment specified: “Equality of opportunity admits discrimination with
reason and prohibits discrimination without reason.
Thus, the Indian Judiciary has contributed towards the goal of India’s silent revolution through
various judgement in line with Article 46 , which talks about State s promoting the educational
and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people, and, in particular, of the Scheduled
Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, and shall protect them from social injustice and all forms of
exploitation.
4.Analyse the position of the Prime Minister of India in a coalition regime.
A parliamentary system or parliamentary democracy is a system of democratic governance of a
state where the executive derives its democratic legitimacy from its ability to command the
support of the legislature to which it is accountable. In contrast to a presidential system, where
the head of state and head of government is president. In the scheme of parliamentary system
of government Prime Minister is the real executive authority (de facto).
Prime Minster (PM) is the “Keystone of the Political Architecture ” in a parliamentary form of
government . He is central to the existence of the cabinet as well as the legislature .William
Harcourt calls him “luna inter stellas minores” or “A moon among lesser stars.” Dr. Ambedkar
had once said that if any functionary under the Indian Constitution was to be compared with the
U.S. President, he is the Prime Minister and not the President.
Article 74 of the Indian constitution talks about a Council of Ministers, headed by Prime
Minister, to aid and advise President. Article 78 gives some details on the duties of the Prime
Minister .
In multi-party states, a coalition agreement is an agreement negotiated between the parties
that form a coalition government. It codifies the most important shared goals and objectives of
the cabinet.
In context of India, the Congress Party in itself was a big coalition. The institution retained its
democratic character under PM Nehru who believed in working with consensus . During the
Prime Ministership of Indira Gandhi, we see the institution developing the features of
Presidential type executive and later on dictatorial trends .
From 1989, we see the emergence of minority governments which brought decline in the
institution of PM , but certain individuals with their leadership qualities like P.V Narsimha Rao ,
Vajpayee could ensure that the power remains in the institution of PM , even if compromised to
some extent due to the compulsion of coalition .
PM Manmohan Singh , who has been referred to as “Accidental Prime Minister” by Sanjaya
Baru, has also provided the much needed leadership in the first term . However, he could not
present himself as a decisive leader in the second term .
As PM Modi possess the strong personality , he has given a new dimension to the institution to
the extent that scholars often warn with the dangers of the growing personality cult in India’s
democracy . According to P.B Mehta, rise of colossal stature of a single leader might be
detrimental to the future of democracy . However, according to a LSE Study , the emergence of
PM Modi is a phenomenon not just because of his personality but also because of lack of
credible alternative .
To conclude , one can say that the office of Prime Minister does not act in vacuum . Generally
speaking , the trend is that if the coalition comprises of less number of participant and are
ideologically aligned. In that case , the office of PM has better position of strength.
5.“The most obvious aspect of the functioning of the collegium system of judicial
appointments and transfers is its opaqueness.” In the light of this statement , examine the
debates on the appointment procedure of judges to the higher judiciary in India.
“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” - Martin Luther King

The constituent assembly adopted a consultative process of appointing judges to ensure that judges
remain insulated from any political influence. Accordingly, constitution of India in Art.124 for supreme
court and Art.217 for high courts provides for a hybrid method of judicial appointment. All the
appointments and transfers are to be made by president after consultation with the chief justice of India.

Collegium is a system of appointment and transfer of judges that has evolved through judgements of the
Supreme Court, and not by an act of parliament or by a provision of the constitution. The three important
judgements that have paved the way for the present system were First Judges case,1981where SC
declared primacy for CJI’s recommendation on judicial appointments and transfers can be refused for
“cogent reasons”. It gave executive a primacy over the judiciary.

Second Judges Case 1993 SC introduced the Collegium system, holding that “consultation” really meant
“concurrence” and it added it was not CJI’s individual opinion, but an institutional opinion formed in
consultation with the two senior-most judges in the SC.

In the Third judges Case,1998 on president’s reference expanded the collegium to a five-member body,
comprising of CJI and four other judges of that court.in the case of HC the collegium is comprised of CJ
and four other senior most judges of that court, but names recommended by a HC collegium reaches to
government only after it is approved by CJI and the SC collegium. This judicial rewriting of the
constitution was ostensibly aimed at securing judicial independence which had its genesis in a constant
fear of an executive takeover of the supreme court. This institution of collegium is a closed system and
process with no published criteria for appointments exists. Neither there are established process of
mechanism for investigating malpractices in appointments.

Government has taken many steps to reform judicial appointments such as setting up of Venkatachaliah
Commission in 2000, the commission opined in favour of a change in the collegium system and
prescribed for a National Judicial Appointment Commission. Government moved 99th Constitutional
Amendment Bill to establish NJAC .Supreme court struck down NJAC as it “did not provide an adequate
representation, to judicial component “and that the new provisions in constitution are insufficient to
preserve the primacy of judiciary in the matters of selection and appointment of judges.

There is a need to establish a process with adequate safeguards to preserve the judiciary’s independence
while guaranteeing judicial primacy but not judicial exclusivity. It should ensure independence, reflect
diversity, demonstrate professional competence and integrity.
6.“73rd and 74th amendment acts provide a basic framework of decentralization of power
and authorities at the grassroot level”. Critically analyse.
The constitution of India is committed to give every Indian , the life of dignity, it is based on the
assumption that the unity and integrity of the nation is conditional to the realisation of dignity.
The constitutional commitments cannot be fulfilled without good governance .
All theories of good governance accept that without transparency and accountability , good
governance is not possible . Keeping in mind the above approach , government of India took a
“great leap forward” by giving panchayats and municipalities the constitutional status by 73 rd
and 74th amendment act.
The 73rd and 74th amendment act can be seen as revolutionary as it gives a constitutional status
, which means it is mandatory to constitute panchayats , state Election Commission to ensure
the regular elections, mandate to finance commission besides creating State Finance
Commissions to address their financial concern. Besides above it contains many other
progressive features like reservation of seats for women.
However, despite being hailed as a revolutionary step, there has been a dissatisfaction with the
experiment. Mani Shankar Aiyer committee came to the conclusion that “a bad panchayati raj
is worse than no panchayati raj”. The observation itself shows that the existing experiment
suffered from certain structural weaknesses. Though it creates the structure of panchayats and
related institutions , it overlooks the essential requirement for the success of any institutional
initiative .
No institution can fulfil its mandate without adequate funds , functions and functionaries . It can
be seen as a major factor that even after almost three decades , they remain hamstrung . The
required political will at the level of union as well as state seems to be missing.
With the exception of Kerala, panchayats in most of the states suffer from systemic crisis. It is to
be noted that a paradigm shift is needed in the way we look at local self government. They are
the lowest tier but should not be seen as the least important . They should be seen as a key to
good governance .
Hence , union as well as state government should show the necessary will to empower
panchayats. For example – Adequate finances, devolution of powers, capacity building
programs are needed to create the robust structure. Bureaucracy has also has to change the
mindset and model code of conduct can ne adopted to reduce the frictions. Sarkaria
commission as well as Punchhi Commission acknowledge that grassroot democracy is essential
to deal with regional threats

7.How do you define grassroot movements? Do you think there is a rise of grassroot activism
in India in recent times? Examine the impact of grassroot activism on Indian politics?
Social movements are those organized efforts, on the part of excluded groups, to promote or
resist changes, that involve recourse to non-institutional forms of political participation. Rajni
Kothari calls social and grassroot movements, in a democratic setup, a result of the gap
between expectation of people and performance of the system. Grassroots activism typically
involves a local community getting motivated to turn their demands into action.
In the contemporary times, due to increasing disillusionment of people with the political
institutions there is a sort of apathy developed with political parties and people are inclining
more towards social and grassroot movements
According to D L Sheth, grassroot movements or micro movements have become active in
different parts of the country since 70s. They represent the desperate struggle of economically
marginalized and socially excluded sections of the society. Many micro movements have
combined together to form national level alliance to fight against Indian state on the issues of
globalization.
Globalization have revived the grassroot movement around the world because of the destructive
forces of development. Globalization have also promoted the growth of movements for peace,
human rights and movements against corruption.
Amrita Basu suggests the growth of grassroot movements in India is because of capitalist model
of development on one hand and the availability of democratic space on the other hand.
We also see a rise of connect between opposition parties with grassroots movements like
National Alliance of Peoples Movements (NAPM). Recently, some of the leading grassroots
movement groups decided to engage with the Bharat Jodo Yatra initiated by the Congress party.
Rajni Kothari mentions the rise of micromovements as a symbol of the disssatisfaction with
representational politics and institutional decline. There is a decline of parliament and
disconnect between people and their representatives. There is a decline of political parties.
Political parties have long abandoned movement aspect of politics and have reduced themselves
to the electoral machines. Political parties operate at the grassroot level only at the time of
elections. Trade unions in India have been junior partners and bargaining counters of political
parties. Thus micromovements led by educated middle class have emerged in India.

8.Federalism in India is under strain on several fronts- Constitutional, economic, political and
electoral. Comment.
Federation is a union of partially self-governing provinces, states, or other regions under a
central federal government . The division of power between them and the central government,
is typically constitutionally entrenched and may not be altered by a unilateral decision.
Federations are often multi-ethnic and cover a large area of territory. Dicey calls federalism as a
political contrivance (arrangement) among those who desire.
In S. R. Bommai case (1994), the Supreme Court laid down that the Indian Constitution is federal
and characterised federalism as its ‘basic feature’.
Federalism has been part of the public discourse in India for many decades, before and after
independence in 1947, but it has gained greater importance since the 1990s when the country's
national polity saw the advent of the coalition era.
However, presently some scholars believe that the Indian federalism is under strain on several
fronts—constitutional, economic, political and electoral—to the extent that they use the phrase
“combative federalism”. The Union government is locked in confrontation with several states.
NITI AAYOG replaced planning commission with the intention to make states as the main drivers
of national development and was seen as a measure strengthening cooperative federalism.
However, some states like West Bengal believe that NITI AAYOG does not create any meaningful
platforms for states participation. The regional council, thus created are in no way as effective as
National Developmental Councils (NDC). The National Plan used to be submitted to NDC and
states approval was needed. Thus, in the absence of effective institutionalization, the federal
features remains weak.
GST has been one of the major taxation reforms having implications for fiscal federalism .
However, states feel that there is a loss of fiscal autonomy without corresponding benefits.In GST
council, the decision is taken by weighted voting. Centre has one-third votes and states have two-
third vote.
In recent years, there has been dissatisfaction with the centralizing drives. For example, union
government has taken unilateral decision of demonetisation. It had impact on the revenues of
state governments. For the first time in the history, a state (Jammu and Kashmir) was converted
to union territory

State government’s have passed resolutions in their assemblies against Citizenship Amendment
Act. Kerala went to the extent of challenging the decision using the route of Article 131.
Government of Chhattisgarh challenged the amendments in the NIA Act.

The 102nd Constitution Amendment Act of 2018 mandated that State had no power to notify
Socially Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) and expanded the powers of the National
Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC). This led to federal strain emerging out of
constitutional amendment. However , the 105th Amendment Act, 2021 made amendments in
Articles 338B, 342A and 366(26C), and preserved the power of the states to identify and notify
Backward Classes .

Pratap Bhanu Mehta gives the example of bifurcation of erstwhile Andhra, which was done
against the resolution of the state legislature, and in Kashmir which was stripped of statehood.

However, it must be realised that only a cooperative federal model can sustain the degree of
diversity that India offers. As rightly defined by K.C Wheare, federalism is a method of dividing
powers so that the general (central) and regional governments are within a sphere of
coordination & independence simultaneously. This should be the spirit of the federalism that we
follow.