Constitutional and statutory bodies, elections, amendments, rights and governance: previous-year questions
42 real UPSC Prelims questions (2011–2026) with the official answer and a clear explanation. 17 of them came in the last five papers.
How often UPSC asks this
Questions per year, counted from the official papers.
Attempt the questions
Newest papers first. Tap an option; the answer and the reason appear instantly.
Mr. X, a senior officer, was overseeing a critical vaccination programme during a pandemic. He found that a private service provider responsible for vaccine distribution was compromising on quality to make profits. Despite immense pressure to manage the issue due to vested interests, he raised his voice based on the principles of public administration which he learnt during various training programmes attended across his career. He reported the issue to the appropriate vigilance authority and halted the contract to ensure citizen welfare.
Which one among the following principles of public administration was most strongly demonstrated by Mr. X's actions ?
Answer (c) & explanation
Accountability is shown (c). Mr. X treated himself as answerable to the public for the money spent and for citizens' health. He did not hide the problem: he reported the provider to the vigilance authority and halted the faulty contract, owning the result of his office. Option (a) is wrong: esprit de corps is team spirit and loyalty within a group. Option (b) is wrong: equity means fairness between groups of people. Option (d) is wrong: delegation is passing work down to juniors. None of these fits his action.
Notice the wider idea: accountability has two parts, answerability (explaining your decisions) and enforceability (facing consequences). Tools like the CVC, the RTI Act and social audits make it real in Indian administration.
a case study with four textbook terms. Name what the officer actually did, then match the word.
UPSC repeats traps like this year after year. The PYQ Book gathers every trap in one place, so you see them coming. Try the free sample
Answer as per the official UPSC answer key.
In a multi-ethnic district where both economic competition and historical grievances frequently led to community tensions, a flashpoint has arisen with a Government decision to allocate land for a waste management facility near a tribal hamlet, sparking protests by the tribal community, which claimed that the land was sacred and critical to their cultural identity. At the same time, urban residents and local industries supported the project, citing severe solid waste challenges and health concerns due to lack of a proper disposal site. The conflict has escalated with road blockades, social media campaigns, and allegations of police excesses.
As a responsible Government official, you are tasked with resolving the situation through mediation, ensuring a sustainable outcome that balances environmental needs, tribal rights, and urban public health.
Consider the following statements with reference to the above :
- 1. A successful conflict resolution process must begin with acknowledging the cultural concerns of the protesting tribal community before discussing technical alternatives.
- 2. The Government should move ahead with the project without delay to address urban health concerns, which outweigh the sentiments of a small group.
- 3. Creating a multi-stakeholder dialogue platform — including tribal leaders, environmental experts, and municipal representatives — to build mutual understanding and help de-escalate tensions.
- 4. Conducting an independent Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) and sharing findings transparently with both sides to facilitate evidence-based decision-making.
Which of the statements given above would contribute to the resolution process ?
Answer (a) & explanation
Statements 1, 3 and 4 help resolve the conflict (a). The task is mediation. Statement 1 is right: acknowledging the tribal community's cultural concerns first builds trust before any technical talk. Statement 3 is right: a multi-stakeholder platform of tribal leaders, experts and municipal officials brings all sides to one table and lowers tension. Statement 4 is right: an independent ESIA, shared openly, allows evidence-based decisions. Statement 2 is wrong: pushing the project through and calling a community's concern "sentiments of a small group" ends dialogue. So options (b), (c) and (d) fail.
Notice the legal backdrop: the Forest Rights Act, 2006 and PESA, 1996 give Gram Sabhas a say over land and sacred sites, as the Niyamgiri case (2013) showed.
one option that sounds firm and practical. In a mediation question, anything that shuts out one party is out.
Answer as per the official UPSC answer key.
Ms. X is a mid-level civil service official working in the urban development department of a major city. Recently, she was involved in approving a contract for a public infrastructure project — a new community park. During the approval process, she received a piece of confidential information indicating that one of the shortlisted contractors had a history of poor workmanship and allegations of corruption in other cities, though nothing had been legally proven. The Head of the Department, Mr. Y, advised her not to disclose this information to the project committee or the public because it could delay the project and damage the city's reputation. However, Ms. X believed that withholding such information compromised transparency and public trust.
What amongst the following should Ms. X do now ?
- 1. Immediately disclose the information to the project committee and the public
- 2. Recommend removing the contractor from the shortlist to protect the project's integrity
- 3. Propose a 'limited disclosure' to an oversight committee, while keeping the information confidential from the public for the time being
Select the answer using the code given below :
Answer (b) & explanation
Only action 3 is right (b). The information is confidential and the charges are not proven. Action 3 is right: a limited disclosure to an oversight committee lets the proper authority check the facts while protecting both the process and a firm that may be innocent. Action 1 is wrong: making unproven charges public at once can damage reputations unfairly and break confidentiality. Action 2 is wrong: striking the contractor off on her own punishes without a finding. So options (a), (c) and (d) fail.
Notice the balance being tested: transparency versus due process. Ms. X also rightly refuses her senior's advice to hide the matter, because silence would hurt public trust. Ethics answers usually favour the proper channel over both cover-up and public exposure.
"unproven allegation" is the key phrase. Public disclosure and instant punishment both jump ahead of the facts.
Answer as per the official UPSC answer key.
Which of the following statements with regard to the persons with disabilities in India is/are correct ?
- 1. The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, an Act passed by the Parliament of India in 2018, mandates reservation in education and employment, places a legal duty on Governments to ensure accessibility and non-discrimination.
- 2. The Sugamya Bharat Abhiyan focuses on achieving universal accessibility for Persons with Disabilities across three key domains — built infrastructure, transport systems and information and communication technology.
- 3. The National Divyangjan Finance and Development Corporation (NDFDC) is a public sector organisation set up by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs as a not-for-profit company to promote entrepreneurship among Persons with Disabilities (PwDs).
Select the answer using the code given below :
Answer (b) & explanation
Only statement 2 is correct (b). Statement 2 is right: the Sugamya Bharat (Accessible India) Abhiyan (2015) works on three areas: built environment, transport and ICT. Statement 1 is wrong: the RPwD Act was passed in 2016, not 2018, though it does mandate reservation and accessibility. Statement 3 is wrong: NDFDC works under the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, not Corporate Affairs. So options (a), (c) and (d) fail.
Notice the RPwD Act's key features: it raised the disability types from 7 to 21, set 4% reservation in government jobs and 5% in higher education for persons with benchmark disabilities, and replaced the 1995 Act. It was passed to fulfil India's duties under the UN Convention (UNCRPD).
true content with one wrong detail (year, ministry). UPSC hides the error in the smallest word.
Answer as per the official UPSC answer key.
Which of the following statements about a Zero First Information Report (Zero FIR) under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 is/are correct ?
- 1. A Zero FIR can be lodged at a police station, even though the place of commission of a cognizable/non-cognizable offence is outside the territorial jurisdiction of that police station.
- 2. The Officer-in-Charge of the police station where a Zero FIR has been lodged may, with the permission of the competent authority, initiate a preliminary enquiry.
- 3. Under Zero FIR, it is obligatory for the informant to furnish information electronically.
Select the answer using the code given below :
Answer (d) & explanation
Only statement 2 is correct (d). Statement 2 is right: under Section 173(3) of the BNSS, for certain offences the officer may hold a preliminary enquiry, with permission of an officer not below Deputy Superintendent of Police. Statement 1 is wrong: a Zero FIR may be lodged anywhere only for a cognizable offence; adding "non-cognizable" makes it wrong. Statement 3 is wrong: information can be given orally or electronically; electronic filing is a choice, not a duty. So options (a), (b) and (c) fail.
Notice the idea: "zero" because the FIR gets no regular number until it is transferred to the police station with jurisdiction. BNSS, along with the BNS and BSA, replaced the CrPC, IPC and Evidence Act from 1 July 2024.
one extra word ("non-cognizable") and one strong word ("obligatory"). Both turn a true idea false.
Answer as per the official UPSC answer key.
With reference to the organisations under the Government of India, consider the following details :
| Sl. No. | Organisation | Function | Controlling Union Ministry
| 1. | Central Economic Intelligence Bureau (CEIB) | To coordinate between various law enforcement agencies | Ministry of Home Affairs
| 2. | Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) | To investigate complex corporate frauds | Ministry of Finance
| 3. | Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) | To preserve values in public life and ensure the health of the national economy | Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension
In how many of the above rows are the given details correctly matched ?
Answer (a) & explanation
Only one row is correctly matched (a). Row 3 is right: the CBI works under the Department of Personnel and Training, Ministry of Personnel, and the function quoted is from its mission statement. Row 1 is wrong: the CEIB is under the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), not Home Affairs. Row 2 is wrong: the SFIO works under the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, not Finance. So options (b), (c) and (d) fail.
Notice the origins: the CBI grew from the Special Police Establishment (1941), got its name in 1963 on the Santhanam Committee's advice, and draws its powers from the DSPE Act, 1946. The SFIO got statutory status under the Companies Act, 2013. The CEIB coordinates agencies like the DRI and ED.
rows where the function is right but the ministry is wrong. Check the last column on its own.
Answer as per the official UPSC answer key.
With reference to India, consider the following pairs :
| Organization | Union Ministry
| I. The National Automotive Board | Ministry of Commerce and Industry
| II. The Coir Board | Ministry of Heavy Industries
| III. The National Centre for Trade Information | Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises
How many of the above pairs are correctly matched?
Answer (d) & explanation
None of the pairs is correctly matched (d). UPSC has rotated the ministries one step. Pair I is wrong: the National Automotive Board is under the Ministry of Heavy Industries, not Commerce. Pair II is wrong: the Coir Board is under the Ministry of MSME, not Heavy Industries. Pair III is wrong: the National Centre for Trade Information was set up by the Commerce Ministry, not MSME. Every pair is off by one, so options (a), (b) and (c) fail.
Notice the Coir Board's base: Kochi, Kerala, the heart of India's coir industry, which uses coconut husk fibre. The Khadi and Village Industries Commission is also under MSME. Spotting a "rotation" trick helps: if one pair is swapped, check the others.
rotated pairs. If you know just two of them, the third is often the leftover answer.
Answer as per the official UPSC answer key.
Consider the following subjects under the Constitution of India :
- I. List I-Union List, in the Seventh Schedule
- II. Extent of the executive power of a State
- III. Conditions of the Governor's office
For a constitutional amendment with respect to which of the above, ratification by the Legislatures of not less than one-half of the States is required before presenting the bill to the President of India for assent?
Answer (a) & explanation
Items I and II need ratification by half the States (a). The proviso to Article 368(2) lists the federal subjects that need ratification by half the State legislatures. Item I is right: it includes any of the Lists in the Seventh Schedule. Item II is right: it includes Article 162, on the extent of a State's executive power. Item III is wrong: the Governor's conditions of office (Article 158) are not on that list, so Parliament alone can amend them. So options (b), (c) and (d) fail.
Notice other items needing ratification: election of the President (Articles 54, 55), the Supreme Court and High Courts, representation of States in Parliament, and Article 368 itself. The GST (101st Amendment) needed ratification because it changed the Lists.
the Governor feels "federal", but Article 158 is not in the ratification list.
Answer as per the official UPSC answer key.
Consider the following statements about Lokpal :
- I. The power of Lokpal applies to public servants of India, but not to the Indian public servants posted outside India.
- II. The Chairperson or a Member shall not be a Member of the Parliament or a Member of the Legislature of any State or Union Territory, and only the Chief Justice of India, whether incumbent or retired, has to be its Chairperson.
- III. The Chairperson or a Member shall not be a person of less than forty-five years of age on the date of assuming office as the Chairperson or Member, as the case may be.
- IV. Lokpal cannot inquire into the allegations of corruption against a sitting Prime Minister of India.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Answer (a) & explanation
Only statement III is correct (a). Statement III is right: the Chairperson or a Member must be at least 45 years old on taking office. Statement I is wrong: the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 covers public servants in India and abroad. Statement II is wrong: the Chairperson can be a former Chief Justice, a former Supreme Court judge, or an eminent person, so "only the CJI" is wrong. Statement IV is wrong: the Prime Minister is covered, with special safeguards, such as nothing on national security or foreign relations.
Notice the structure: a Chairperson and up to eight members, half of them judicial, and half from SC, ST, OBC, minorities and women. Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose was the first Lokpal (2019).
"only" and "cannot". Absolute words in a Lokpal question are usually wrong.
One trap spotted is one mark saved. The PYQ Book lines up every trap UPSC has set, so you walk in prepared. Try the free sample
Answer as per the official UPSC answer key.
Consider the following pairs :
| Party | Its Leader
| 1. Bharatiya Jana Sangh | Dr. Shyama Prasad Mukherjee
| 2. Socialist Party | C. Rajagopalachari
| 3. Congress for Democracy | Jagjivan Ram
| 4. Swatantra Party | Acharya Narendra Dev
How many of the above are correctly matched ?
Answer (b) & explanation
Only two pairs are correctly matched (b). Pair 1 is right: Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerjee founded the Bharatiya Jana Sangh in 1951. Pair 3 is right: Jagjivan Ram formed the Congress for Democracy in 1977, leaving Indira Gandhi's Congress after the Emergency. Pairs 2 and 4 are swapped: C. Rajagopalachari founded the Swatantra Party (1959), a pro-market party, while Acharya Narendra Dev was a leader of the Socialist Party, with Jayaprakash Narayan.
Notice what happened next: the Jana Sangh and the Congress for Democracy joined the Janata Party, which won the 1977 election under Morarji Desai. The BJP grew out of the Jana Sangh in 1980.
a swap between two pairs. Fix the one you are sure of, and the swap shows itself.
Answer as per the official UPSC answer key.
Consider the following statements :
- 1. It is the Governor of the State who recognizes and declares any community of that State as a Scheduled Tribe.
- 2. A community declared as a Scheduled Tribe in a State need not be so in another State.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct ?
Answer (b) & explanation
Only statement 2 is correct (b). Statement 2 is right: the Scheduled Tribe list is State-wise, so a community can be an ST in one State and not in another. Statement 1 is wrong: under Article 342, it is the President who notifies Scheduled Tribes for each State, after consulting the Governor. Only Parliament can later add to or remove from the list, by law. So options (a), (c) and (d) fail.
Notice the matching rule for Scheduled Castes under Article 341. The Lokur Committee (1965) gave the usual tests for STs: primitive traits, distinct culture, geographical isolation, shyness of contact and backwardness. The National Commission for Scheduled Tribes sits under Article 338A.
the Governor is consulted, so students think he declares. The notification is the President's.
Answer as per the official UPSC answer key.
As per Article 368 of the Constitution of India, the Parliament may amend any provision of the Constitution by way of :
- 1. Addition
- 2. Variation
- 3. Repeal
Select the correct answer using the code given below :
Answer (d) & explanation
All three are correct (d). Article 368(1) says Parliament may, in exercise of its constituent power, amend "by way of addition, variation or repeal any provision of this Constitution". All three words are in the text, so options (a), (b) and (c), which each leave one out, are wrong. The Basic Structure doctrine, from Kesavananda Bharati (1973), limits what can be changed, not these methods.
Notice the three ways to amend: a simple majority (for things like creating new states, not counted as Article 368 amendments), a special majority of each House, and a special majority plus ratification by half the state legislatures for federal matters. The 24th Amendment (1971) added the words "constituent power".
Answer as per the official UPSC answer key.
How many Delimitation Commissions have been constituted by the Government of India till December 2023 ?
Answer (d) & explanation
Four Delimitation Commissions have been set up (d). Delimitation Commissions were constituted under Acts of 1952, 1962, 1972 and 2002, so options (a), (b) and (c) are too low. The last one, under Justice Kuldip Singh, redrew constituency boundaries using the 2001 Census, but kept the number of seats in the Lok Sabha and the assemblies frozen, based on the 1971 Census. Its orders cannot be challenged in any court.
Notice the link to Article 82 and Article 170, which require readjustment after each census. The 84th Amendment extended the freeze on seat numbers until the first census after 2026. A separate commission for Jammu and Kashmir (2020–22) also redrew that Union Territory's seats.
Answer as per the official UPSC answer key.
In India, which one of the following Constitutional Amendments was widely believed to be enacted to overcome the judicial interpretations of the Fundamental Rights?
No official answer (question dropped) & notes
UPSC dropped this question, so no answer was counted. The ideas are still worth knowing. The 1st Amendment (1951) answered court rulings on land reform and free speech: it added the Ninth Schedule to shield land laws and new limits to Article 19(2). The 42nd Amendment (1976) also tried to put laws based on the Directive Principles beyond Fundamental Rights challenges. The 44th (1978) undid many Emergency changes, and the 86th (2002) made education a Fundamental Right. More than one option fits "widely believed", which is likely why it was dropped.
Notice the long tussle: courts struck down laws, Parliament amended, and Kesavananda Bharati (1973) finally set the basic structure limit on amendments.
UPSC did not evaluate this question, so no official answer exists. Use it for practice only.
UPSC dropped this question from evaluation; there is no official answer.
Consider the following organizations/bodies in India :
- 1. The National Commission for Backward Classes
- 2. The National Human Rights Commission
- 3. The National Law Commission
- 4. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
How many of the above are constitutional bodies?
Answer (a) & explanation
Only one of them is a constitutional body (a). Item 1 is right: the National Commission for Backward Classes became a constitutional body through the 102nd Amendment (2018), which added Article 338B. Item 2 is wrong: the National Human Rights Commission is a statutory body under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. Item 3 is wrong: the Law Commission is set up by a government order for a fixed term, so it is neither constitutional nor statutory. Item 4 is wrong: the NCDRC is a statutory body under consumer protection law, now the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Notice the other constitutional commissions: NCSC (Article 338) and NCST (Article 338A). The 22nd Law Commission was led by Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi.
NCBC was statutory (1993) before 2018. Old notes still call it statutory.
Answer as per the official UPSC answer key.
Consider the following statements :
- 1. A bill amending the Constitution requires a prior recommendation of the President of India.
- 2. When a Constitution Amendment Bill is presented to the President of India, it is obligatory for the President of India to give his/her assent.
- 3. A Constitution Amendment Bill must be passed by both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha by a special majority and there is no provision for joint sitting.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
Answer (b) & explanation
Statements 2 and 3 are correct (b). Statement 1 is wrong: under Article 368, a Constitution Amendment Bill can be introduced in either House by a minister or a private member, without the President's prior recommendation. Statement 2 is right: since the 24th Amendment (1971), the President must give assent to an amendment Bill and cannot withhold it or return it. Statement 3 is right: each House must pass it separately by a special majority, and there is no joint sitting if they disagree.
Notice that amendments touching federal matters, such as the election of the President or the Seventh Schedule, also need ratification by half the State legislatures. The basic structure doctrine limits all amendments.
"prior recommendation" is needed for Money Bills and Bills on State boundaries (Article 3), not for amendments.
Fell for this one? Most aspirants do. The PYQ Book puts every UPSC trap side by side, so the pattern finally clicks. Try the free sample
Answer as per the official UPSC answer key.
Consider the following statements :
- 1. Attorney General of India and Solicitor General of India are the only officers of the Government who are allowed to participate in the meetings of the Parliament of India.
- 2. According to the Constitution of India, the Attorney General of India submits his resignation when the Government which appointed him resigns.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Answer (d) & explanation
Neither statement is correct (d). Statement 1 is wrong: under Article 88, the right to speak in and take part in the proceedings of Parliament belongs to ministers and the Attorney General, not the Solicitor General. The AG cannot vote. Statement 2 is wrong: under Article 76, the Attorney General holds office during the pleasure of the President. Resigning when the government changes is a convention, not a rule in the Constitution.
Notice that the AG must be qualified to be a Supreme Court judge, is the government's chief legal adviser, and is not a member of the Cabinet. The Solicitor General and Additional Solicitors General are not constitutional posts. The State-level counterpart is the Advocate General (Article 165).
"only" plus the wrong officer. The Solicitor General is not a constitutional post.
Answer as per the official UPSC answer key.
Consider the following statements :
- 1. In India, there is no law restricting the candidates from contesting in one Lok Sabha election from three constituencies.
- 2. In 1991 Lok Sabha Election, Shri Devi Lal contested from three Lok Sabha constituencies.
- 3. As per the existing rules, if a candidate contests in one Lok Sabha election from many constituencies, his/her party should bear the cost of bye-elections to the constituencies vacated by him/her in the event of him/her winning in all the constituencies.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
No official answer (question dropped) & notes
UPSC dropped this question from evaluation, so no answer was scored. The likely trouble was statement 2: Devi Lal did contest from three Lok Sabha seats in 1991 (Sikar, Rohtak and Ferozepur), but the wording was disputed. The current law is clear. Statement 1 is wrong: since 1996, Section 33(7) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 lets a candidate contest from at most two constituencies. Statement 3 is wrong: no rule makes the party pay for bye-elections; the Election Commission has only suggested that the candidate pay.
Notice that a winner of two seats must quit one within 14 days under Section 70. Before 1996, there was no limit on the number of seats.
UPSC did not evaluate this question, so no official answer exists. Use it for practice only.
UPSC dropped this question from evaluation; there is no official answer.
Consider the following statements :
- 1. 'Right to the City' is an agreed human right and the UN-Habitat monitors the commitments made by each country in this regard.
- 2. 'Right to the City' gives every occupant of the city the right to reclaim public spaces and public participation in the city.
- 3. 'Right to the City' means that the State cannot deny any public service or facility to the unauthorized colonies in the city.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Answer (d) & explanation
Statements 2 and 3 are correct (d). The "Right to the City" is an idea from the French thinker Henri Lefebvre (1968). Statement 1 is wrong: it was taken up in the UN's New Urban Agenda (Habitat III, Quito, 2016), but it is not a binding, agreed human right that UN-Habitat monitors country by country. Statement 2 is right: it covers every resident's claim to reclaim public spaces and take part in city decisions. Statement 3 is right: it means the State cannot deny basic services to people in unauthorised colonies.
Notice India's urban schemes: PMAY-Urban, AMRUT and the Smart Cities Mission. The 74th Amendment (1992) gave constitutional status to urban local bodies.
"agreed human right" and "monitors" turn a policy idea into a treaty. Words like these usually signal a wrong statement.
Answer as per the official UPSC answer key.
With reference to India, consider the following statements :
- 1. Judicial custody means an accused is in the custody of the concerned magistrate and such accused is locked up in police station, not in jail.
- 2. During judicial custody, the police officer in charge of the case is not allowed to interrogate the suspect without the approval of the court.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Answer (b) & explanation
Only statement 2 is correct (b). Statement 1 is wrong: in police custody, the accused is held in a police lock-up; in judicial custody, he is in jail under the magistrate's control, not in a police station. Statement 2 is right: during judicial custody, the police can question the suspect only with the court's permission. Police custody is limited to 15 days in total, within the first part of the remand period.
Notice that the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS, 2023), which replaced the CrPC from 1 July 2024, lets the 15 days of police custody be taken in parts during the first 40 or 60 days. D.K. Basu (1997) laid down guidelines on arrest and custody.
Answer as per the official UPSC answer key.