Public Section Preview
Predicted Questions with Model Answers
Q1 (5 marks — 50 words): What are the five constitutional writs? State the purpose of each.
Model Answer:
The five writs (Articles 32/226): (1) Habeas Corpus — release from illegal detention; (2) Mandamus — compel public body to perform legal duty; (3) Prohibition — prevent inferior tribunal from exceeding jurisdiction (prospective); (4) Certiorari — quash inferior tribunal's ultra vires decision (retrospective); (5) Quo Warranto — challenge a person's right to hold public office. All issue from Supreme Court (Art. 32) or High Court (Art. 226).
Q2 (5 marks — 50 words): Distinguish between the Public Accounts Committee and the Estimates Committee.
Model Answer:
| Aspect | PAC | Estimates Committee |
|---|---|---|
| Members | 22 (15 LS + 7 RS) | 30 (LS only) |
| Chair | Opposition MP (since 1967) | Ruling party |
| Type | Post-audit (examines CAG reports) | Pre-audit (Budget Estimates) |
| Purpose | Past expenditure accountability | Future efficiency improvements |
Both cannot alter policy — only administrative implementation. PAC is more powerful due to CAG backing.
Q3 (5 marks — 50 words): What is Public Interest Litigation (PIL)? How has it expanded judicial control over administration?
Model Answer:
PIL allows any citizen to approach the Supreme Court (Article 32) or High Court (Article 226) in public interest — without personal injury. Pioneered by Justices P.N. Bhagwati and V.R. Krishna Iyer (1979). PIL expanded judicial control by: enabling rights enforcement for marginalised groups (Hussainara Khatoon 1979 — undertrials); ordering police reforms (Prakash Singh 2006); directing environmental compliance (MC Mehta). It liberalised locus standi — any person may petition.
Q4 (10 marks — 150 words): Discuss the forms and methods of judicial control over public administration in India with examples.
Model Answer:
Judicial control is the external supervision by courts over administrative actions — ensuring legality, constitutionality, and protection of fundamental rights.
Forms of judicial control:
1. Writs (Articles 32/226): The five constitutional writs are the most direct tool. Habeas Corpus — A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950) — challenged preventive detention. Mandamus — compels departments to perform duties; used extensively to compel disclosure of information and implementation of entitlements. Certiorari and Prohibition — quash ultra vires tribunal decisions. Quo Warranto — challenges occupancy of public offices (Amarinder Singh v. Punjab Vidhan Sabha Speaker, 2016).
2. Judicial Review of Delegated Legislation: Courts can declare subordinate legislation (rules, notifications, orders) void if they exceed the parent Act or violate fundamental rights. In Re: Delhi Laws Act (1951) — landmark on limits of delegation.
3. Administrative Tribunals (Article 323A): The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) established under the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985 adjudicates service matters. Its decisions are appealable to Division Bench of High Courts (L. Chandra Kumar, 1997).
4. Public Interest Litigation (PIL): Courts have directed sweeping administrative reforms through PIL — Vishaka (1997): sexual harassment guidelines; Prakash Singh (2006): police reforms; MC Mehta: environmental enforcement.
5. Natural Justice Enforcement: Courts enforce principles of audi alteram partem (right to be heard) and nemo judex in causa sua (no bias) in administrative proceedings — void orders passed without hearing.
Limitations: Judicial control is post-facto; courts lack technical expertise for policy merits; delays defeat the purpose; PIL misuse clogs the system.
Q5 (5 marks — 50 words): What is Vote on Account? Why is it needed? Distinguish it from the regular Budget.
Model Answer:
Vote on Account (Article 116) is Parliament's advance authorization for government spending before the full Budget is passed. It is typically 1/6th of annual expenditure for 2 months. Needed in election years when Budget cannot be presented or passed by the outgoing government. Differs from regular Budget: (1) Vote on Account is for spending only — no new taxes; (2) Temporary; (3) Passed by Lok Sabha alone; (4) No policy announcements — only routine expenditure.
Q6 (10 marks — 150 words): Discuss legislative control over administration in India. How effective is it?
Model Answer:
Legislative control is Parliament's supervision of executive administration — a cornerstone of parliamentary democracy where the executive remains responsible to the legislature.
Instruments of legislative control:
Question Hour: Starred questions (oral, with supplementaries), unstarred (written), and short notice questions allow MPs to hold ministers accountable for administrative actions daily. Zero Hour (Indian innovation, post-1962) allows urgent matters without advance notice.
Debate and motions: Adjournment motion on urgent public matters; No-Confidence motion brings down government; Cut Motions (Policy cut to ₹1; Economy cut reducing demand; Token cut of ₹100 for specific grievance) allow Parliament to signal dissatisfaction with departments.
Budget process: All Demands for Grants require Lok Sabha approval — a fundamental financial control. If a Demand is rejected, the department cannot function. Vote on Account (Article 116) allows temporary advance during election years.
Parliamentary Committees:
- PAC (22 members, opposition chair): Post-audit control through CAG reports; calls secretaries; issues Action Taken Reports.
- Estimates Committee (30 LS members, ruling party chair): Pre-audit efficiency scrutiny of Budget.
- COPU: PSU performance.
Effectiveness assessment:
Legislative control has significant limitations: (1) Sessions are short (approximately 60 days/year) — limited time for scrutiny; (2) Committee recommendations are not binding; (3) PAC has a backlog of CAG reports; (4) Cut Motions are rarely used effectively — government whip prevents rebellion; (5) Question Hour disruptions reduce actual accountability. The 2nd ARC recommended strengthening parliamentary committees and making their reports more binding.
Yet legislative control remains essential — it provides democratic legitimacy, public visibility, and the threat of political consequences that deters gross maladministration.