2nd Sem Non Law

UNIVERSITY OF CALCUTTA
B.A.LL.B (5 years)
ANSWERS of SUGGESTIONS
PROVIDED BY VOCULS
NON LAW PAPERS
PAPER II and PAPER III
2nd SEMESTER
We have published all the Answers in Public
Platform (Facebook) of all the others
Semesters of B.A.LL.B (5 years). If you want to
get it then search on Facebook using……
#VOCULSHELPDESK
UNIVERSITY of CALCUTTA ANSWERS 2022
B.A.LL.B (5 years) 2nd Semester
Provided by: VOCULS Paper II and Paper III
PAPER II
POLITICAL SCIENCE II
1)(a)What are the features of Parliamentary form of Government?
Features of Parliamentary Government
The Indian Constitution establishes a parliamentary form of government at
both the national and state levels. Articles 74 and 75 deal with the
parliamentary system at the Centre, while Articles 163 and 164 deal with
state governments.
The parliamentary system of government holds the executive accountable
to the legislature for its policies and actions.
Parliamentary government, also known as cabinet government, responsible
government, or the Westminster model of government, is popular in the
United Kingdom, Japan, Canada, and India.
• Nominal and Real Executives: The President is the nominal executive
(also known as the de jure or titular executive), whereas the Prime
Minister is the real executive (de facto executive). As a result, the
President is the President of the State, whereas the Prime Minister is the
Prime Minister of the Government.
• Double Membership: The Prime Minister and the Council of
Ministers serve as the executive, while the Parliament serves as the
legislature. Members of parliament elect the Prime Minister and
ministers, meaning that the executive comes from the legislative.
• Collective Responsibility: The executive has a collective
responsibility to the legislative. There is a collective responsibility,
which means that each minister's responsibilities are shared by the
entire Council.
• Secrecy of procedure: A requirement of this type of administration is
that cabinet proceedings be kept secret and not made public.
• Prime Ministerial Leadership: The Prime Minister is in charge of this
system of administration.
• Majority Party Rule: The Prime Minister is usually appointed by the
leader of the party that obtains a majority in the lower chamber.
2|Page #VOCULSHELPDESK
• Bicameral Legislature: Bicameral legislatures are used in most

parliamentary democracies.
• Political Homogeneity: Members of the council of ministers are
usually from the same political party, and so have similar political
ideologies. The ministers in a coalition government are bound by
consensus.
• No fixed term: The government's term is determined by the lower
house's majority support. The council of ministers must resign if the
government fails to win a vote of no confidence. There will be
elections, and a new government will be formed.
1)(b) Difference Between Parliamentary and Presidential Form of
Government.
A representative democracy can be divided into Parliamentary and
Presidential democracy. A presidential system, also known as a single
executive system, is a form of government in which the president heads an
executive branch that is independent of the legislative branch whereas a
parliamentary system, often known as parliamentary democracy, is a form
of democratic administration in which the executive gains political legitimacy
by commanding the support of the legislative, usually a parliament, to whom
it is accountable. In this article, we will discuss the difference between both
these types of representative governments.
Basis Parliamentary Form of Government Presidential Form of Government
It is a type of governance in It is a form of governance in
which the legislative and the which the executive,
executive branch are judiciary, and legislature all
Meaning intimately correlated. It is a act independently of one
form of government in which another. The President serves
citizens elect representatives as the chief executive and is
to the legislative body. directly chosen by the people.
Executive Dual executive as leader of the Single executive as the head of
state and leader of the the state and the head of the
government are different. government is the same.
Belong to the ruling party and
Can be chosen from outside the
are Members of Parliament.
Ministers legislature, and are usually
Generally, no outsider is
industry experts.
allowed to become a minister.
Executive accountable to Executive not accountable to
Accountability
Legislature Legislature
Dissolution of The Prime Minister is able to The President cannot dissolve
the lower house dissolve the lower house. the lower house.
Prime Minister’s tenure depends
Tenure upon majority support in the Fixed tenure for President.
Parliament. Thus, it is not fixed.
Separation of No clear-cut separation of The principle of Separation of
Powers power. powers is strictly followed.
Party Party discipline is
Stronger party discipline
Discipline comparatively less
Autocracy Less autocratic More autocratic.
1(c)Merits of Parliamentary Form Of Government.

The Parliamentary form of government has its own merits and demerits. The
main merits and demerits of the parliamentary form of government are
coordination between Legislature and Executive, Flexibility of the
government and Instability of the government, no strict separation of powers
respectively. As the merits outweigh the demerits, the Indian Constitution
makers choose the Parliamentary System of Government.
Cooperation between the executive and legislative branches:
• The executive is part of the legislature under a Parliamentary system,
and the dominant party usually has a grip in parliament, making it
easier to pass and enforce laws and policies.
• The parliamentary system, as opposed to the presidential system,

allows for a lot more coordination because the government's
departments are rigidly segregated from one another.
• Because the party has a majority in the lower chamber, the likelihood
of disagreements and confrontation is minimized.
Responsible Government:
• 'Responsible government' is another term for the Parliamentary system
of government.
• All other members of the legislature address issues that are of public
concern and national importance.
• This approach can be used to keep tabs on the government's operations.
• The opposition must be powerful enough to call out the prevailing
government's errors and inefficiencies to ensure accountability.
Diverse Representation:
• People from various backgrounds, ethnicities, faiths, races, and genders
live in many countries across the world.
• Because every group is represented in the legislature, the parliamentary
system is best equipped to accommodate all of these various groupings.
• As a result, the interests and desires of numerous groups can be
discussed on a large platform, and a more effective solution can be
developed.
Flexibility:
• In contrast to the Presidential system, where the President usually
remains for the entire term and can only be replaced through
impeachment or incapacity, which is a lengthy process, the Prime
Minister can be removed from power quickly.
• If the ruling party's promises made before the elections are not kept,
parliament may vote a no-confidence resolution, allowing the
government to be dismissed.
Check on Authoritarianism:
• In the Presidential System, power is concentrated primarily in the hands
of the President. He has the authority to appoint cabinet members.
• In the Parliamentary system, on the other hand, power is shared among

the council of ministers, and the ruling party does not become all-
powerful; the government can resign if a vote of no confidence is
passed against it.
• There are numerous institutions that keep an eye on the government's
operations.
2)(a)Discuss the characteristics of Federal Form of Government.
Characteristics of a federal State :-
Federalism, mode of political organization that unites separate states or other
polities within an overarching political system in a way that allows each to
maintain its own integrity. Federal systems do this by requiring that basic
policies be made and implemented through negotiation in some form, so that
all the members can share in making and executing decisions. The political
principles that animate federal systems emphasize the primacy of bargaining
and negotiated coordination among several power centres; they stress the
virtues of dispersed power centres as a means for safeguarding individual and
local liberties.
Dual or two sets of governments:
• In a unitary state as the name indicates there is only one
government, the national government.
• In a federation two sets of governments co-exist. The national (also
called central or federal) government and the government of each
constituent State.
• These two governments derive their powers from the same source
(the Constitution) and are controlled not by the other but by the
Constitution. Check details on the Constitution of India on the
linked page.
• But it would be erroneous to assume that they work in watertight
compartments. They govern the same people and their object is to
serve the same populace so naturally, their functions many at times
touch and affect each other.
• They must necessarily work not in isolation but in active

cooperation with the other.
It is interesting to note two things in this context—
(a) The Constitution in Art. 1(1) states India, that is Bharat, shall be a
Union of States. Dr Ambedkar had stated in the Constituent Assembly that
the word Union has been used advisedly because it has certain advantages. It
indicated that –
• The Indian federation is not the result of an agreement among the
States and
• The States have no right to secede.
• It may be noted that the word Union was employed by Stafford Cripps
in his proposals and was also used in the Cabinet Mission Plan.
(b) By the 73rd amendment and 74th Constitution amendments, another
level of government has been created viz. Panchayats and Municipalities.
They have assigned Powers and functions. This may be regarded as a third
level. So in India, the Constitution envisages not two but three levels of
government.
• This is a novel form of federation, unknown to the outside world.
• Local government of a district, country or municipality is generally a
creature of an Act of the legislature.
• In India they are created by the Constitution whose provisions are
supplemented by the Acts.
• It is the natural corollary of a dual government that there is a Separation
of power and functions between the two sets of government.
• The distribution between the Federal and the State units may not be
identical in all constitutional systems.
• The division of subjects may be two-fold i.e. Federal and State as in the
U.S.A. or maybe threefold (Central, State and Concurrent) as in
Australia.
• The residuary powers may rest with the Centre (Canada and India) or
with the States (U.S.A. and Australia). Apart from the lists, there are
many other ways of distributing power.
•
Written Constitution:
• In order to make the distribution clear and permanent it must be
reduced to writing and must be made amenable to amendments and
changes by observing the procedure laid down in the Constitution itself.
• Left to unwritten conventions or understanding it would create fluidity
which in turn would generate uncertainty leading to dissatisfaction
among the constituent units.
Supremacy of the Constitution:
• The constitution is regarded as a higher law that is there for the Union
and States to obey and honour.
• None of the Units has the authority to override or disregard the
Constitution.
• In some cases the Union may have overriding powers but not in
relation to the divisions of power.
• Federal Constitutions guard attentively the distribution of powers and
do not tolerate encroachments.
• Just as Public Corporations derive their powers from the Act creating
them the two sets of Government owe their power to the Constitution
and are in a way controlled by it and function within the limits marked
by it.
Rigidity:
• Rigidity does not mean that the Constitution is not subject to any
change and must remain in the same static condition. But as a corollary
of the necessity of having a written Constitution, it is required that the
provisions containing and regulating the distribution of powers must
not be left to the discretion of the Centre or the States.
• The amending process should lay down as a precondition the
concurrence of both. Our Constitution provides amendment by a
special majority at the Centre followed by ratification by at least half of
the States. (In the U.S. it is ¾ of the States).
Authority of Courts:
• In a federation, there is the possibility of a State encroaching upon the
field of another State. There is also the possibility of the Union
trespassing on the rights of one or more States as also the States
purporting to exercise the functions of the Union.
• To take care of such contingencies, a federation contemplates an
independent judicial body which will decide the rights of the Units and
keep them confined within their limits. Read in detail bout the Indian
judiciary on the given link.
• The Courts have the last word in regard to questions involving the
interpretation of the Constitution.
• Our Constitution confers original jurisdiction on the Supreme Court in
regard to federal matters (Art. 131). Thus the Supreme Court has been
constituted arbiter in all disputes involving the units.
• The five characteristic features recounted above are found in our
Constitution. Our Constitution is a written document that establishes a
dual polity of the govt. level i.e. Central and State. Each deriving its
powers from the supreme law of our land, the Constitution.
• The powers, functions and responsibilities of the Union and the
State are plenary within the boundaries defined by the Constitution.
The Constitution is endowed with supremacy. The Centre alone cannot
mould or change it.
• Federal features may be amended with the concurrence of both sets of
government as required by Art. 368 of the Constitution.
• To guard the division of legislative and administrative powers between
the two sets of government, the Constitution has set up the Supreme
Court. The Supreme Court may invalidate and injunct any act which
transgresses the division.
• It may be an administrative act or a legislative measure. The Supreme
Court may be moved by any person aggrieved by a violation of the
distribution of powers or by any State or the Union.
• It is the existence of the above features in our Constitution that led the
Supreme Court to describe our Constitution as federal.
2)(b) What are the Advantage and Disadvantages of Federal Form of
Government.
Advantages of Federal System of Government
Below are the demerits or disadvantages of a federal system of
government:
1. Federalism brings about peaceful political association of multi-ethnic
groups:
In a heterogeneous society or a multi-ethnic nation, federalism is the best
system of government to practice because it brings about a peaceful political
association between people of different tribes, languages and beliefs. This is
so because there is a national government at the center and other smaller units
of the government at the local level to govern the people.
However, in a unitary system of government where powers are only
concentrated in the hands of a central government, the fear of the majority
can lead to crisis. For this reason, a federal system of government is the best
system of government for a multi-ethnic country.
2. Federalism produces a stronger and stable nation:
Another advantage of federalism is the fact that it produces a stronger and
stable government in power. This is so because the association of different
component units will make the government stronger and respected by
international organizations.
Based on this, political scientists are of the view that prancing a federal
system of government brings about a stronger stable government.
3. There is no fear of majority:
In a federal system of government there is usually no fear of the majority
because every unit of the government is partially independent, and can decide
to run its own affairs by itself.
Conversely, there is not possible way for the majority to totally rule over the
minority in the country. Meanwhile, this is possible in a unitary system of
10 | P a g e #VOCULSHELPDESK
government since all the government powers of the state are concentrated in
the hands of the central government.
4. Equitable development and growth of the nation:
One of the major reasons why many countries (including the United States of
America), practice federalism is because the system fosters equitable growth
and development in every part of the nation.
Every unit of government is expected to develop its territory and together, the
growth and development of the whole nation will be achieved easily.
5. Rapid and effective government:
Unlike a unitary system where the burden of caring for the whole nation is
carried by a single central government, federal system of government is
different.
In a federal system of government, the functions and powers of the central
government and its component units are clearly shared and stipulated in the
constitution. Thus, the central government will not be faced with too many
works. This actually makes the government more effective and efficient.
Disadvantages of federal system of government
Below are the demerits or disadvantages of a federal system of
government:
1. It is expensive to operate:
Apparently, federalism is an expensive system of government because a lot
of money is needed to maintain the central government and all of its
component units. Workers and officials of every level of government must be
paid and maintained by the nation.
This is a big disadvantage of federalism because many nations can not afford
to main a government with different component units.
2. Federalism usually have a rigid constitution:
A rigid constitution is a constitution that is not easily amended. This type of
constitution is actually the best in a federal system of government.
However, the fact that is can not be easily amended even in time of
emergency is a disadvantage. Depending on the provisions of the
constitution, to amend a rigid constitution, there must be so many
consultation and unnecessary requirements.
In light of the above, a unitary system of government is deemed by some

scholars to be better than federalism.
3.Duplicate of government:
Some political scientists have argued that a federal system of government is
not actually advantageous because it brings about an unnecessary duplication
of the government which is also true.
By creating a national government and component units of government, it
can lead to instability and power struggle in the nation even when those
powers have been prescribed in the law of the country.
4. The federal government will become weaker:
Lastly, a federal system of government is disadvantageous because it
produces a weaker federal or central government and a stronger component
unit.
In light of this, the federal government may not be able to control its
component units of government and that can lead to political crisis or even
disintegration. An example of a country were this can be seen is Nigeia.
3)(a)Discuss Judiciary as an important organ of Government/Modern
State.
Introduction -
“The concept of governance is as old as human civilization. What is
“Governance”? It simply means the process of decision making and the
process by which decisions are implemented.”
- Justice Y.K. Sabharwal, Chief Justice of India
You may come across different incidents in your social surroundings where
people approach the Local courts, High court or the Supreme Court. The rule of
law governs the country of India. The judiciary is an important part of
our government and plays a critical role in the way our democracy works.
Role of Judiciary
The Supreme Court of India is the highest authority of the judiciary. But, first
of all, we need to understand the role of the judiciary system. Courts in India
are responsible for handling and passing decisions on multiple issues- how a
school should treat the students, or if two states can share each
other’s resources etc.
The Courts also have the right to punish people for the crimes they commit.
Almost every social situation which needs a rule is managed by the judiciary,
like-
• Dispute Resolution: Whenever there is a dispute, the courts intervene in
providing solutions. Whether it’s a dispute between citizens, citizens, and
government, or between two state governments or even the central
and state governments, the court is responsible for dispute resolution.
• Judicial Review: The judiciary has the final hold on the Constitution of
India. As such, if there is any violation of the fundamentals of the
constitution, the court can even overwrite laws passed by the Parliament.
This process is called Judicial Review.
• Upholding the Law and Enforcing Fundamental Rights: Almost all
Fundamental Rights of Indian citizens are defined in our constitution. In
case, any citizen feels that any of such rights are violated, they can
approach their local high courts or the Supreme Court.
The Indian Constitution protects the citizens from any partial judgment. And,
this gives the power to the judiciary to make decisions based on the rules of the
law, in case of any dispute. Due to such authority, the judiciary of the country
is an independent body. The courts of India are not controlled by the
government and do not represent any political authority. Such independence
allows the judiciary to ensure that there is no misuse of power by any section of
the government.
The independence of judiciary calls for ‘separation of powers’. This basically
means that both the legislature and the executive branches of the government,
cannot interfere with the functions and decisions of the judiciary. So, in order to
successfully execute their independent authority, the judges of both high courts
and the Supreme Court must be appointed without any influence or interference
from other branches of the government. Also, it is very difficult to remove a
judge from his/her office, once appointed by the judiciary.
Indian Judiciary has been pro-active and has scrupulously and overzealously
guarded the rights fundamental for human existence. The scope of right to
life has been enlarged so as to read within its compass the right to live with
dignity, right to healthy environment, right to humane conditions of work,
right to education, right to shelter and social security, right to know, right to
adequate nutrition and clothing and so on. This has been achieved by filling
the vacuum in municipal law by applying, wherever necessary, International
instruments governing human rights 6 . The Supreme Court has, over the
years, elaborated the scope of fundamental rights consistently, strenuously
opposing intrusions into them by agents of the State, thereby upholding the
rights and dignity of individual, in true spirit of good governance.
In case after case, the Court has issued a range of commands for law
enforcement, dealing with an array of aspects of executive action in general,
and of police at the cutting edge level in particular.
Some instances :
• Reiterating the view taken in Motiram , the Supreme Court in
Hussainara Khatoon 8 , expressed anguish at the “travesty of justice”
on account of under-trial prisoners spending extended time in custody
due to unrealistically
• In Prem Shankar Shukla , the Supreme Court found the practice of
using handcuffs and fetters on prisoners violating the guarantee of basic
human dignity, which is part of the constitutional culture in India and
thus not standing the test of equality before law (Article 14),
fundamental freedoms (Article 19) and the right to life and personal
liberty (Article 21). It observed that “to bind a man hand and foot’
fetter his limbs with hoops of steel; shuffle him along in the streets, and
to stand him for hours in the courts, is to torture him, defile his dignity,
vulgarise society, and foul the soul of our constitutional culture”.
Strongly denouncing handcuffing of prisoners as a matter of routine,
the Supreme Court said that to “manacle a man
• In Chander Kumar’s case, a Seven Judges Bench held that the power
of judicial review over legislative action vested in the High Courts
under Article 226 and Supreme Court under Article 32 is an integral
and essential feature of the Constitution and is part of its basic
structure.
Conclusion –
Judiciary has, thus, played a crucial role in development and evolution of
society in general and in ensuring good governance by those holding reigns
of power in particular. Perhaps, there can be no two views about the
significance of the role expected of judiciary, viza-viz, the goal and good
governance in a free society. I believe that judiciary has played its role well.
3)(b)What are the factors that help to ensured the independence of the
Judiciary?
9 Steps Taken to Ensure Independence of Judiciary
1. Separation of Judiciary from the Executive and Legislature:
Judiciary in India is neither a branch of the executive nor a hand-maid of the
legislature. It has an independent identity under the Constitution. It enjoys
full autonomy in its working.
2. Appointment of Judges by the President:
The method of appointment of judges has been very sound. The Judges of the
Supreme Court and High Courts are appointed by the President. While
appointing other judges the Supreme Court, the President consults the Chief
Justice of India. In case of the appointment of the Chief Justice, the practice
of appointing the senior most judges to this high office is followed. In the
case of subordinate courts, the Judges are recruited through competitive
examinations.
3. High Qualifications:
The Constitution prescribes specific and high qualifications for the Judges. A
person eligible for judgeship has to be an Indian citizen, must have
experience as a Judge of a High Court for at least five years or as an advocate
of High Court for at least ten years or be a distinguished jurist. Thus, only
persons with high qualifications and experience are appointed as judges of
the courts.
4. Long Tenure:
Judges of Supreme Court remain in office till they attain the age of 65 years.
This age limit ensures a long tenure for the Judges.
5. Security of Service:
The Judges in India enjoy good security of service. No judge can be removed
from the office except by a very difficult process of impeachment.
6. High Salary:
Every Judge of the Supreme Court gets a high salary. Besides this, each judge
is entitled to free residential accommodation, medical allowance and several
other perks. Salaries and allowances of judges cannot be reduced during their
terms of office, except in the situation of a financial emergency in the
country.
7. Prohibition of Practice after Retirement:
A Judge of the Supreme Court is prohibited to practice before any court or
authority in India.
8. Power to Punish the Contempt of Court:
Courts in India have been given the power to punish all cases involving a
contempt of court. The Supreme Court can punish any institution or person
who is found guilty of contempt of court.
9. Vast Jurisdiction and the Power of Judicial Review:
Judiciary in India enjoys a vast jurisdiction. It acts as the guardian interpreter
of the Constitution, the protector of Fundamental Rights of the people and the
arbiter of disputes between the Union and the States. It has the power to
determine the constitutional validity of every law.
4)(a)Explain the theory of Separation of Power.
Introduction –
Separation of powers, division of the legislative, executive,
and judicial functions of government among separate and independent
bodies. Such a separation, it has been argued, limits the possibility of
arbitrary excesses by government, since the sanction of all three branches is
required for the making, executing, and administering of laws.
The doctrine may be traced to ancient and medieval theories of mixed
government, which argued that the processes of government should involve
the different elements in society such as monarchic, aristocratic,
and democratic interests. The first modern formulation of the doctrine was
that of the French political philosopher Montesquieu in De l’esprit des
lois (1748; The Spirit of Laws), although the English philosopher John
Locke had earlier argued that legislative power should be divided between
king and Parliament.
I. Central Idea of the Theory of Separation of Powers:
The Theory of Separation of Powers holds that the three organs of
government must be separate and independent from one another. Any
combination of these three functions into a single or two organs is harmful
and dangerous for individual liberty. Separation of powers of the three organs
is essential for the efficiency of the government and the liberty of the people.
Government can work systematically and efficiently only when each of its
organs exercises its own powers and functions. Similarly, the liberty of the
people can be protected only when there is no concentration or combination
of the three governmental powers in the hands of one or two organs.
The theory of Separation of Powers holds that for keeping the government
limited, which is necessary for protecting the liberty of the people, the three
functions of government should be separated and performed by three separate
organs.
II. Meaning of Separation of Powers:
In simple words, the theory of Separation of Powers advocates that the three
powers of the government should be used by three separate organs.
Legislature should use only law making powers, Executive should undertake
only law enforcement functions, and Judiciary should perform only
adjudication/Judicial functions. Their powers and responsibilities should be
clearly defined and kept separate. This is essential for securing the liberty of
the people.
Separation of Powers: Views of Montesquieu:
In his book The Spirit of The Laws’ (1748), Montesquieu enunciated and
explained his theory of Separation of Powers. He wrote,
(1) If the legislative and executive powers are combined in the same organ,
the liberty of the people gets jeopardized because it leads to tyrannical
exercise of these two powers.
(2) If the judicial and legislative powers are combined in the same organ, the
interpretation of laws becomes meaningless because in this case the law-
maker also acts as the law interpreter and he never accepts the errors of his
laws.
(3) If the judicial power is combined with the executive power and is given to
one-person or one organ, the administration of justice becomes meaningless
and faulty because then the police (Executive) becomes the judge (judiciary).
(4) Finally if all the three legislative, executive and judicial powers are
combined and given to one person or one organ, the concentration of power
becomes so big that it virtually ends all liberty. It establishes despotism of
that person or organ.
As such, the three powers should not be combined and given neither to a
single organ nor to two organs. These three powers should be used by three
separate organs of the government. It is essential for safeguarding the liberty
of the people.
Main Supporters of the Theory of Separation of Powers:
The British jurist Blackstone and the founding fathers of the American
constitution, particularly, Madison, Hamilton and Jefferson, extended their
full support to the theory of separation of powers. They regarded Separation
of Powers essential for protecting the liberty of the people.
Use of Separation of Powers in Modern Constitutions:
The theory of Separation of Powers guided the Declaration of Rights adopted
after the French Revolution of 1789. It clearly stated that, “every society in
which separation of powers is not determined has no constitution.”
The real and big support to this theory came from the founding fathers of the
Constitution of the USA. They accepted its importance as the essential
safeguard for preserving liberties and property.’ The Constitution of USA
adopted the theory of separation of powers as its guiding principle.
It laid down a governmental structure based on this theory. It gave the
legislative powers to the US Congress, the executive powers to the US
President and the judicial powers to the US Supreme Court. Each organ was
kept separate from the other two.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as adopted by the UN General

Assembly on 10 December 1948, also accepted the principle of separation of
powers. In fact, all contemporary democratic constitutions do provide for a
separation of powers in one way or the other.
Conclusion :
The theory of Checks and Balances holds that no organ of power should be
given unchecked power in its sphere. The power of one organ should be
restrained and checked with the power of the other two organs. In this way a
balance should be secured which should prevent any arbitrary use of power
by any organ of the government.
The legislative power should be in the hands of the legislature but the
executive and judiciary should have some checking powers over it with a
view to prevent any misuse or arbitrary use of legislative powers by the
legislature. Likewise, the executive powers should be vested with the
executive but legislature and judiciary should be given some checking
powers over it.
4)(b) “Rigid Separation of Power in neither possible nor desirable” – Do
you agree with this view ?
Baron Montesquieu is a prominent French jurist who was greatly inspired by
the English legal system and political arrangement. He introduced the theory
of ‘Separation of Powers’ in his books ‘Esprit de Lois’ (Spirit of Law).
Though the history of the theory can be traced back to ancient Greek thinkers
like Aristotle and Plato, and subsequently the 16th and 17th century, it was
Montesquieu who systematically doctrinated the theory and gave it a
scientific formulation.
The primary problem with this theory is that it is not possible to implement it.
When it says separation of powers, what it really means is the separation of
the functions of the government. It has divided the government into three
rigid, watertight components. But the government is a single entity, it can not
be separated in three watertight compartments that perform different
functions. The functions of the government often coincide and are
complementary. Thus the government cannot function effectively and

smoothly if there is no coordination. Complete separation of functions in the
government would lead to undesirable consequences as it would limit unity
and coordination in the government. As the government is a single entity,
with different functions these functions are interrelated and the organs are
interdependent. For example, Legislature is dependent on the executive for
guidelines and policy matters, Executive is dependent on Judiciary for
judicial advice, etc. The point is, it is impossible to imagine breaking up the
government and its functions in 3 different watertight compartments. Doing
so would lead to conflicts, dead-locks and inefficiency in the government. It
may create a conflict of interest and tussle for power within the 3 different
organs.
It is also important to note that the separate functions which Montesquieu
talked about, like lawmaking cannot be the exclusive domain of any one
organ. It has now become necessary to delegate the functions of the
legislature to the executive( delegated legislation). It is essential to provide
for delegation of functions and symphony in the different functions
performed by the organs of the government to ensure no one organ wield
excessive power or excessive workload.
The power of the government is one whole, there can be no separation of
powers in the government. To perceive the government as different entities
would be to undermine it.
Absolute and rigid separation is not possible, the three organs of the
government cannot really be separated in different water-tight compartments.
It is neither desirable as it will only lead to conflicts, deadlocks and
inefficiency in the working of the government. In today’s time when the
government is more than just a police state, it is impossible to imagine it as
three different organs in isolation. Though Montesquieu’s theory is relevant
to the extent that it upholds liberty and avoids the abuse of power, its strict
implementation is neither desirable nor practical.
5)(a)What do you understand by the term Political Party ?

Introduction
A political party basically, is a group of people. These people come together to
contest elections in order to hold power in the government. It is a way to
mobilize voters to support common sets of interests, concerns, and goals. The
primary role of the political party is to fix the political agenda and policies. So,
each party tries to persuade people by claiming their policies are better than
those of other parties.
In a broader perspective, a political party is a means via which the people can
speak to the government and have a say in the governance of any country. So,
every political party must have three key components:
• Leaders
• Active Members
• Followers
Political Party -
Political party, a group of persons organized to acquire and exercise political
power. Political parties originated in their modern form in Europe and
the United States in the 19th century, along with the electoral
and parliamentary systems, whose development reflects the evolution of
parties. The term party has since come to be applied to all organized groups
seeking political power, whether by democratic elections or by revolution.
A political party is defined as the group of people who come together to
contest the elections so that they can hold power in the government. A
political party has a leader, active members, and the followers.
Political parties are required so that they make policies that help in fulfilling
the needs of the citizens through the representatives.
In earlier, prerevolutionary, aristocratic and monarchical regimes, the
political process unfolded within restricted circles in which cliques and
factions, grouped around particular noblemen or influential personalities,
were opposed to one another. The establishment of parliamentary regimes
and the appearance of parties at first scarcely changed this situation. To
cliques formed around princes, dukes, counts, or marquesses there were
added cliques formed around bankers, merchants, industrialists, and

businessmen. Regimes supported by nobles were succeeded by regimes
supported by other elites. These narrowly based parties were later
transformed to a greater or lesser extent, for in the 19th century in Europe and
America there emerged parties depending on mass support.
The 20th century saw the spread of political parties throughout the entire
world. In less-developed countries, large modern political parties have
sometimes been based on traditional relationships, such as ethnic, tribal, or
religious affiliations. Moreover, many political parties in less-developed
countries are partly political, partly military.
Certain socialist and communist parties in Europe earlier experienced the
same tendencies.
These last-mentioned European parties demonstrated an equal aptitude for
functioning within multiparty democracies and as the sole political party in a
dictatorship. Developing originally within the framework of
liberal democracy in the 19th century, political parties have been used since
the 20th century by dictatorships for entirely undemocratic purposes.
People may often hear the media talk about the state of our country's political
system and, specifically, our political parties. However, the term 'political
party' isn't something where senators, representatives, and other political
officials have fun all day. Instead, a political party is a group of dedicated
people who come together to win elections, operate the government, and
determine public policy. So, you can see that this is anything but the fun type
of 'party' that we usually think of when we hear the word.
• Political parties in the United States do a variety of things. There are
five main functions that political parties have. Recruiting candidates for
public office is one of the most important functions that political parties
have. An important goal of political parties is to gain control of the
government, and to do this, parties must work to recruit candidates for
all elected offices. For example, if a state had an opening for governor,
each political party would try and find a person they could support to
run for that position.
• Political parties also actively try to gather volunteers to help register

voters as well as organize and run the election day voting. The hope is
that the more people that are involved in helping with the election, the
more interest there will be in the outcome, which should increase voter
turnout. The ultimate goal is to get the person the party supports to win
an election.
• While political parties do end up endorsing or supporting individual
candidates, they do so because those people share very similar ideals
and political positions of the entire party. Thus, another function of
political parties is to present alternative policies to the electorate, called
their political platform. A political platform is the ideals and positions
a political party has. Thus, we often learn of the ideals a political party
has from the members that support it.
• When a member of a political party wins an elected position, they in
essence take responsibility of running the government. This includes
staffing positions with loyal party supporters and developing
connections among other elected officials to gain support for policies
and their implementation. For example, Barack Obama, who is a
member of the Democratic Party, did this when he named his White
House staff, Cabinet members, and other appointed officials.
5)(b)Discuss the importance of party system in democracy ?
Introduction
In our country, there are several political parties that stand for the election. The
presence of the political party is actually a healthy situation for the nation. It
gives people a choice to make a more evolved and effective decision. Moreover,
it drives the other political parties to get better than their competitors to
win elections and rule the nation. So, this is the basic backdrop of political
parties.
Importance of Political Parties

A democracy cannot exist without the presence of a political party. This is clear
from the function performed by the political parties. In case, there are no
political parties then:
• Every candidate in the election would be an independent candidate. Any
individual candidate does not have the efficiency to promise any
major policy change to the people. In such a scenario, no one will be
responsible for how the country is run.
• In the long run, only a representative democracy can survive. Political
parties are the agencies that gather different views on various issues and
present them to the government.
• “A healthy, resilient democracy is based on inclusiveness, which political
parties and representative institutions are in a key position to safeguard.
Yet parties are finding it harder to sustain an atmosphere of inclusiveness,
particularly as women and youth are largely excluded from representative
institutions. Younger generations are insufficiently represented in party
membership, leadership and legislatures. Their marginalization from, and
decreasing trust in, traditional party politics is of particular concern, as
young people can make or break future models of representation.”[i]
• In many countries, the relationship between youth and political parties is
strained. Many young people do not trust political parties, while party
leaders often complain that the youth are unwilling to get involved.
• Political Parties are the main gatekeepers for candidates to participate in
elections. Parties therefore have great influence over the degree of young
people’s political participation at local, regional, and national levels. In
most countries, parties determine which candidates are nominated and
elected and which issues achieve national prominence. They decide who
will be placed on their candidate lists and at which position. Political
parties’ nomination processes favored young candidates, as they are often
placed in low positions on candidates’ lists (in proportional representation
‘closed list’ electoral systems), with very limited possibilities to get
elected. As intermediary institutions, they link the state and civil society,
translating the policy preferences of citizens into political action.
Individuals with political ambition are likely to seek out leadership

positions within political parties. Most are of these aspiring leaders are
middle-aged men.
• The persistent exclusion of youth stems from a variety of factors,
including: “old-boy” networks, recruitment, and promotion mechanisms
based on seniority, a lack of individual capacities, and limited self-
confidence and motivation. Engagement in political parties often requires
long-term commitments, which is difficult for youth trying to obtain an
education and to establish themselves in the labor market. Middle-aged
men tend to have a greater powerbase, because they comprise a large
percentage of members. In some cases, youth face more than one kind of
discrimination because of their gender or because they can also belong to
other marginalized groups (i.e. indigenous people, people with disabilities,
and/or be lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender).
• These obstacles fuel a cycle where youth are put off by the exclusionary
nature of political parties and decide not to join them. In turn, because
they do not join, they lack the internal powerbase to win elections and
nominations. Both issues should be addressed to break the cycle: youth
should be able to develop the skills and motivation to be successfully
engaged in political parties, and parties should be encouraged to create
space for youth. Affirmative action measures such as youth and women’s
quotas and party youth wings can help move these processes forward.
• Political parties could do more to encourage youth to run for office, and
could consider nominating younger candidates for provincial/state
elections and municipal elections. They could also advocate to have the
legal age to run for office these levels of political office lowered to
accommodate younger people.
Conclusion :
Political parties are essential institutions of democracy. By competing in
elections parties offer citizens a choice in governance, and while in
opposition they can hold governments accountable. When citizens join
political parties, volunteer their time, donate money and vote for their
leaders, they are exercising their basic democratic rights. Participation of
citizens in political parties offers unique benefits, including opportunities to

influence policy choices, choose and engage political leaders, and run for
office. However, in some countries political parties do not respect the rights
of citizens to participate and are not accountable to voters. NDI supports the
development of vibrant, accountable and inclusive multiparty systems that
offer citizens meaningful choices and opportunities for political participation.
The Institute’s work includes knowledge and resource sharing, and aims to
expand the participation of marginalized groups including: women, youth,
ethnic and racial minorities, persons with disabilities, and gender and sexual
minorities. NDI's assistance reaches across party organizations, from
grassroots party members to mid-level party officials and senior party
leaders. The Institute is the only organization to have official standing in the
four largest international groupings of political parties: Centrist Democrat
International, Liberal International, Socialist International and Progressive
Alliance. Through these networks, NDI fosters peer-to-peer exchanges and
consultations. The Institute also facilitates constructive engagement between
political parties and other institutions, such as civil society, the media and
election management bodies.
6)(a)Explain the function of Legislature in a Modern State.
Introduction :
In our country the central legislature is called the Parliament, which has two
Houses:
(1) Lok Sabha and
(2) Rajya Sabha.
There were 22 States and 9 Union Territories in India till 1985, out of
which 7 States had two Houses and the rest 15 States had only one House, i.e.
Legislative Assembly. Now we discuss the functions of the Legislature.
In a democracy generally, the following are the functions of Legislature:
(1) Law Making:
In modern times the most important function of legislature is law making.
Ordinary Bills can be introduced by the members of the Parliament and by
the Ministers, while Money Bills can be introduced only by the Ministers in
the Lower House. The Members of the Legislature can by a majority vote
accept or reject any Bill. The Members of Legislature or the Parliament enjoy
full freedom of speech and also of criticism of the policies of the government.
(2) Control over the Budget:
The legislature has control over the budget of the executive (Government)
and without its approval the executive cannot spend even a single ‘paisa’. In
England and India, the Members of the Parliament can impose a cut on any
demand on the budget but they cannot increase it.
(3) Control over Executive:
In a Parliamentary Government the Legislature or the Parliament exercises
full control over the executive or the Council of Ministers. The Parliament
has the right to put Questions and Supplementary Questions to the Cabinet.
The Parliament can remove the Cabinet by a No- Confidence Motion. It can
bring in Adjournment Motions and Censure Motions against the Cabinet. The
Parliament can appoint a committee to investigate the affairs of the ministers.
(4) Judicial:
In certain countries the legislature has to perform certain judicial functions.
For example, in India and America the Parliament and the Congress can
remove the President by a process of Impeachment. In England, the House of
Lords is the final Court of Appeal. In Canada, the Upper House, i.e. the
Senate hears the divorce cases. In Switzerland, the Federal Assembly has the
power to interpret the Constitution.
(5) Electoral:
In certain countries, the legislature elects the President, the Vice-President
and the Judges. In India, the Parliament takes part in the election of the
President and the Vice-President. (In the election of the President, besides the
Parliament, the State Legislatures also take part, but in the election of the
Vice- President, only the Parliament takes part).
In Russia, the Judges of the Supreme Court are elected by the Parliament of
that country. In Switzerland also the members of the Executive and Federal
Tribunal are elected by the members of Parliament. Formerly, in China the
President was elected by the Parliament.
(6) Amendment of the Constitution:

In every democracy, the power to amend the constitution rests with the
legislature of that country. The only difference is that in some countries, a
similar procedure is adopted as that for the amendment of ordinary laws. In
some other countries a special procedure is adopted for the amendment of the
constitution. In our country, the Parliament can amend certain clauses of the
constitution with a two thirds majority and for amending certain clauses; the
approval of one half of the state legislatures is needed.
(7) A Minor of Public Opinion:
Now-a-days, the legislature acts as the mirror of public opinion, because it
criticises and compels the executive to act according to the wishes of the
people.
(8) Right of the Legislature to remove the Judges:
In India, China, Soviet Russia, England and the U.S.A., the Parliament has
the power to remove the judges of the Federal or Supreme Court.
(9) As a Board of Directors:
In certain countries the legislature acts as a Board of Directors for
Government Corporations, because it decides the manner in which the
Administrative Branch is to be organized and perform its functions. It also
decides the ways and means for raising money.
Conclusion :
We have given the functions of the legislatures in democratic countries. The
situation in totalitarian countries is quite different. In these countries, the
executive has a great control over the legislature; hence the executive is not
responsible to the legislature. Its functions like law-making and the passage
of the budget are nominal.
The legislature acts according to the directions of the executive. Thus we see
that in democratic countries, the legislatures exercise a great control over the
executive, but in totalitarian regimes the legislature is controlled by the
executive.
6)(b)Discuss in this connection the merits of Bicameral system of

Legislature.
Bicameralism is a device to check the despotism of either one chamber or the
other. It has been justified as a check on undivided power, rashness and
irresponsibility.
Merits of Bicameralism
(1) Prevention of hasty legislation:
Firstly, bicameralism is defended on the ground that it prevents hasty
legislation. It is said that the second chamber by interposing delay and
restrain will prevented the enactment of hastily passed bills of the other
chamber.
But this argument is not adequate. For, the process of law-making today is
not so quick. The bills are passed through three readings and committee
stages which interpose adequate delay. Further, delay by second chamber is
undersirable.
(2) Safeguard of individual liberty:
Secondly, Bryce opined that second chambers of legislature can safeguard
individual liberty. In his opinion, one chamber possesses an innate tendency
to be tyrannical and corrupt in the absence of a check by the existence of
another house of equal power.
(3) Representation of different interests:
Thirdly bicameral legislature is defended on the ground that it gift
representation to the different interests. For instance, the Rajya Sabha in India
has 12 nominated members with repute in the fields of art, science, literature
and social service.
These persons fields not otherwise be elected to the Lok Sabha whose
membership is confined to elected representatives only.
(4) Representation of the units in a federation:
Fourthly, federal States one of the chamber consists of the representatives of
states while the other chamber is composed of representatives of the people
In the U.S.A. the members of the lower house are elected on the basis of
population.
On the other hand, the Senate or the upper house of America consists of two
representatives from each state irrespective of their population, size or
economic status. In India, the Rajya Sabha is supposed to consist of the
representatives of States, although there is no parity in representation as in
the U.S.A.
(5) Smooth working of the legislature:
Fifthly, it facilities the working of the legislature. Complexity and the bulk of
modern legislation demand that the second chamber should exist to lighten
the burden of the popular chamber. Non-controversial bills may be
introduced in the upper chamber.
7)Short note (any one)
Woman Suffrage
Introduction :
Lucy Stone (1818-1893): A prominent abolitionist and one of the most
important figures in the first generation of suffragists. Known for her liberal
marriage to Henry B. Blackwell , Lucy headed the American Woman
Suffrage Association and was the mother of Alice Stone Blackwell (1857-
1950), who would later be called "the foremost suffragist propagandist"
(Kraditor 1965, 266)
Suffrage is the right or privilege of voting and is frequently incorporated
among the rights of citizenship (the duties and privileges of a person owing
loyalty to and entitled by birth or naturalization to the protection of a state or
nation). However, just as not all people in the United States are necessarily
granted the privilege of citizenship, not all U.S. citizens have been uniformly
endowed with the right to vote. Throughout U.S. history, persons have been
denied suffrage based on sex, race, age, and income. This lack of universal
suffrage historically resulted in an avalanche of debate, protest and advocacy
for political reform. There was great resistance to this reform, and the woman
suffrage movement's accomplishments came over time. Arnaud-Duc
explains,
Political rights empower citizens to influence the state's priorities and hold
public office. Suffrage may be national (or federal), local, or limited to
particular offices. Because such hierarchies existed, women could only work
their way gradually toward full citizenship. (1993, 82).
Importance
The woman's suffrage movement is important because it resulted in passage
of the Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which finally allowed
women the right to vote. However, as Lucinda Desha Robb suggests, "one of
the most important lessons of the woman suffrage movement may be the
relative unimportance of suffrage all by itself" (1996, 40). The early
suffragists did not see voting privileges as their primary goal; rather they saw
suffrage as an opportunity to participate more fully in the public affairs of
society through political engagement and civic action (Kraditor 1965).
In the Declaration of Sentiments, Stanton proposed twelve resolutions, of
which woman's enfranchisement was just one. While many of her
contemporaries initially felt that woman's suffrage was inconceivable,
Stanton and Anthony soon saw that achievement of their other goals
regarding women's rights was only possible through suffrage and the political
advances and allies they would make along the way (Carter 1996;
Weatherford 1998). Though they faced obstacles and hardships, Robb points
out,
The years of hard work women put into making suffrage a reality taught them
the full potential of democracy and how to employ that potential. They
learned grassroots skills and gained the political credentials that made them
more effective and laid the groundwork for their increasing participation in
government. (1996, 41)
The ripple effect of the woman's suffrage movement on subsequent
generations is evident in a range of educational, civil rights, and health care
reforms, as well as in the growing number of women elected to governmental
positions (Hossell 2003).
A number of commonly understood terms or ideas related to woman suffrage
exist in our vocabulary. Among them are feminism , inequality , sexism ,
and women's rights . In addition, other ideas bear the need for more
explanation or historical context:
Abolition : The opposition and eradication of slavery. The anti-slavery or
abolitionist movement was established in 1833 with the formation of the
American Anti-Slavery Society in Philadelphia, although anti-slavery
sentiment predated the formation of the republic (Library of Congress).
Following the U.S. Civil War (1861-1865), Congress ratified the Thirteenth
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which officially abolished slavery.
Enfranchisement : To endow a person with the rights of citizenship,
particularly the right to vote.
Equal rights : Those benefits and privileges that are due to a person by law,
tradition, or nature without discrimination, specifically in regard to one's sex.
Passage of the Nineteenth Amendment marked the first specific written
guarantee of women's equal rights in the Constitution. However, in response
to the many laws and practices at work and in society that still perpetuated
the unequal treatment between men and women, Alice Paul introduced the
Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) in 1923. The ERA advocated for the equal
application of the Constitution to all citizens to ensure freedom from
discrimination based on sex. To date however, the ERA has failed to be
ratified by the United States Congress (Equal Rights Amendment.org).
Grassroots advocacy : Active support for something such as a policy, an
idea or cause spearheaded by people or society at a local level rather than as a
result of major political activity.
Progressivism : The principles and practices of political progressives.
Persons in support of progressivism promote progress toward better
conditions or new policies, ideas, or methods. Efforts made by Progressives
during the early 1900s led to the establishment of laws governing child labor
and food and drug safety (Hossell 2003).
Temperence Movement/Prohibition : Initiated by Christian women who
saw the societal and familial ills created by the abuse of alcohol, temperance
was the movement to prohibit the lawful manufacture, transportation, sale or
possession of alcoholic beverages (Hossell 2003). In the simplest terms,
prohibition refers to restrictions against the sale of alcohol; however,
prohibition also refers to the period (1920-1933) during which the Eighteenth
Amendment (which outlawed the manufacture and sale of alcoholic
beverages) was in force in the United States. In 1933, prohibition of alcohol
was repealed by passage of the Twenty-first Amendment.
Voting rights : The ability of U.S. citizens to participate in local, state and
federal elections. Despite passage of the Fifteenth Amendment (which
prohibited state and federal governments from denying citizens the ballot on
the basis of race) Blacks and other minorities continued to experience
resistance by state officials who were unwilling to enforce the amendment. In
1965, President Johnson signed into law the Voting Rights Act, "generally
considered the most successful piece of civil rights legislation ever adopted
by the United States Congress" (U.S. Department of Justice). The Act
systematizes and actualizes the Fifteenth Amendment's permanent guarantee
that no person shall be denied the right to vote on account of race or color.
Conclusion :
Though, in the broadest sense the suffrage movement embodies the fight by
all individuals to obtain voting rights, the term is seen to be synonymous with
the woman's suffrage movement, which stemmed from the fight for women's
rights (Weatherford 1998). This is likely due to the fact that the woman's
suffrage movement was a seventy-two-year-long battle that was rooted in the
abolishment of slavery and, at least for some reformers, linked to obtaining
the right for both blacks and women to vote; that is, some suffrage activists
sought enfranchisement for blacks as well as women (McCulloch 1929).
This paper will focus on the struggle for woman's suffrage, arguments against
women's right to vote, progress toward equality, and related social and
political reform. Moreover, it will highlight key events and figures involved
in the suffrage movement and suggest how both supporters and opponents of
suffrage focused on the ways voting rights would affect women's abilities to
bring about social change.
Important features of a Unitary Form of Government

i. Strong Centre
The division of powers is in favour of the Centre and highly inequitable from
the federal angle. Firstly, the Union List contains more subjects than the State
List. Secondly, the more important subjects have been included in the Union
List. Thirdly, the Centre has overriding authority over the Concurrent List.
Finally, the residuary powers have also been left with the Centre, while in the
US, they are vested in the states. Thus, the Constitution has made the Centre
very strong.
ii. Central Government’s control over state territory
Unlike in other federations, the states in India have no right to territorial
integrity. The Parliament can by unilateral action change the area, boundaries
or name of any state.
iii. Single Constitution
Usually, in a federation, the states have the right to frame their own
Constitution separate from that of the Centre. In India, on the contrary, no
such power is given to the states. The Constitution of India embodies not
only the Constitution of the Centre but also those of the states. Both the
Centre and the states must operate within this single-frame. The only
exception in this regard is the case of Jammu and Kashmir which has its own
(state) Constitution.
iv. Flexibility of the Constitution
The bulk of the Constitution can be amended by the unilateral action of the
Parliament, either by simple majority or by special majority. Further, the
power to initiate an amendment to the Constitution lies only with the Centre.
In India states don’t have the right to propose amendment unlike in U.S.A
v. Unequal representation of states
In a federation states are given with equal representation with regard to upper
house, but in India states are not given with equal representation with regard
to Rajya Sabha.
vi. Emergency Provisions

During an emergency, the Central government becomes all powerful and the
states go into the total control of the Centre. It converts the federal structure
into a unitary one without a formal amendment of the Constitution. This kind
of transformation is not found in any other federation.
vii. Single Citizenship
India adopted the system of single citizenship. There is only Indian
Citizenship and no separate state citizenship. All citizens irrespective of the
state in which they are born or reside enjoy the same rights all over the
country. The other federal states like US, Switzerland and Australia have dual
citizenship, that is, national citizenship as well as state citizenship.
viii. Single Integrated Judiciary
It means that all the courts of India are in a hierarchical order from the lower
courts to the Supreme Court of India. Courts in India have Original and
Appellate Jurisdiction.
ix. All India Services
It has the features of All India Services or Central Services, and the State
Civil Services. The Central and All India services promotes uniform
administrative system and process throughout India.
x. Appointment of Governor
The governor of a state is not elected but appointed by the president and
holds office at the pleasure of the president. He is the head of the executive in
the state. He has powers like Legislature, Executive Judicial and emergency
powers.
Public opinion and it’s role in democracy
The term ‘public opinion’ was coined by philosopher John Locke in the 17th
century. However, the concept itself predates Locke. Vox populi or ‘voice of
the people’ is a similar Latin concept. Today, public opinion is defined in the
following way: collective evaluations expressed by people on politico-social-
economical issues, policies, institutions, and individuals.
Importance of public opinion in a democracy:

• Listening is essential in a democracy. People have a right to be heard
by their representatives. That is what legitimises democracy in the
public eye and builds trust in gove rnment and its institutions. The
functioning of a stable society is impossible without the means of a free
-flowing two-way communication – talking and listening– with an
openness to the others’ point of view.
• Public opinion can act as a check on leadership, as the members of the
public can express their dissatisfaction with politicians who refuse to
take their opinions into account and vote them out of office.
• Presenting the views of the mass public to gove rnment leaders who are
making decisions that will affect society. Leaders often monitor the
public pulse when making policy decisions, especially when they face
an election campaign.
Various agencies through which public opinion is expressed:
By age ncies of public opinion, we mean all those organizations, institutions
and groups which significantly contribute to the formulation and expression
of public opinion. In every society, a large number of people and age ncies
play an important role in the formulation and expression of public opinion.
According to Bryce , three type s of people contribute significantly to the
formulation, expression, and promotion of public opinion.
1. The people who build public opinion. This cate gory includes the
legislators and journalists who by their views and use of mass media
act as agencies of Public Opinion.
2. The people who are active actors in social and political life. These are
well informed and active people who direct public opinion in a
particular direction.
3. The third cate gory includes people who arouse public opinion. These
are the people who take part in public meetings, agitations, movements,
and de monstrations.
The following are the major agencies of Public Opinion:

• Press: Newspapers, periodicals: magazine s—in-fact the Press i.e. the
print media as a whole act as an important major age ncy of public
opinion. The press discusses and analyse s every important issue of
public concern and the editorials, write-ups, and news-analysis always
play a big role in the formulation and expression of public opinion.
• Legislature: Legislature is formed by the elected representatives of the
people. It is an assembly of political leaders. It acts both as a mirror of
public opinion as well as the agency for the formulation and expression
of public opinion. Le gislative debates, the publication of records of the
debates of the legislature, and the views expressed by the le gislators
both inside and outside the legislature play an important role in the
making and mirroring of public opinion.
• Public Meetings and Rebates: In every democratic state people have the
right and freedom to form associations, to hold meetings, processions
and demonstrations and to discuss all issues of public importance and
concern. Public meetings as such are age ncies for the formulation of
Public Opinion.
• Political Parties: Political parties are the agents of political education.
These provide all information to the people re garding the activities,
successes, failures, omissions, and errors of the gove rnment. Each
political party tries to create a public opinion in its favour. It organise s
meetings, agitations, demonstrations, processions and movements for
highlighting the issues of public importance. All these activities play a
role in the formulation of public opinion. Political Parties act as
important, useful and active agencies for interest articulation interest
aggre gation and political communication. These play a major role in
the formulation of public opinion.
• Radio, T.V., and Internet: In this age of information revolution Radio,
T.V. and the Internet contribute significantly to the formulation of
public opinion. Radio and T.V. talks and debates act as motivating
factors for the formulation of public opinion. These act as agencies of
political education. The use of these during elections acts as a means

for making and changing public opinion.
• Educational Institutions: In the educational institutions classroom-
lectures, speeches, meetings and seminars of different kinds are
arranged. The eminent leaders, scholars, and writers participate in these
meetings and assemblies and through the mutual exchange of views
influence the views of the students and teachers.
• Also, the views expressed by the teachers in their classes influence the
students. At times the views thus expressed become the part and parcel
of the thinking of the students. Also, the syllabi meant for teaching in
educational institutions are prepared with some specific objectives. All
this helps in the formulation of public opinion.
• Religious Institutions: Man’s political views are also influenced by his
religious views. In India, especially many political parties are based on
religion. Religious congre gations in India always have a political face.
Under the cloak of religion, political views are expressed and spread.
The people ‘faithfully’ follow these views and in this way, public
opinion ge ts formulated.
Types of Executive
1. Nominal/Titular and Real Executives:
The difference between the nominal/titular and real executives is made only
in a parliamentary system of government. In it, the head of state, the
President or the Monarch, is the nominal executive and the Council of
Ministers headed by the Prime Minister is the real executive. All the powers
are legally the powers of the nominal executive but in practice these are
exercised by the real executive.
The nominal executive is not responsible for its actions as these are
performed in its name by the real executive. The real executive is responsible
for all the actions of the nominal executive. The nominal executive is the
ceremonial and dignified part of the executive, whereas the real executive is
its powerful part.
2. Hereditary and Elected Executives:

When the executive assumes office by the law of hereditary succession, it is
called the hereditary executive. When the executive is directly or indirectly
elected by the people for a fixed period or even for life, it is called the elected
executive. In Britain, Japan and Malaysia there are hereditary chief
executives. In India, USA, Germany and many other states there are elected
chief executives.
3. Single and Plural Executives:
When all the executive powers are in the hands of a single functionary/leader,
it is called a single executive. In India, Britain, USA, Australia, France and
many other states there are single executives. In India, all the executive
powers are with the President of India. Likewise under the US Constitution,
the executive powers are with the President of the United States of America.
When the executive powers are vested with a group of persons or in a
committee/council/commission and these are collectively exercised by all the
members of this commission/council, the executive is called the Plural
Executive. As for example, in Switzerland all the executive powers have been
given to the Federal Council which consists of seven members. All the
members collectively exercise all the executive powers.
4. Parliamentary and Presidential Executives:
The distinction between the parliamentary and presidential executives is
made on the basis of relationship between the legislature and executive.
In Parliamentary Executive there is:
(i) A close relationship between legislature and executive and members of the
executive are also members of the legislature,
(ii) The members of political executive is individually and collectively
responsible before the legislature,
(iii) The tenure of the political executive is not fixed as it can be at any time
removed by the legislature, and
(iv) The legislative can be dissolved by the executive.
In a Presidential Executive, there is:
(i) Separation of powers between the executive and the legislature;
(ii) The membership of the two organs is incompatible i.e. member of one
cannot be a member of the other;
(iii) The executive is not responsible to the legislature; and
(iv) Neither can dissolve nor remove the other.
The parliamentary executives are functioning in India, U.K., Canada, New
Zealand, Australia and several other states. In the United States of America,
the executive is presidential. In France there is a mixture of these two forms
of Executive.
PAPER III
SOCIOLOGY – II
1)(a)Write down the ownership pattern in Pre – British India.
Introduction :
Before British rule there was no formal individual ownership of land in India.
However, during the two centuries of British rule (1757–1947), India’s
traditional land ownership and land use patterns were changed with the
introduction of the concept of “private property”.
Land ownership systems
Various land ownership and transfer systems were introduced by the British:
The ‘zamindari’ system prevailed in most of northern India whereby feudal
lords (zamidars) became owners of large tracts of land. They had to pay fixed
revenue payments to the government and so peasants became tenant farmers
and had to pay rent on the land they farmed.The ‘ryotwari’ system was
followed in south and west parts of India. Individual cultivators (ryots or
raiyats) were proprietors of land against revenue payments. They had rights
to sub-let, mortgage and transfer land.The ‘mahalwari system’ was a third
system whereby entire villages had to pay revenue, with farmers contributing
their share in proportion to their holdings.The Indian Forest Act was passed
in 1920, making all forest land government-owned. This de-legitimised the
traditional community ownership systems in adivasi (tribal) societies.
Land distribution under these systems became extremely unequal - rural
society was polarised: landlords and rich peasants versus tenants and
agricultural labourers. By the time of Independence in 1947, about 40% of
India’s rural population was working as landless agricultural labour.
A Competing Vision: The Raiyatwari System
Because the Company was perennially cash-strapped, and the Permanent
Settlement’s taxes were fixed in perpetuity, they were set at a very high level
(Islam 1979, p. 25). Defaults by zamindars were common in the early years
and, facing severe pressure from zamindars, peasants deserted in some
regions (Chowdhury-Zilly 1982, chapter 5). Far from becoming progressive
capitalist farmers, many zamindars simply rented their lands to others, who in
turn sub-let it, creating a chain of intermediaries between the zamindar and
the final cultivator, a phenomenon historians have called “sub-infeudation.” 2
The Permanent Settlement was also criticized for leaving tenants unprotected
from rent increases and eviction, at the mercy of zamindars.
Zamindar-Tenant Relations in Bengal
The Permanent Settlement had, to put it mildly, left a great deal of unfinished
business. There were three major issues to be settled: (i) What level of
coercion could the landlord use on tenants?, (ii) How much freedom did he
have to raise rents?, and (iii) Under what conditions could he evict a tenant?
The Proclamation of 1793 paid lip-service to tenant security and protection
from arbitrary rent increases. The Company did not have the administrative
capacity to intervene at that level of detail, and in any case tax collection was
the priority. But zamindars could pay taxes only if they extract rents from
tenants. Corporal punishment and jailing of defaulting tenants was common
in pre-colonial Bengal (Mclane, 1977, p. 24). In the regulations of 1793 the
Company took away these rights (Islam, 1979, p. 15). But zamindars
complained that that while the courts were strict with them, they were being
disempowered vis-à-vis their tenants, and were struggling to collect rents. In
response, in 1795, and especially the notorious Regulation VII of 1799, the
pendulum swung towards the zamindars: the key concession was the freedom
to use physical coercion on their own account, without the permission of a
court. Further complaints, this time from the tenants, led them to receive, in
Regulation V of 1812, some protection from asset seizure by the zamindar,
but other provisions had a loophole that facilitated tenant eviction.5 Thus, up
to the early 19th century the colonial state primarily regulated zamindar-
tenant relations to attain its fiscal objectives.
Raiyatwari in the Bombay
Deccan After a series of conflicts with the major western Indian power, the
Marathas, the British finally took control of the Bombay Deccan in 1818.
Again, a key issue was the collection of land taxes. In the Marathas’ system,
a powerful official, the “mamlatdar” was responsible for collection of land
taxes, and also had judicial and police functions (Kumar, 1968, pp. 14-15).
The mamlatdar negotiated the land tax with the head of the village. The norm
was for the tax to be assigned to the village as a whole, with its allocation
across families to be decided internally; efforts to increase revenue by
allocating taxes to individual peasants, which Madhav Rao Peshwa tried to
do after 1760, had been successfully resisted.
Direct Restrictions on Land Transfer
A similar controversy arose in the Punjab, with the additional twist that, in
western Punjab, moneylenders tended to be of Hindu trading castes and the
peasants were Muslim.11 A particularly alarmist take on the problem of land
alienation was presented by Septimus Thorburn (1885, p. 1; see footnote 9), a
British official whose 1885 book entitled Mussulmans and Moneylenders in
the Punjab laid out its central thesis in its first two lines: The Punjab is an
agricultural province, and land of peasant proprietors, a large and annually
increasing proportion of whom are sinking into the position of serfs to the
moneylenders. The gradual transfer of ownership of the soil from its natural
lords – the cultivators – to astute but uninfluential Hindu traders and bankers,
is directly due to a system of law and administration created by ourselves,
which, unless remedied in time, must eventually imperil the stability of our
hold on the country.
Conclusion :
The problem of land ownership at present cannot be resolved without
understanding the land ownership structure of the past. The past plays an
important role in shaping our perceptions and ordering our priorites.
Naturally, the solutions we find for the contemporary crisis are affected by
our past. Hence, it is important to see how our ancestors understood land
ownership.
There is a general consensus among experts that the question of land
ownership came into existence in the post-vedic era because during the Rig
vedic era, the Aryans were pastorals and cattle was the main index of wealth.
Land ownership was not prevalent at that time. In the post-vedic era, due to
use of iron implements in agriculture, people started staying in one place. We
find reference to land ownership in the post-vedic book Aitareya Brahman in
which it is written that when Vishwakarman Bhuvan donated land to the
purohits for performing yagna, Prithvi protested. This suggests that it was not
possible to donate land without the consent of the community. In other

words, land ownership was based on community and there was no concept of
individual ownership of land.
1)(b)What are the nature of village economy during this time.
Introduction to Indian Economy during Pre-British Period:
During the pre-British period, i.e. during the mid-eighteenth century, the
condition of Indian economy was not at all satisfactory. Just after the death of
Aurangzeb in 1707, the central power at Delhi was so weak that the situation
had led to disintegration and gradual downfall of deep rooted Mughal
Empire.
During 1750, the Indian economy was passing through recurrence of crisis
and disorders because by this time the central power at Delhi was either
weakened or disappeared.
The writings of Dr. Francis Bukanon, Charles Metacalfe and Prof. Gadgil
made available sufficient information about the conditions of Indian economy
during the pre-British period.
Indian economy, during the pre-British period, consisted of backward,
isolated and self sustaining villages on the one hand and on the other hand,
there were number of towns which were the seats of administration,
pilgrimage, commerce and handicrafts.
During this period, the mode of transport and communication of India were
totally backward, underdeveloped and insufficient. Under such a situation,
the size of market was also very small.
Condition of Indian Villages and Village Communities during Pre-
British Period:
During the pre-British period, the village community was composed of
different groups based on simple division of labour. There were farmers who
cultivated land and tended cattle. Other groups of people were weavers,
goldsmith, potters, washermen, carpenters, cobblers, oil pressers, barber-
surgeons etc.
All the above mentioned occupations were hereditary. These various groups
of people were getting their remuneration in terms of crops during the
harvesting period against the services rendered by them.
These Indian villages were functioning independently as most of food articles
and raw materials produced within the villages were either consumed or
purchased by the village communities itself. Agricultural and handicraft
industry were interdependent and thus the village republics were able to
function independently.
Indian villages were almost self-sufficient in respect of daily necessities
excepting commodities like salt, spices, fine cloth, luxury and semi-luxury
goods.
In this connection, Sir Charles Metacalfe wrote, “The village communities
are little republics having nearly everything they want within themselves, and
almost independent of foreign relations. They seem to last where nothing
lasts. This union of the village communities each one forming a separate little
state by itself…………………… is in a high degree conducive to their
happiness, and to the enjoyment of a great portion of freedom and
independence”.
Thus during the pre-British period, Indian villages were mostly
consisting of three distinct classes:
(a) the agriculturists,
(b) the village artisans and menials and
(c) the village officials.
There were again two types of agriculturists—the land owning and the
tenants.
The village community had enjoyed a simple form of self government. The
headman, the watchman, the accountant, the preacher, the school teacher etc.
were all village officers. Thus Indian villages during those days were
working as a complete administrative and economic unit.
1)(c)Mention the different causes of the break down of self sufficiency of

Traditional Indian Village.
Causes for a breakdown of pre-British Indian self-sufficient villages:
India in the pre-colonial period had a stable economy consisted of isolated
and self-sustaining villages on the one hand, and towns, which were the seats
of administration, pilgrimage, commerce and handicrafts, on the other, these
were some of the causes for breakdown of pre-British Indian self-sufficient
villages.
i) Introduction to Indian Economy during Pre-British Period: During
the pre-British period, i.e. during the mid-eighteenth century, the condition of
Indian economy was not at all satisfactory. Just after the death of Aurangzeb
in 1707, the central power at Delhi was so weak that the situation had led to
disintegration and gradual downfall of deep rooted Mughal Empire.
ii) Condition of Indian Villages and Village Communities during Pre-
British Period: During the pre-British period, the village community was
composed of different groups based on simple division of labour. There were
farmers who cultivated land and tended cattle. Other groups of people were
weavers, goldsmith, potters, washer-men, carpenters, cobblers, oil pressers,
barber-surgeons etc.
iii) Condition of Agriculture during the Pre-British Period: During
the pre-British period, i.e., during the mid-eighteenth century, the condition
of Indian agriculture was not at all satisfactory. During those days,
agriculture was the main source of livelihood in India.
iv) Prices and Wages during the Pre-British Period: During the pre-
British period, the prices of food-grains used to fluctuate widely between
different places. Markets for most of the commodities were very much
restricted to local areas in the absence of adequate means of transport and
communications.
v) The Structure and the Conditions of Towns during the Pre-
British Period: During the pre-British period, the major portion of the total
population of India was living in rural areas.
vi) Industries and Urban Handicrafts during the Pre-British Period

in India: Although agriculture had dominated the Indian economy during the
pre-British period yet some Indian industries, producing certain special
products, enjoyed worldwide reputation.
vii) Conditions of Transport and Trade during the Pre-British
Period: During the pre-British period, there were no proper transportation
systems in India. In the absence of pucca roads, different villages of India
were connected with dusty tracks.
2)(a)India is a land of Unity in Diversity – Explain.
Introduction
As we all know India is a country of unity in diversity. The mountain ranges,
river-irrigated areas, rivers, and streams, forest, and desert all have beautified
India with their outstanding diversity amongst people various races, castes,
creed, religion, and languages each state and region has its uniqueness
International local travellers or visitors love this variety colours, culture, and
the climate, etc. Dance & music, colourful festivals and beautiful handiworks
a spell on the visitors both National and international. Beaches of Goa,
backwaters of Kerala, and snow-clad mountains of Himachal, and sands, &
lakes of Rajasthan, world culture sights of Delhi etc are the symbol of the
diversity of our nation. This colourful variety of a country makes our country
a major attraction of tourists that is beneficial for the Economy, and
prosperity of the country.
Meaning of unity in diversity
The term unity in diversity relates to the state of togetherness or integrity
despite the presence of infinite diversity. Unity in diversity is based on the
concept where the individual has variations in physical qualities, skin colour,
castes, creed, cultural and religious traditions, etc. are not seen as a dispute.
Rather, these differences are viewed upon as varieties that improve the
society and the nation as a whole.
In India, the national unions only can be the establishment of a strong, unified
and prosperous Indian, usually in the days of extremism and terrorism.
Mahatma Gandhi sacrificed his life for communal unity. Though, there are
different communities like Bengalis, Gujaratis, Punjabis, Maharashtrians,
Tamilians, etc. the facts remain that despite divisions and differences, caste
or creed, we have lived together for thousands of years. Though, there are
differences between the Hindu and the Muslim communities concerning their
cultures, ideology, and rituals. They live together and have a deep-rooted
respect for each other. The Hindus send greetings to their Muslim friends at
the time of their Muslim festivals such as Eid, Muharram, etc. likewise, the
Muslims also send wishes or greetings to their Hindu friends at the time of
Hindu festivals such as Diwali, Durga puja, etc. this describes the majority of
unity among the Hindus and the Muslims in India.
Origin of unity in diversity
The term unity of diversity signifies the unity between people with different
cultural, religious faiths, social status and other demographic variations. This
expression has its organizations, since ancient times, it is used by various
political and social assemblies to show unity among the individuals or
societies. This is an ancient expression that was earlier used by some
societies in North America and China, around 500 BC. Unity in India is the
best model of unity in diversity because people living with various religions
and cultures follow the same laws as laid down by the Constitution of India.
Importance of unity in diversity
Unity in diversity is very much important for a country for:
National Integration
Unity in diversity is very essential for a country because it is a very simple
task to divide people with different views and ideas. If there is a unity
between people despite their variations and it is very difficult to disintegrate
the nation. The unity among the citizens of the country plays a great role in
maintaining peace and prosperity in the nation.
Development and growth
Unity in diversity plays a vital role in the growth of the country because the
united country will always move on the path of development. It will face
some internal issues than a country that is socially weak and distributed on
different terms.
Global recognition
A country that is assorted, but still it is united, not only joins value to the
nation but is also appreciated on international platforms. It sets an example
for all nations by highlighting the values and morals of citizens who respect
and encourage each other despite their different backgrounds and cultures.
Peaceful co-existence
Diversity can also be the reason for the origin of internal disputes but unity in
diversity plays a big role in maintaining peaceful co-existence with people
with different cultures and backgrounds.
Advantages of Unity in Diversity
• Unity in diversity increases the morale of individuals within the
workplace, organization and community.
• It helps to expand collaboration, relationships, interactions between
people, thereby improving performance, quality of work,
productivity and lifestyle.
• This enables communication to thrive even under the most trying
circumstances.
• Keep people removed from social ills and it helps to manage
conflicts more easily.
• It promotes healthy human relationships and protects the equal rights
of all people.
• Unity in diversity provides a source of tourism for India. People
from all walks of life, cultures, religions, and clothing are attracted
to many visitors and tourists from all over the world.
• This, though distinctly different from one another, results in the
practice of national unity among the peoples of the world.
• It strengthens and enhances the rich heritage of the country and
moreover as a cultural heritage of India.
• It helps to fill the agricultural sector with biodiversity as well as
economic expectations.
• A source of skilled and developing professionals in various parts of
the country.
Unity in diversity in ancient India

Ancient Indian history is exciting because many races and tribes mingled in
early India. The pre-Aryans, the Indo-Aryans, the Greek, the Scythians, the
Hunas, the Turks, and many others made their homes in India. Every ethnic
group gave its mite to the development of the Indian social system, art and
architecture, language, and literate. All these peoples and their cultural
features blended so inseparably that they can be recognised in their original
form.
An incredible feature of ancient Indian culture has been the combining of
cultural components from the north to south, and the east to west. The Aryan
factors are equalised with the Vedic and puranic culture of the north and pre-
Aryan with the Dravidian and Tamil culture of the south.’
The significance of the past to the present
Recent research in India sees special importance in the context of the
problems we are currently facing. Some people are complaining about the
restoration of ancient culture and civilization, and a large number are being
swayed by what they consider to be India’s past glory. This is in contrast to
the concern for the preservation of ancient artistic and architectural treasures.
What they want to bring back is the old way of society and culture. This
requires a clear and accurate understanding of the past. There is no doubt that
the ancient Indians made great strides in various fields, but this advancement
alone will not enable us to compete with the achievements of modern science
and technology. We cannot ignore the fact that the ancient Indian society was
marked by gross social injustice.
Law orders, especially Shudras and untouchable ones were also included in
the paralysis which is alarming to the modern mind. Likewise, law and
culture discriminate against women based on race. Restoration of the old way
of life will naturally regenerate and strengthen all these inequalities. The
success of the ancients in increasing the complexity presented by nature and
human resources can build our hope and confidence in the future but any
attempt to restore the
Factors that influence to unity in diversity
Geographical unity
India may not be a mixed by itself but from times ancient India has been
considered as-one country. The only name Bharatvarsha has granted to this
country emphasis this unity. According to the authors of ‘Advance History of
India’, the word and the concept of unity mean, “have always existed in the
minds of theologians, political philosophers, and poets who spoke of the
thousands of yojanas (leagues) of the land that stretches from the Himalayas
to the sea as the customary field of a single universal emperor.”
Racial unity
There is no doubt that the people of India belong to distinctive races but they
are so much engaged in the Hindu fold that they have completely lost their
separate reality. It is a recognised fact that the people of India, to whichever
race or area they might belong, are known as Indian or Hindustani. This is
clear evidence of the underlying racial unity of the people.
Linguistic unity
Although India maintains a variety of language, In the 3rd century B.C. the
Prakrit was accepted as the common language of the people. According to Dr
Ray Chaudhri, “Prakrit was the one only language enough to bring the
information of a royal minister to the bars of his enduring subject during this
huge kingdom.” After Prakrit, Sanskrit became the common language of the
masses. Another local language which subsequently realised influence began
out of Sanskrit. Some of the leading Indian languages which owe their rise to
Sanskrit include Hindi, Gujarati, Telugu and Tamil. Sanskrit followed as the
lingua franca throughout ancient times.
Religious and social Unity
In the religious sphere and in spite of diversity, the type of unity has grown
among the various religious denominations in that country. India was
primarily a Hindu country and its culture was based on the Varnashrama
Dharma Vya-vastha, e.g. Caste, Ashrams and Dharma.
Political unity
In the political arena, national unity has been one of the greatest goals which
most of the Indian rulers appreciated. Undoubtedly, India was divided into
various small institutions but the powerful rulers were always eager to bring
all these territories under their control. They were determined to take the title
of Chakravarti. According to Kautilya, the base of the Chakravarti kings was
extended from the Himalayas to the sea. In other words, according to
Kautilya, the king was regarded as Charravati only when he succeeded in
increasing his power or supremacy over the whole country. Ordinarily, such
titles were considered by the king after the due completion of rituals and
sacrifices.
The main reasons behind the unity in diversity in India
India has seen the cultural history of experiments creating new forms, the
diversity of which can be felt in terms of the number of cultural, religious,
linguistic, functional units and political parties. These differences can easily
be attributed simply to previous years of migration, exchange, initiation and
comparison and the separation of natural boundaries. The transition period
and in the current situation with a population of about 1.33 million. India
introduces a border of different cultures and traditions, we see the rise of
faith, from prehistoric times to the Vedic period. Although it was present at
the adoption of this form, it differed from region to region, and sometimes
when the Aryans arrived, different tribal societies had different values and
different metals of the same values giving the same heritage for several
generations.
How our Indian Constitution shows unity in diversity in India
A constitution is an official document with specialized legal expertise, which
sets out the framework and core functions of the organs of state, and sets out
the principles that govern those functions. Like all other constitutions, the
constitution of India also seeks to establish the basic structures of government
and administration, undermines its structure, composition, powers and
functions, defines intergovernmental relations, and regulates relations
between citizens and the state. It was in 1934 that the idea of a meeting in
India was first conveyed by M.N.Roy.
Conclusion
Unity in diversity instructs us that although we are from diverse caste, creed
or race, these variations cannot keep us apart and we are eternally united for
the improvement of our nation. This is the most uncommon event which is
exposed in our country. It not only performs the nation united and
strengthened but it also holds us alive in the old eras, the belief of co-
existence with love, peace, and respect. The distinction in culture, traditions,
festivals, music and dance makes the country energetic and makes an
unbelievable country in the world.
2)(b)Mention different factor which are endangering unity in India
today.
In the words of A.R. Desai,
“India presents a spectacle of Museum of tongues”.
The diversity in India is unique. Being a large country with large population,
India presents endless varieties of physical features and cultural patterns. In
short, India is “the epitome of the world.” The vast population is composed of
people having diverse creeds, customs and colors. Economic development,
level of education and political culture of the people in various social
segments differ from region to region.
Notwithstanding the various diversities evinced in India, there are the bonds
of unity which are located in a certain underlying uniformity of life as well as
in certain mechanisms of integration. Unity amidst diversity is visualized in
the geo-political sphere; tradition of accommodation, emotional bond etc.
India’s political unity is an offshoot of the religious and cultural unity. The
First bond of unity of India is found in its geo-political integration.
Politically, India is now a sovereign State. Every part of it is governed by the
same Constitution and same Parliament. We share the same political culture
marked by the norms of democracy, secularism and socialism.
Quite in line with the traditional bonds of unity, the Indian State in post-
Independence era has rightly opted for a composite culture model of national
unity rather than a uniform culture model. The composite culture model
provides for the preservation and plurality of cultures within the frame work
of an integrated nation. Hence, the significance of our choice of the norm of
secularism, implying equal regard for all religions, as our policy of national
integration.
The account of the unity of India should not be taken to mean that we have
always had a smooth sailing in matters of national unity, with no incidents of
caste, communal or religious riots. Nor should it be taken to mean that the
divisive and secessionist tendencies have been altogether absent.
All these factors are discussed below:
1. Diversity of Constituents:
India is a heterogeneous society. It is made of a number of diverse groups.
The first potential threat to the Indian nation state lies in this plurality. The
Indian society was and is divided in terms of religion, caste, language and
ethnic origin.
2. Regionalism and Cultural Identities:
Regionalism is also a threat to national integration. Some of the social
elements having their separate cultural identity want to preserve it even at a
political level and for this purpose some of these segments want further
reorganization of the states.’
3. Casteism:
Casteism has always played a dirty role in matters of politics and reservation
policy and has created a wide gulf between different segments of society.
Unfortunately, the caste system has been recognized by the framers of the
Constitution by providing a protective discrimination to Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes. Though the reservation was made for a limited period,
it is being extended from time to time. The reservation of seats in the
educational institutions and jobs on the caste basis has strengthened the caste
feeling and resulted in the possibilities of new types of inequalities and caste
conflict.
4. Linguism:
Due to linguistic and regional loyalties the national feeling gradually erodes.
Linguistic tensions are manifested in the borders which are bilingual. For
example, Goans are divided on the basis of Konkani and Marathi Languages.
There is also conflict between Marathi and Kannada-speaking people in
Belgaum.
Language has become, especially since Independence, a powerful source of
political articulation. For instance in the South, particularly in Tamil Nadu,
language sentiments have been propagated among the people for getting
power within State politics.
5. Communalism:
Broadly defined, communalism refers to the tendency of any socio-religious
group to maximize its economic, political and social strength at the cost of
other groups. This tendency runs counter to the notion of the secular nation –
state that India purports to be. Secularism in the Indian context is defined as
the peaceful co-existence of all religions without State patronage to any of
them.
5. Communalism:
Broadly defined, communalism refers to the tendency of any socio-religious
group to maximize its economic, political and social strength at the cost of
other groups. This tendency runs counter to the notion of the secular nation –
state that India purports to be. Secularism in the Indian context is defined as
the peaceful co-existence of all religions without State patronage to any of
them.
7. Regional Disparities:
The unequal development of different regions of India has negatively
affected the character of national integration. The unequal development has
become the major cause of many social movements after the independence.
For instance, the Jharkhand movements which involved tribal groups from
Bihar, M.P. Bengal and Orissa stresses the backwardness of the region
among other issues. While demanding a separate State, people, involved in
this movement argue that the rich natural resources of the area have been
drained out to benefit others.
8. Ethnonationality and Ethnic Conflicts:
Ethnonationalism and ethnic conflict has hindered national integration.
Whereas the modern concept of nationalism is closely linked with the
concept of nation-state, scholars have described another prevailing notion of
nationalism such as religious nationalism, ethnonationalism etc. Although
nationhood is denied to the Nagas, the Nagas understand themselves as
nation in the sense of ethnonationality. The concept of “ethnonationalsim”
best defines the self-understanding of the ethnic groups in Northeast India in

the various forms of their struggle for identity.
9. Tribal Identity:
To a member of the Indian national mainstream, a Khasi, a Naga or Mizo are
tribals. The pejorative term “tribal” carries a denotation of primitivity and
inferiority of the people for whom the name is applied.
10. Role of Political Parties:
The regional political parties play a dirty role in exploiting the regional
feelings of the people. Regional political parties formed on the basis of
linguism at times form the Government. The States like Tamil Nadu, Andhra
Pradesh, Mizoram, Jammu & Kashmir may be cited as examples in this
regard. It has been experienced that such political parties in power often
complicate the Centre-State relationship.
3)(a)Define Traditional Joint Family.
Joint family, family in which members of a unilineal descent group (a group
in which descent through either the female or the male line is emphasized)
live together with their spouses and offspring in one homestead and under the
authority of one of the members. The joint family is an extension of
the nuclear family (parents and dependent children), and it typically grows
when children of one sex do not leave their parents’ home at marriage but
bring their spouses to live with them. Thus, a patrilineal joint family might
consist of an older man and his wife, his sons and unmarried daughters, his
sons’ wives and children, and so forth. For a man in the middle generation,
belonging to a joint family means joining his conjugal family to his family of
orientation (i.e., into which he was born).
The joint family is distinguished from the extended family (q.v.) only in that
members of the latter live in separate compounds. Members of a joint family
share all the tasks of food gathering, trade, food preparation, and child
rearing; and at times the social organization is so cohesive that the discrete
nuclear families are barely visible in the daily chores, with children
addressing all the adult women as “mother.”
Some Definitions of Joint Family are the following:

(i) “ A joint family is a group of people who generally live under one roof,
who eat food cooked at one hearth, who hold property in common and who
participate in common worship and are related to each other as some
particular type of kindred.” —Karve
(ii) “We call that household a joint family which has greater generation depth
than individual family and the members of which are related to one another
by property, income and mutual rights and obligations.” —I.P. Desai
(iii) “The joint family consists of persons having a common male ancestor,
female offspring not yet married, and women brought into the group by
marriage. All of these persons might live in a common household or in
several households near to one another. In any case, so long as the joint
family holds together, its members are expected to contribute to the support
of the whole and to receive from it a share of the total product.” —Davis
(iv) “In a joint family not only parents and children, brothers and step-
brothers live on the common property, but it may sometime include
ascendants and collaterals up to many generations.” —Jolly
(v) “The Hindu joint family is a group constituted of known ancestors and
adopted sons and relatives related to these sons through marriage.” —Henry
Maine
3)(b)Discuss the causes behind the breakdown traditional joint family
system.
Joint family system emerged pre-eminently to cater to certain felt needs of
individuals. But consequent upon the forces of industrialization, urbanization
and modernization, it is gradually disintegrating.
When we say that the joint family is disintegrating, we do not mean its
disappearance. We only mean a decrease in the number of joint households.
The causes leading to the disintegration of the joint family in the Indian
context are as follows:
1. Industrialization:
So far as rural economic system was concerned, the joint family was a unit of
both production and consumption. But with the arrival of industrial economy,
the family no longer functions as a unit of production. On the contrary, it has
become essentially a unit of consumption.
2. Urbanization:
Urbanization has also led to the weakening of the joint family system in
India. The amenities of urban life in the form of better transport and
communication, better employment opportunities, better educational
facilities, and developed health care facilities attract the ruralites to the towns
and cities. Naturally there is a rural to urban type of migration.
3. Modern education:
The role of modern education in bringing about the disintegration of the joint
family is no less significant. Modern education inspires individualism among
the people. Further, educated men and women in the countryside are forced
to leave their families in search of suitable jobs.
4. Enlightenment of women:
Enlightenment of women is also responsible for the disintegration of the joint
family. The young educated women, being fully conscious of their new rights
and status in society, are now not prepared to submit themselves meekly to
their mothers-in-law.
5. Influence of western culture:
Western culture has fostered in young men and women individualistic
tendencies with the result that they do not want their fortunes to be tied down
forever with those of the joint family. B.B. Saha rightly observes that
individualism as a gift of western culture has given rise to a separatist
tendency among them. Furthermore, influenced by the western values such as
rationalism, equality, freedom etc, they do not like to remain submissive
under the tight grip of the joint family. The end result is the disintegration of
the joint family system.
6. Over-Population:
In rural India, agriculture is the major occupation of the ruralites. Land being
fixed, agriculture fails to provide employment to the ever-increasing number
of people depending upon it. Rapid growth of population leads to an

imbalance of man and land equation. People are forced to go to towns and
cities in search of employment. This has resulted in the disintegration of joint
family.
7. Developed means of transport and communication:
In the past, there was hardly any appreciable development in the field of
transport and communication. Hence the level of mobility was low. But today
as a result of developed means of transport and communication, there is
large-scale mobility. People move to different places in order to avail better
employment opportunities. This leads to the breaking up of joint families.
8. Change in marriage system:
Change in marriage system has its adverse impact on the continuance of the
joint family system. Factors like solemnization of marriage at the late age,
restricted role of the head of the family in mate selection, freedom enjoyed by
young men and women in matrimonial affairs, perception of marriage by
most of the people as a social ceremony rather than a religious sacrament etc.
have weakened joint family ties.
9. Problem of accommodation:
The problem of accommodation has a lion’s share in the disintegration of the
joint family system. This problem is more pronounced in big cities and
metropolis. Members of a joint family find it extremely difficult to live
together despite their desire and willingness to do so.
10. Social legislation:
Legislation has had a devastating effect on the institution of joint family in
India. The Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act of 1937, which recognised
the wife as the surviving personality of the dead coparcener with all his rights
in the property, has obviated the theory of survivorship as a guiding principle
of joint family property.
4)(a)Who are Schedule Caste ?

Scheduled castes are sub-communities within the framework of the Hindu
caste system who have historically faced deprivation, oppression, and
extreme social isolation in India on account of their perceived ‘low status’.
Only marginalised Hindu communities can be deemed Scheduled Castes in
India, according to The Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950.
Scheduled caste communities were considered avarna, or outside the existing
varna system. They were considered to be a section of people in Hindu
society who are not from the four major varnas, i.e., Brahmin, Kshatriya,
Vaishya, and Shudra.
Scheduled castes are those castes/races in the country that suffer from
extreme social, educational and economic backwardness arising out of age-
old practice of untouchability and certain others on account of lack of
infrastructure facilities and geographical isolation, and who need special
consideration for safeguarding their interests and for their accelerated socio-
economic development. These communities were notified as Scheduled
Castes as per provisions contained in Clause 1 of Article 341 of the
Constitution.
Scheduled castes are sub-communities within the framework of the Hindu
caste system who have historically faced deprivation, oppression, and
extreme social isolation in India on account of their perceived ‘low status’.
Only marginalised Hindu communities can be deemed Scheduled Castes in
India, according to The Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950.
Those who belonged to one of the four major varnas are called Savarna. The
Hindu four-tier caste system, or varna system, forced these communities into
work that predominantly involved sanitation, disposal of animal carcasses,
cleaning of excreta, and other tasks that involved contact with “unclean”
materials. The communities adapted the name Dalit, or Harijan, which
meant ‘children of god.’ The avarna communities were also referred to as
“Untouchables”. They were prohibited from drinking water from shared
water sources, living in or using areas frequented by “higher castes,” and
faced social and economic isolation, often being denied rights and privileges
that many born into savarna castes consider “fundamental rights”.
4)(b) Discuss the nature of problem faced by Scheduled Caste by Indian
Today.
Traditionally Scheduled Castes or untouchables were suffering from several
disabilities or problems. These problems are discussed below.
1. Social Problem:
These problems pertained to the concept of purity and pollution. The
untouchables were given a very low position in the society.
The high-caste Hindus maintained a social distance from them. They were
denied many basic amenities of life which were accorded to the high-caste
Hindus. They were dependent on the tradition of Hindus for items of food
and drink.
2. Religious Problems:
These pertained to the denial of the right of entering temples which were
exclusively served by the high-caste Brahmins. The untouchables were
neither allowed to enter the temples nor served by the Brahmins. They had no
right to worship the Gods and Goddesses in the temple.
3. Economic Problems:
The untouchables were not free to choose any occupation according to their
own ability they had to clean the streets, remove dead cattle and to undertake
heavy agricultural work. Mostly they were landless labourers. They worked
in the fields of high- caste Hindus as labourers.
4. Public Disabilities:
Harijans had to face many public indignities because they were denied the
right to use the services of public utilities like wells, public transport as well
as educational institutions.
5. Educational Problems:
Traditionally the untouchables were deprived of getting education. They were
not allowed to use public educational institutions. Even today most of the
illiterates are untouchables.
4)(c) Explain the ameliorative measures for Schedule Caste to improve

their conditions.
Being dissatisfied with the social status of the SCs, Ambedkar launched a
drive in 1956 for their mass conversion to Buddhism. In 1957, he organised
the political wing of the SCs, known as Republican Party. There have been
many instances of conversion of the SCs to Christianity too. Since after the
conversion, the SCs ceased to be entitled for benefits offered by the
government, the Republican Party launched an agitation in 1964 for the
restoration of these privileges to neo-Buddhist SCs.
Gandhiji had taken up the cause of Harijan welfare in 1924. The uplift of the
Harijans was an important item in the Bardoli programme of constructive
work drawn up in 1922. The Harijan Sevak Sangh was organised in 1932 to
work for the removal of the social disabilities of the Harijans.
The important measures taken are:
(i) Abolition of untouchability,
(ii) Protection from social injustice and various forms of exploitation,
(iii) Throwing open to them religious institutions of public character,
(iv) Removal of restrictions on their access to wells, tanks, shops, restaurants
and roads, etc.
(v) Giving them the right to move freely and acquire property,
(vi) Giving them the right of admission to educational institutions and
receiving grants out of state funds,
(vii) Permitting the state governments to make reservation for them in serv-
ices,
(viii) Giving them special representation in the Lok Sabha and the Vidhan
Sabhas,
(ix) Setting up separate departments and advisory councils to promote their
welfare and safeguard their interests,
(x) Prohibiting forced labour, and
(xi) Making special provision for the administration and control of the
scheduled areas.
The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities)

Act, 1989 has described the following acts as punishable crimes
5)(a)What was the position of Woman during British Rule.
The status of women, at the dawn of the British rule in India, reached the
lowest level in the society. The wife’s position in the household was in a
sorry state. The rate of literacy was so low that hardly one woman in a
hundred was able to read or write. Evil social practices, dogmatic religious
beliefs, inhuman superstitions and sinister customs caused the maximum
degree of deterioration. Child marriage, enforced widowhood, sati, Devadasi,
purdah, dowry, female infanticide and the practice of polygamy made the
Indian society static.
However, after centuries of social degradation, perpetual depression, terrible
suffering and social falling in the nineteenth century, zealous endeavor was
made by the social reformers for dispelling the social evil and awakening
people against the injustice meted out to the Indian women. Raja Ram Mohan
Ray, Iswar Chandra Vidyasagar and various other social reformers laid stress
on women’s education, prevention of child marriage, removal of polygamy
and remarriage of widows. Public opinion was aroused against the practice of
‘Sati’.
The early twentieth century witnessed the rise of the National Movement
under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi who was in favour of removing all
the disabilities of women. Gandhiji gave a clarion call to women who formed
nearly half the population of India to come out in large numbers in support of
the cause of freedom. Women responded to the call and their mass
participation under Gandhiji’s leadership gave them a sense of equality with
men. Gradually women raised their voice against the age-old suffering at the
hands of the orthodox society.
Women’s movements were launched against the old customs and the women
demanded education and legal reform. Thus during this period, the efforts of
the reformers, national leaders and women’s organisations resulted in a good
deal of social legislations by the British Government. The Child Marriage
Restraint Act was passed in1929. This Act penalized the marriage of girls
below fourteen and boys below eighteen years of age. However, the
government failed to enforce it properly.
Lord William Bentick initiated steps against ‘Sati’. He was supported by Raja
Ram Mohan Ray and Dwarakanath Tagore. ‘Sati’ was legally abolished in
December, 1829. After the abolition of ‘Sati’ the Britisher’s realized the
pitiable conditions of the Hindu widows and enacted the Hindu Widow
Remarriage Act in 1856. The Hindu Woman’s Right to Property Act was
passed in the year 1937. It intended to improve the position of widows in
respect of property.
This Act made the provision that after the death of the husband, his widow
would succeed to his property along with his son. The widow of the pre-
deceased son and the son of the pre-deceased son would also succeed to the
property. The enactment of this Act improved the legal position of the widow
and she became self-sufficient in terms of food and shelter.
Thus during the British regime, with the help of several social legislations the
Indian woman’s position which had taken a chequered course was sought to
be balanced. The National Movement and various women’s movements
paved the way for their liberation from the social evils and religious taboos.
People became conscious of the social disabilities and attempts were made to
dispel all kinds of inequalities.
Sati, infanticide, slavery, child marriage, prohibition of widow remarriage
and lack of women’s rights were some of the social problems which attracted
the attention of the British and social reformers. In the beginning of the
nineteenth century, the practice of sati was confined to Hooghly, Nadia and
Burdwan districts of Bengal, Ghazipur of Uttar Pradesh and Shahabad of
Bihar. It was also found in other parts of India, but only as a rare
phenomenon.
In southern India, it was practised in Ganjam, Masulipatnam and Tanjore
districts. In Rajasthan, Punjab and Kashmir, the practice was confined mainly
to women of high castes. In Delhi, Charles Metcalfe stopped the practice.
Aligarh and Agra seldom had occurrences of sati.
The British had shown interest in the abolition of sati in 1813. The persuasive
propaganda techniques failed to prevent the occurrence of the practice. The
police also did not prove effective. Raja Ram Mohan Roy took it upon
himself to eradicate this social evil.
He announced that the rite of sati was not a part of the Shastras. It was not an
integral part of the Hindu religion. A number of religious leaders opposed
Ram Mohan Roy’s crusade against sati. Through the cooperation of the
princes, it was virtually stopped in the princely states. But it was not made an
illegal act for a long time.
Even today, occurrences of sati are reported from various parts of the
country. And in most of the cases, the police have either reached late or
remained ineffective. In Jhunjhunu town of Rajasthan, a huge temple of sati –
known as Rani Sati Mandir – is a place of worship by all castes and
communities. Nearly, two decades ago, in Sikar district of Rajasthan, a young
Rajput woman committed self-emolation. This particular sati occurrence
invited protests from all over the state and other parts of India.
Female infanticide was found mainly among the Rajputs of Benaras, Gujarat,
Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan and in parts of Punjab and Sind and among
some Sikhs. The institution of female infanticide arose due to (1) the
deplorable position of women in Hindu society, (2) the dowry system, (3)
hypergamy, and (4) the sense of honour and pride. Marriage of a female is
considered compulsory. In 1779, infanticide was declared to be murder by the
Bengal Regulation XXI. In 1804, this was extended to other parts of India.
However, the practice continued in secret till recently, particularly among the
Rajput’s in Rajasthan. Dowry is its main cause.
Child marriage is prevalent even today among the rural people, and among
the urban illiterate and poor. The institution of child marriage is also the
result of hypergamy, dowry, and notion of virginity and chastity. It has
resulted in the problems of overpopulation, poverty, unemployment, ill-
health, dependence upon parents, etc. The first legislation was passed in 1860
under which the minimum age for consummation of marriage in the case of
girls was raised to ten.
In 1891, the age of consent for girls was raised to twelve, and in 1925 to
thirteen for married girls and fourteen for unmarried ones. In 1929, the Child
Marriage Restraint Act (Sharda Bill) was passed. Under this Act, which came
into being in 1930, the minimum age of marriage for a girl was fixed at
fourteen and for a boy at eighteen. According to the Hindu Marriage Act of
1955, the minimum age for a bride is fifteen, and for a bridegroom it is
eighteen.
The legislations have not proved effective in this case. Education, economic
pressures, and migration to towns and cities from rural areas have certainly
contributed to the raising of the age at marriage of both the sexes. However,
child marriage persists unchecked. Many a time, even political leaders of
repute have enacted child marriages of their wards. No stringent actions are
taken for violation of the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955.
5)(b) What steps have been taken during the Post Independent Period to
improve the status of Woman in India.
In the Post-Independence Era the Indian women are free to choose any form
of education and professional training to enable them for a career. They can
aspire to the highest office of the state on the basis of equal opportunity for
all appointments, provided by the Indian Constitution. Adult franchise for
both the sexes has been ensured in the Indian Constitution.
After India gained Independence, the Constitution, makers and the national
leaders not only recognized the unequal social position of women but saw to
it that women would get equal rights with men. The concept of equality has
been enshrined in the Constitution and has been the greatest source of honour
to the women who once constituted the most neglected and subjugated
section of the society. The principles of Hindu social organisation were
formulated by males, who debarred the women from enjoying equal rights in
the social life.
With the spread of women’s education in India and due to the impact of the
West, the Indian women rose against the cruelties of the male. They opposed
polygamy, sought right to divorce, claimed equality in marital right and
demanded restriction on dowry. On account of these demands, several social

legislations were enacted to improve the condition of the Indian women.
The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 classified Hindu Marriages, determined the
age for marriage, provided for monogamy and guardianship of the mother
and permitted the dissolution of marriage under specific circumstances. The
Hindu Succession Act of 1956 made provision for equal rights of the
daughter in the property of the father.
The Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act 1956 allowed Hindu women to
adopt a son or a daughter and to claim maintenance from the husband under
certain circumstances. The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956
provided for the guardianship of the mother over the daughter throughout her
life and in the case of a son, for the first-five years. The position of the Hindu
widow has improved considerably and she now enjoys a respectable position
in the household. Although the widow marriage has been legalized since
long, the Hindu Marriage Act also provides for her right to remarry. A widow
may now adopt either a son or a daughter under the Hindu Adoption and
Guardianship Act, 1956.
Now the Indian women are free to choose any form of education and
professional training to enable them for a career. They can aspire to the
highest office of the state on the basis of equal opportunity for all
appointments, provided by the Indian Constitution. Adult franchise for both
the sexes has been ensured in the Indian Constitution.
Part III of the Constitution guarantees certain rights which have a special
bearing on women. That apart, certain directives towards the emancipation of
women have been contained in part IV of the Constitution. Article 39(d) of
the Indian Constitution ordains that the State should not make any
discrimination on the ground of sex and it should direct its policy towards
securing equal pay for equal work irrespective of sex.
An attempt to control dowry through the mechanism of law was made in
1961 through the Dowry Prohibition Act, but it could not prove effective due
to several inherent weaknesses and loopholes. A strong women’s movement
was made all over the country against the toothless dowry legislation.
As a result, the Act was amended in 1984 by the Dowry Prohibition

(Amendment) Act, 1984. However, even after the enactment of this Act,
some inadequacies were still there. Therefore to make the provisions of the
Dowry prohibition Act more stringent, it was amended again in 1986.
Assessments of dowry deaths and evil of bride burning and efficacy of
protective provisions come under the Criminal law Amendment Acts, 1983
and 1986.
After a long time, the Hindu Married Women’s Right to Separate Residence
and Maintenance Act, 1946 was passed. It enlarged the right of maintenance
of the Hindu wife. In the field of education, changes started towards the end
of the nineteenth century. Swami Vivekananda, Iswar Chandra Vidyasagar
and others gave an impetus to it and the educational status in the post-
Independence era is on the rise.
Demographically speaking, the status of women is low because of a decline
in the female population and decline in the sex ratio since 1901. The female
mortality rate has always been higher in comparison with that of the males. In
the economic sphere, women have come to be at par with their male
counterparts. In the fields of public service, law, medicine, teaching, sports,
film, industry, etc. a number of women have been employed. In the rural
sector, the women constitute quite a sizeable chunk of the work force.
In the political field, too, women enjoy equal status in the post-Independent
India. Mahatma Gandhi had given them a call to join the freedom struggle.
Women got the right to vote in 1932 and were elected to provincial and
central legislatures in 1936. Since then, the Indian women have participated
in active politics and have become M.P., M.L.A, Governor, Chief Minister or
even Prime Minister. Though the statistics show that there were only 28
female M.P.s in the Parliament during 1980-84, it accounted for a higher
percentage than that of the U.S.A. Great Britain, West Germany, France and
Norway. India has also a number of female ministers.
Firstly, Women should be given education. Education will broaden their
outlook and make them aware of their rights, duties and responsibilities in the
society. Women should be encouraged to go in for higher education.
Secondly, women should be encouraged to participate in politics. Seats

should be reserved for women both in the State Assemblies as well as in the
Parliament. Women should independently join politics, so that they can have
a voice in nation building and can help the cause of women in general.
Thirdly, women should work as equal partners with men in all spheres of life.
They should help in building up a progressive and developed society. Women
who work outside their homes are common today.
Fourthly, in a country where women are put on a pedestal and worshipped as
a goddess, crimes against women seem to be on the rise.
Recently, several Acts have been passed to safeguard women. These include
the Dowry prohibition Act, 1961, the Indecent Representation of Women
(Prohibition) Act, 1956, the Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987, the
Suppression of Immoral Traffic Act or SITA, 1956 etc. More legislations are
to be passed and possible loopholes should be blocked as these have far-
reaching implications for women in the country.
6.Short Note
Jajmani System
Meaning of Jajmani System:
Jajmani system is considered as the backbone of rural economy and social
order.
It is a system of traditional occupational obligations. In rural India Jajmani
system is very much linked with caste system.
It has become a part and parcel of social and economic system.
Etymologically, the term Jajman has been derived from the Sanskrit word
Yajman, which means a person who performs a yajna. Thus if some yajna is
to be performed for that the services of some Brahmins are essentially
needed. It was gradually that its use was made common to everyone who
hired services or to whom the services were given.
It could be said that the Jajmani system is a system of distribution whereby
high caste land owning families are provided services and products of various
lower castes such as Khati (Carpenter), Nai (Barber), Kumhars (Potters),

Lobars (Blacksmiths), Dhobi (Washer man), Sweeper (Chuhra) etc.
The servicing castes are called Kamins while the castes served are called
Jajmans. For services rendered the servicing castes are paid in cash or in kind
(grains, fodder, clothes, animal products like milk, butter etc.) Kamin means
who works for some body or services him.
In villages, durable relations obtain mainly between food-producing families
and the families that supply them with goods and services. William H.
Wiser’s study of a village in uttar Pradesh reveals that these relations are
called Jajmani in Hindi. In Maharashtra, they are known as “Balutdarl”.
In Jajmani system, at the centre is the family of agriculturists, the zamindars.
They receive services from the families of occupational castes. One who
receives services is known as Jajman, the patron. The families that provide
services are known as Kamin, Kam Karney waley or Kamgars (workers). In
other parts of India, terms such as Parjan, Pardhan, Balutedar etc. are also
used for the providers of goods and services.
All these words literally refer to the same people, i.e. those who ‘work’ for
others and one may call them clients. The castes, which happen to provide
services to the agriculturists, vary from one village to another. Every caste in
the village does not happen to be a part of Jajmani system. So Jajmani system
can be defined as a patron-client relationship.
Yogendra Singh describes Jajmani system as a system governed by
relationship based on reciprocity in inter-caste relations in villages. Ishwaran
has said, that it is a system in which each caste has a role to play in a
community life as a whole. This role consists of economic, social and moral
functions.
Definition of Jajmani System::
The Jajmani system is a peculiarity of Indian villages.
“A person by whom a Brahmin is hired to perform religious services, hence a
patron, a client”. —Webster’s Dictionary
“The service relations which are governed by a hereditary tenure are called
Jajman-Praja relations”. —N.S. Reddy
Kamins are also known as Praja.
“Under this system each caste group within a village is expected to give
certain standardised services to the families of other castes. Each one works
for certain family or group of families with whom he is hereditary linked.” —
Oscar Lewis
Harold Gould has described the Jajmani system as inter-familial inter-caste
relationship pertaining to the patterning of super- ordinate-subordinate
relations between patrons and suppliers of services. The patrons are the
families of clean castes while the suppers of services are the families of lower
and unclean caste.
The first detailed study of Jajmani tradition in India was made by William H.
Wiser. Both Kamin and Jajman are Integral part of the jajmani system and
thus complementary to each other. The Jajmani system is called “Aya” in
Mysore of South India, according to Ishwaran (1966).
Henty Orenstein has held that the families of village officials or village
servants (for example the watchman) maintain jajmani relations with the
whole village rather than with particular families.
Edmund R. Leach (1960) said, “Jajmani system maintains and regulates the
division of labour and economic interdependence of caste.” William H. Wiser
(1967) said, “Jajmani system serves to maintain the Indian village as a self-
sufficient community.” Harold Gould (1987) said, “Jajmani system
distributes agricultural produce In exchange for menial and craft services.”
A number of studies have been conducted on jajmani system in India. The
important studies code N.S. Reddy’s study on North India in 1955, W.H.
Wiser’s study in 1936, Prof. S.C. Dubey’s study in Hyderabad; D.N.
Majumdar’s study (1958) in Lucknow of U.P., Katheline Cough’s (1955)
study in Tanjore, Darling’s study (1934) In Punjab etc.
Although the Jajmani relationship seems to be between castes, in reality, it is
between particular families belonging to particular castes. It is the
relationship between families that continue to exist over time.
Effect of Industrialization on Indian Society

Industrialization of a country means to include manufacturing industries apart
from agricultural industries to develop the country. A country that is only
based on agriculture cannot develop as much as an industrialized country can.
In fact, both are the pillars that bear the responsibility of improving and
maintaining a stable economy for the country. Though industrialization has
its own disadvantages affecting the environment and health of the people
without proper industrialization, the country remains underdeveloped. It
provides all the necessary elements for strengthening the economy of the
country with its technological progress. Industrialization in India started in
1854 with the first cotton mill in Bombay. Since then India has always
moved forward in its industry setup and thus making it a developing country
from an underdeveloped one.
The economy play a significant role in the growth of every country across the
world. It is the economy that determines and separates the developed country
from the underdeveloped country. The economy of the developed nation
depends mainly on the industrial sector while the underdeveloped countries’
economy mainly depends on the agricultural sector. To revive the economic
status, industrialization plays an instrumental role in bringing the economical
shift in numerous countries across the globe and the same shift occurred with
industrialization in India.
The process of industrialization has transformed the entire old socio-
economic structure which was founded on traditional feudal and pre-feudal
principles of birth and status. It has brought about changes in property system
and in division of labour, and has given rise to new social strata and classes
which stand above the traditional division of region and religion.
Political:
Capitalism was already well set by the time industrial revolution commenced.
It stimulated the growth of industry as large machines were costly and
individual worker could not purchase for use. The weaving industry was the
first to come fully under the grip of capitalists. Role of weaver got confined
to labour selling and wage earning.
These in fact came to be established, owned and controlled by capitalists.

Under the new system the workers were rendered completely dependent on
their employers. They lived together, in large agglomerating, in absolute
misery and total poverty.
Education:
The people in the pre-industrial West in general were illiterate. There was not
much need for literacy. Learning was the privilege of the aristocrats, vocation
of the priest and a necessity for the trader. National educational system did
not exist in any European country.
There were public schools for well to do. The atmosphere in these schools
was not good. Flogging was common. Dr. Arnold, the Principal of Rugby, in
England, improved the conditions there. He insisted on religion and morality
being accepted as the basis of education.
Religion:
Orthodoxy and superstitions have flourished under the grab of religion.
Superstitions are due to ignorance. The process of industrialization has
resulted in spread and dissemination of science and practical knowledge. It
attacked religion and superstition. Misery, distress and exploitation made
religion and morality as if nonexistent.
Familial Sphere:
As a result of industrialization family came under heavy pressure. The
structure and functions of family underwent change considerably. Family
which for ages had remained the production-consumption unit, ceased to be
so, with the advent of industry. One had to go away for work to the factory or
a mill. Mobility, ensured individualism, at the cost of kinship relation.
Sphere of Stratification:
In industrial societies there is a unique kind of social stratification. The
system of stratification is based social class.
Relationship Between Caste and Politics

The relationship between caste and politics has been analysed at two levels:
one, how caste affects politics, and two, how politics affects caste. We will
first take up the relationship in terms of awareness of castes in politics.
The Relationship:
Rajni Kothari (1970) examined the relationship between caste and politics by
analysing the issue as to what happens to political system because of the vote
of castes. He found that three factors—education, government patronage, and
slowly expanding franchise (including 18-21 year old young persons in
electorate)—have penetrated the caste system because of which it (caste
system) has come to affect democratic politics in the country. Economic
opportunity, administrative patronage, and positions of power offered by the
new institutions and the new leadership drew castes into politics.
This involvement (of castes in politics) resulted in two things: the caste
system made available to the leadership the structural and the ideological
basis for political mobilisation, and two, leadership was forced to make
concessions to local opinion and organise castes for economic and political
purposes.
The use of caste in politics was analysed by Rajni Kothari (1970) in two
different stages. The first stage involved intellectuals, and antagonism and
resentment between high entrenched castes (like Reddi in Andhra Pradesh,
Pattidars in Gujarat, Lingayats in Karnataka, Bhumihars in Bihar, and
Rajputs in Rajasthan) and high ascendant castes (like Kayastha in Bihar, Jats
in Rajasthan).
The second stage involved factionalism and fragmentation within the
competing (entrenched and ascendant) castes as a result of which multi-caste
and multi-factional alignments develop. The lower castes also are brought in
to support high caste leaders and to strengthen a faction.
In the first stage, only three components of caste are involved—the power
structure of caste, distribution of economic benefits, and caste consciousness.
But in the second stage, other components of castes like caste consciousness,
client loyalties etc. also come to be involved. Further, three sub-stages are
pointed out by Kothari in the first stage. In the first sub-stage, the struggle for
power and benefits is at first limited to the entrenched castes, i.e., those
which exercised preponderant influence economically and politically but not
necessarily numerically. In the second sub-stage, ascendant castes (i.e.,
unsatisfied castes wanting higher roles) also start competing for power.
In the third sub-stage, there is not only competition between entrenched and
ascendant castes (for power and benefits) but also within these castes. In the
second stage, called as the stage of caste fragmentation or factionalism, the
leadership cleavages are created and multi-caste and multi-factional
alignments come into being. This also creates the problem of rival caste
leaders in politics. These leaders come to involve masses too because they
(leaders) want to appeal to wider identities. There is also change in leadership
in this stage.
Kothari has talked of the third stage also in relationship between caste and
politics. While in the first stage, ‘entrenched’ high castes are first politicised
and ‘ascendant’ high castes respond with resentment and feeling? of relative
deprivation (e.g., entrenched caste of Brahmins and ascendant caste of
Marathas in Maharashtra) and in the second stage factions emerge within the
competing (entrenched and ascendant) castes and lower castes are also
brought in for support, in the third stage, identifications other than those of
caste are likely to become more important with advancing education,
urbanisation and adoption of modern achievement orientation. There, thus,
emerge cross-cutting alliances.
The process of fusion of castes is illustrated by the DMK in Tamil Nadu and
Republican Party (consisting of Mahars and other untouchable castes) in
Maharashtra. The former party is politically powerful but the latter party has
not yet wielded much political power.
In panchayats at the village level these days, elections are often contested on
cross-cutting votes. Large landless castes now have the power of voting
strength; so they challenge the traditionally dominant caste which has power
derived from land control. Dominant castes as well as ascendant (higher)
castes are usually tied in with the important political parties of the region and
upward mobility through the political party organisation takes place. Thus,
today on the one side caste ceases to be an exclusive political support-base

and on the other it greatly affects politics.
Significance factors for the Modernization in India
3 Major Factors which Promotes Modernization
1. Development of Science and Technology:
There cannot be two opinions in this respect that the development of science
and technology play a major role m the process of modernisation. Due to this
factor a mad race is going in various countries of the world for development
of science and technology.
If some latest development takes place in the field of science and technology
in nuclear or space field just like Star Wars, then it becomes a prestigious
question for the U.S.S.K- also. China first of all was not recognised by
U.S.A. as a great power but when China developed nuclear device, then Mr.
Nixon, President of U.S.A. went himself to seek the hand of friendship of
China.
India also exploded her first nuclear device on the 18 May, 1974 at Pokhran
in Rajasthan m order to prove to the world that she does not lag behind the
other countries in this respect. Thus India entered as six in member of nuclear
club.
In the field of technology, China has caught up with U.S.A. and U.S.S.R. She
has developed intermediate range ballistic missiles. In the air, she has now
developed inter-continental ballistic missiles capable of delivery at longer
distance. India is also going ahead with its research programme in space with
a greater speed.
India shot her first satellite in space known as Arya Bhatta. Then it threw into
space Apple. After that it sent into space Insat-A and Insat-B. These satellites
have helped India a lot in gathering information especially about coming
rains and gathering storms in the sea.
India is still making progress by leaps and bounds in the field of technology
by using computers, but at the same time we cannot overlook this factor that
while plenty of labour is available in our country, there is a scarcity of

capital. Therefore the technology has to be different in India.
As Mahatma Gandhi once put it, what is needed in developing societies is
production by the masses rather than mass production, for which it may be
more necessary to develop what has been variously called “intermediate
technology”, “self-help technology” or “appropriate technology “a
technology which is appropriate to the requirement of the developing
countries. Therefore the economy may be provided to the labourers and the
educated youths.
2. Development of Industrial Civilisation:
It is most important to industrialise a backward country in order to lead it on
the path of modernisation. That is the reason Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, the
first, Prime Minister of India established many steel plants in the public
sector. He started a factory for making railway coaches at Perambur (Tamil
Nadu).
He started Chittaranjan Locomotive Works. He established Bhopal Heavy
Electricals. He built many dams in order to” provide more facilities for
irrigation and generate electricity. Like U.S.S.R., India has also launched
many Five Year Plans in order to accelerate the growth of economy.
Therefore whatever political system may prevail in any country, it cannot
afford to ignore the industrial development because it brings economic
prosperity in the country. Consequently, we see that England, France, West
Germany, Japan, U.S.S.R. and China are highly industrialised countries.
3. Successful Working of Democratic Institutions:
Democracy is regarded one of the best means to modernise a country.
England, France, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Belgium, West Germany,
U.S.A., Japan and India have modernised themselves in this way. The
Westerners believe in this institution thoroughly and they regard it as the key
to modernisation but the communists regard this political democracy as the
rule of few bourgeoisie and though there is dictatorship of the Communist
Party in U.S.S.R., East European countries, (Finland, Poland, East Germany,
Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Rumania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia and East
Germany), China, Vietnam, North Korea etc., yet they consider it a socialist
democracy.
Dictatorship of the Communist Party in these countries has in turn become a
dictatorship of the politbureau or General Secretary in these countries. It is
altogether a different thing whether we may agree with this political system
or the other political system but it is true that these communist countries have
also modernised themselves to a great extent and compare favourably with
the industrialised countries of the West.
So far India is concerned, it has adopted democratic system and through its
Five Year Plans, it has made rapid strides in economic development and
marching ahead with a terrific speed towards modernisation but in spite of
that about 40% people live below poverty line. This situation must be
remedied by means of equal distribution of wealth.

2nd Sem Non Law

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2nd Sem Non Law

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNIVERSITY OF CALCUTTA

• Bicameral Legislature: Bicameral legislatures are used in most

1(c)Merits of Parliamentary Form Of Government.

• The parliamentary system, as opposed to the presidential system,

• In the Parliamentary system, on the other hand, power is shared among

• They must necessarily work not in isolation but in active

In light of the above, a unitary system of government is deemed by some

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as adopted by the UN General

complementary. Thus the government cannot function effectively and

5)(a)What do you understand by the term Political Party ?

added cliques formed around bankers, merchants, industrialists, and

• Political parties also actively try to gather volunteers to help register

Importance of Political Parties

Individuals with political ambition are likely to seek out leadership

citizens in political parties offers unique benefits, including opportunities to

(6) Amendment of the Constitution:

6)(b)Discuss in this connection the merits of Bicameral system of

Important features of a Unitary Form of Government

vi. Emergency Provisions

Importance of public opinion in a democracy:

The following are the major agencies of Public Opinion:

political education. The use of these during elections acts as a means

2. Hereditary and Elected Executives:

possible to donate land without the consent of the community. In other

1)(c)Mention the different causes of the break down of self sufficiency of

vi) Industries and Urban Handicrafts during the Pre-British Period

Unity in diversity in ancient India

best defines the self-understanding of the ethnic groups in Northeast India in

Some Definitions of Joint Family are the following:

of people depending upon it. Rapid growth of population leads to an

4)(a)Who are Schedule Caste ?

4)(c) Explain the ameliorative measures for Schedule Caste to improve

The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities)

demanded restriction on dowry. On account of these demands, several social

As a result, the Act was amended in 1984 by the Dowry Prohibition

Secondly, women should be encouraged to participate in politics. Seats

lower castes such as Khati (Carpenter), Nai (Barber), Kumhars (Potters),

Effect of Industrialization on Indian Society

These in fact came to be established, owned and controlled by capitalists.

Relationship Between Caste and Politics

today on the one side caste ceases to be an exclusive political support-base

while plenty of labour is available in our country, there is a scarcity of

You might also like