MAI NS STRAT EGY

IMPOR T ANCE O F NO TES MAKING IN MAINS

TH E FREED OM S TRUGGLE — ITS VARIOU S STAGES AND IMPO RT ANT

CO NTRIBU TO RS /CO NTRIBU TIO NS F RO M DIF FERENT PARTS OF TH E CO U NT RY.
• D iscu ss t h e cont r ib ut i on of Ma u la na Ab ul Ka l am A zad t o p re -a nd post -i nde pe n de nt
In d ia . ( 2 0 1 3 )
• D e fyi ng t he ba rr ie rs of a ge , ge nd e r a nd re li gi on, t he In d ian wom e n b e cam e th e t orch
b e ar e r d u ri ng t h e st ru ggl e for fre e d om i n I nd i a. D isc uss. ( 2 0 1 3 )
• S e ve ra l f ore i gn e rs m a de Ind i a t he ir h om el an d an d p ar ti ci pa t e d i n va r iou s
m ove m e n ts . An al yze t h e ir role i n t he In d ia n s tr ug gl e for f re e d om . ( 2 0 1 3 )
• D iscu ss t h e cont r ib ut i on of Ma u la na Ab ul Ka l am A zad t o p re -a nd post -i nde pe n de nt
In d ia . ( 2 0 1 3 )

• Ma ha t m a G an d hi an d Dr. B. R. A m be d ka r , de sp it e h av ing d ive rge n t ap proa che s a nd

st ra t e gi e s, ha d a com m on g oal of am e li ora t ion of t he d ow nt rod d e n . E lu ci d at e . ( 2 0 1 5 )
• H ow di ffe r e nt w ou ld h a ve b e e n t he a ch ie ve m e nt of I nd i an ind e pe nd e nce w i t hou t
Ma ha t m a G an d hi ? D isc uss. ( 2 0 1 5 )

• D iscu ss t he role of w om e n i n t he fre e d om st ru g gl e e spe ci al l y d ur in g t he G a nd hi a n

ph ase . ( 2 0 1 6 )
• H ig hl ig ht t h e d i ff e re n ce s i n th e a pp roac h of S u bha sh Ch an d ra B ose an d Ma ha t m a
G a nd hi i n t he st ru ggl e for fre e d om . ( 2 0 1 6 )
• Wh y d i d t he ‘M od e r ate s ’ f a il e d to ca rry con vict i on w i th th e na t ion ab out t he i r p rocl ai me d
i d e ol ogy a nd pol it i ca l g oal s b y t h e e nd of t he ni ne t e e nt h ce nt u ry? ( 2 0 1 7 )
• Ma ny voice s h ad str e ng th e ne d a nd e n ri ched t he n a ti ona li st m ove m e nt d u rin g t h e
G a nd hi a n ph ase . E la b or a te . ( 2 0 1 9 )
• S in ce th e de ca d e of th e 1 92 0 s, t he n at i ona l move m e n t a cqu i red va ri ous i d e olog ica l
st ra nd s a nd t he re b y e xpa nd e d i t s soc ia l ba se . Di scu ss. ( 2 0 2 0 )
 MAI NS SYLL ABU S
• In d ia n Consti t ut i on— hi stor ica l u nde r pi nnin gs, e vol u ti on, fe at u re s, am e n dm e nt s,
si gni fica n t provi si on s an d b a sic st ru ct ur e .
• F u nct i on s an d r e sponsi bi li t i es of t h e U ni on an d th e S t a te s, is su e s a nd ch al le n ges
pe r ta i ning t o t he fe d e r al st ru ct u re , devol ut i on of pow e rs a nd fi na n ce s u p t o l oca l le ve l s
a nd cha l le n ge s t he re i n.
• S e pa ra t ion of pow e r s b e t w e e n va ri ou s or ga ns d isp ut e r ed re ssa l m e cha ni sm s a nd
i nst it u t ion s.
• Com pa ri son of t h e Ind i a n const i t ut i ona l sch e m e w it h t ha t of ot he r c ou nt r ie s.
• P ar li a m ent a nd S t a t e le gisl a t ur e s—st ru ct u re , f un cti on in g, con du ct of b usi ne ss, pow e rs &
pr ivi le g e s a nd issu e s a r isi ng out of t h e se .
• S t ru ct ure , org a ni za t ion and f u nct ion ing of t h e E x e cu ti ve and t he J ud ici a ry— Mi ni st ri es
a nd D epa rt me nt s of t he Gove r nm e nt ; p re ssu re g rou ps a nd f orm a l/ i nf orm al a ssoci at i ons
a nd t he i r rol e in th e P ol it y.
 MAI NS SYLL ABU S
• S al i e nt fe at u re s of t he Re pr e se nt a t ion of Pe opl e ’ s Ac t.
• A ppoi ntm e n t t o va ri ou s C on sti t u ti ona l p osts, p ow e r s, fu nc ti ons a nd re sponsi bi li t ie s o f
va ri ous C onst i t ut i ona l Bod i e s.
• S t at u t or y, re g ul a tor y an d va ri ou s qu a si-j u d ic ia l bod i e s.

• D e ve lopm e nt pr oc e sse s a nd t he d e velopm e nt i nd ust ry — t he r ol e of NG O s, S H G s, va ri ous

gr oup s a nd a ssocia t i on s, d onor s, c ha ri ti e s, in st it u t iona l a nd ot h e r st a ke h old e r s.
• Im port a nt aspe ct s o f g ove rn an ce , t ra nspa re n cy an d a ccount a bi l it y, e -gove rn an ce -
a ppl ic at i ons, m od e ls, su cce ss e s, li m it a t ions, a nd p ot e n tia l ; cit i ze n s ch ar te r s,
t ra nsp ar e ncy & a ccou nt a bi li t y an d ins ti t ut i ona l a n d ot he r m e a sur e s.
• Rol e of civ il se r vic e s i n a d e m ocr ac y
IND IA N CO NS TITU TION—HIST OR IC AL UND E RPINNINGS, EV OLU T IO N, F EAT U RE S,
AME ND ME NT S, SIGNIFIC ANT PR OV IS IONS AND BAS IC ST RU CTU RE.
D id t he G ove rnm e nt of I ndi a Ac t , 1 9 3 5 l ay dow n a fe d e ra l c onst it u t ion ? D is cu ss. ( 2 0 1 6 )

P re a mb l e
• D is cu ss e a ch ad j e ct i ve a tt ache d t o t h e w ord ‘Re p ub li c’ in t he p re am b l e. Are t h ey de f e nd a b le i n
t he pre s en t c irc um st a nc e s ? ( 2 0 1 6 )

F und a m e nt a l Ri ght s
• D is cu ss S e ct ion 6 6 A of I T Ac t, w it h ref ere n ce t o i t s a ll e ge d v iol at ion of A rt ic le 1 9 of t h e
C onst i t ut i on. ( 2 0 1 3)
• W ha t d o y ou u nd e rst a nd b y t h e co nce p t “f re e d om of sp ee c h and ex p re ssi on”? D oe s it c ove r ha t e
sp e e ch a lso ? W hy d o t he f ilm s i n I ndi a sta nd on a sli gh t ly di f f ere n t pl ane fro m ot he r f orm s of
e x pre s sion ? Di sc uss . ( 2 0 1 4)
• D is cu ss t he p ossi b le fa c t ors t ha t i nhi bi t Ind ia from e na c t i ng f or i t s c it ize n s a u nif or m c iv il c ode
a s p rovi de d f or in t he D ire c t i ve P ri nci pl e s of S t a t e P oli cy . ( 2 0 1 5 )
• E x am i ne t he sco pe of F un da m e nt a l Ri gh t s i n t h e l ig ht of t he l at e st j udg e m e nt of t h e S u pre m e
C ourt on Ri ght t o P ri va cy. ( 2 0 1 7 )
• ‘C onst it ut i ona l Mora l it y ’ in root e d in t he C o nst i t ut ion it s e lf a nd is fo und e d on it s e sse nt i a l
f a ce t s . E x pl ain t he d oct rine of ‘ C onst it ut i ona l Mora li t y’ wit h t he he l p of re le van t ju di ci a l
d e ci sio ns. ( 2 0 2 1 )
• " Ri ght of m ove m e nt a nd re s id e nce t hrou gh out t he t e rri tory of In di a a re f re e l y av ai la b le t o t he
In di an ci t ize ns , b u t t he s e rig ht s are no t a b solu t e . " C om me n t . ( 2 0 2 2 )
• T he mos t s igni fica nt a chie ve m e nt of m ode rn la w i n Indi a is the const itu t iona li za ti on of
e nvi ronm ent al p rob l em s b y the Sup re m e C ourt. Di scuss thi s st at e m e nt wi th the he l p of
re le va nt ca se la w s. ( 20 2 2)

BSD/Am endme nt s

• T he Supre m e C ourt of Indi a ke e ps a che ck on a rb i trary p owe r of t he P arlia me nt i n am e nd ing

the Cons tit uti on. Di scus s crit ica ll y. ( 20 1 3)
• St arti ng f rom i nve nti ng the ‘b a si c structu re ’ doctrin e , t he ju di ci a ry ha s pl ayed a hig hly
proa cti ve role in ens uring tha t In d ia de v e lop s into a t hri vi ng d e mocra cy. In l ig ht of th e
st at e m e nt, e v al ua te the rol e pl ay e d by jud ici al act iv ism i n a chie ving t he i de a ls of de m ocra cy.
( 20 1 4)
• E xpl ain the s a li e nt fe a tu re s of t he C ons ti tu ti on ( One H undre d a nd F i rs t Am e ndm e nt) Act,
2 01 6 . D o you thi nk it i s e f fica cious e nou gh ‘ to re m ove ca sca di ng e f f e ct of ta xe s a nd p rov id e
for com m on na ti onal m arke t f or goods a nd se rvi ce s ’? ( 20 1 7)
• “P a rl iam ent ’ s pow e r t o a me nd the Cons t i tut ion is a lim i te d pow er a nd it ca nno t be e nla rge d
i nto ab sol ute p owe r. ” In th e l i ght of thi s st at e m ent ex p la in whe the r P arl iam e nt und e r Art icl e
3 68 of the Co nst it uti on ca n d e stroy t he B asic St ruct u re of the Con st it uti on b y e xpa ndi ng i ts
a m e ndi ng pow e r? (2 0 19 )
CO MPAR ISON OF THE IN DIAN C ON ST IT UTIONAL SC H EME W ITH T HAT OF OT H ER
CO UN TR IES.
• Ind ia a nd US A a re tw o l a rg e de m ocra ci e s. E xam ine t he b a si c te ne ts on w hi ch the tw o
pol i ti ca l sys te m s a re b as e d. (2 0 18 )
• W hat ca n F rance l e arn from the Indi a n C onsti tu ti on’s a pproa ch to se cul aris m ? ( 2 01 9 )
• D o you thi nk tha t consti tu t ion of Ind ia d oe s not ac ce pt p ri ncip le of st ri ct s e pa ra ti on of
pow e rs rat he r it is ba se d on the p ri ncip le of ‘ che cks a nd b a la nce’? Exp la i n. ( 20 1 9 )
• Ana ly ze the d is ti ng ui shi ng f e a ture s of the no ti on of Ri ght to E qual i ty i n t he C onsti tut ions of
the USA and Indi a. ( 2 02 1 )
• Cri ti cal l y e xam i ne the proce d ure s t hrou gh w hi ch t he P re si de nts of Ind ia a nd F rance a re
e l ect e d. ( 2 02 2 )
F UNC TIONS A ND RE SPONSIBILITIES OF THE UNIO N AND T HE S TA TE S, ISS UE S
AN D C HA LLE NGE S PE RT AINING T O T HE F ED E R AL S TRU CTU RE , DE VO LUT ION OF
POW E R S AND F IN ANCES U P T O L OCA L LE V ELS AN D CH ALLE NGES T H ER EIN.
• Ma ny Sta te G ove rnme nts f urt he r bi f urca te ge ogra phi cal a dm i nistra ti ve a re as l ik e D is tri cts
a nd T al uka s for be t te r g overna nce . In l i ght of t he a bov e, ca n i t al so b e jus ti f ie d th at m ore
num b e r of s m a ll e r S ta te s wou ld b ri ng i n e f fe cti ve gove rna nce a t S ta te l e ve l ? Di scus s. ( 20 1 3)
• C onsti tut iona l m e chani sm s to re sol ve the i nte r-s ta t e w a te r d is put e s ha ve fa il ed t o a dd re s s
a nd sol ve t he probl e ms . Is the fa i lure due t o st ruct u ra l or proces s i nad e quacy or bot h?
D is cu ss. ( 2 01 3 )
• Thoug h the f ed era l p rinci ple i s d om ina nt i n our Cons tit uti on a nd t hat princi pl e is one of i ts
b as ic f e at ure s, but i t i s e qu al l y true t ha t f e d e ra lism u nde r the Ind ia n Cons t it ut ion l e ans i n
fa vour of a s t rong Ce ntre, a fe at ure t ha t m il it at e s a gai ns t t he conce p t of st rong fe d e ra l ism.
D is cu ss. ( 2 01 4 )
• The concep t of coope rat ive f e d e ra lism ha s be e n incre a si ngly e m pha si ze d i n rece nt ye a rs .
H ig hlig ht the drawb a ck s in the e xi st in g s tructure a nd t he e xte n t to whi ch c oope rat ive
fe de ral i sm w oul d a nsw e r the s hort com i ngs . (2 0 15 )
• D is cuss the e s se nti als of th e 6 9t h Cons t it uti onal Am e ndm e nt Ac t a nd a nom a l ies , if a ny tha t
ha ve le d to re ce nt re porte d conf l ict s be tw e en the e le cte d re pre se nta ti ve s a nd the in st it uti on
of the Li e ute na nt G ove rnor in t he a dm i nis trat ion of D elhi . Do y ou thi nk tha t th is w il l gi ve
ris e t o a ne w t re nd i n the fu nct ioni ng of the I ndi an fe d era l p oli ti cs? ( 20 1 6)
• W het he r the Suprem e C ou rt J udg em e nt ( Ju ly 2 0 18 ) can s et tle the p ol it ica l t uss le b e twe e n the
L t. G ove rnor a nd e l e cte d gov e rnm e nt of D e lhi ? E xa m ine . (2 0 18 )
• Ind ia n const i t uti on e x hib it s ce ntral i si ng te nd e nci e s t o m ai nta in uni ty a nd in te g ri ty of the
na ti on. E lu cid at e i n the p e rs pe ct iv e of the E p id em ic Di se ase s Act, 1 8 97 ; T he D is aste r
Ma na ge m e nt Act, 2 0 05 a nd re ce ntl y pa ss e d F a rm Acts . (2 0 20 )
• H ow f ar do y ou thi nk coop e ra ti on, com pe t it ion a nd conf ronta ti on h av e sha pe d th e nat ure of
fe de rat ion in Indi a ? C i te s om e re ce nt e xa m pl e s t o va li da te your ans wer ( 20 2 0)
• "Whi le the nat iona l poli ti cal pa rt ie s i n Ind ia fa vour centra li sa ti on, the re gi onal pa rti es a re in
fa vour of Sta te a ut onom y . " C om m e nt. ( 2 02 1 )
• In a bs e nce of a w e ll -e duca te d a nd orga nize d l ocal l ev el g ove rnme nt sys tem , 'P a nchay at s' and
'Sa mi ti s' have re m a i ne d m ai nl y p ol i tical i ns ti tut io ns a nd no t e f f e ctive i nst rum e nt s of
G ove rnance . Cri ti ca l ly d i scuss . ( 2 01 5 )
• Ass e ss the i mporta nce of th e P ancha ya t sys te m i n Indi a as a p a rt of loca l g ove rnm e nt. Ap art
from g ove rnm e nt g ra nts , wha t s ourc e s t he pa ncha ya ts ca n look out f or f i na ncing
de v e lop m ent al p roje cts ? (2 0 18 )
• T he st re ng th s uste na nce of loca l i nsti tu t ions i n Ind ia ha s shi f te d f rom the i r f orma ti ve pha se
of ‘F uncti ons, F unct iona ri es a nd F uns’ to the con te m pora ry sta ge of ‘F uncti onal i ty’. H ig hli ght
the cri ti cal cha l le nge s fa ce d b y loca l i nsti tu tions i n t e rm s of t he i r f uncti onal i ty i n re cent
ti m e s. ( 20 2 0)
• T o w ha t e xt ent , i n y ou r o pi ni on, ha s t he de ce ntra li sa ti on of pow e r i n In di a c ha ng e d the
gov e rna nce l a ndsca pe a t t he gras sroots? (2 0 21 )
SE PAR ATION OF POW ER S BE TW E EN V ARIOU S OR GANS DISPU TE R E DR E SSAL
ME CHANISMS AN D INST ITUT IO NS.
• Re sorti ng t o ordi nance s ha s a lwa ys rai se d conce rn o n vi ola ti on of t he spi rit of se p ara ti on of
p owe rs d octri ne . W hi le not i ng the ra ti onal e s jus ti f yi ng t he powe r to prom ulga te ord ina nce s,
a nal yze whe the r t he de ci si ons of the Su prem e Cou rt on t he is sue ha v e fu rt her f a cil it at e d
re torting to thi s pow e r. Shoul d the powe r to p rom ul ga te ordi nance s b e re pe a le d ? (2 0 15 )
• D o y ou think t ha t const it u ti on of Ind ia doe s not a ccep t pri nci ple of stri ct se p ara ti on of pow e rs
rat he r it is ba se d on t he pri nci pl e of ‘ che cks a nd b al a nce’ ? Exp la i n. ( 20 1 9)
• Ju di cia l L egi sl a ti on i s ant i t he ti cal to the d octrine of se pa rat ion of p ow e rs a s e nvisa ge d i n t he
Ind ia n C onst it uti on. In thi s conte xt just if y t he fi li ng of la rge num be r of public i nte re s t
p et it ions p ra yi ng for i ssui ng g uid e li ne s t o e xecu tiv e a ut hori ti es . ( 2 02 0 )
PAR LIAME NT AN D ST ATE LE GISLA TUR ES—ST RU CT UR E, FU NCT IO NING, CON DU CT
O F BU SINE SS, PO W ERS & PR IV ILEGE S AN D IS SUE S AR IS ING OU T O F T H ES E.
• T he role of ind iv id ua l MP s ( Me mb e rs of Pa rlia me nt) ha s di mini she d ove r t he ye a rs a nd a s a
re sul t he a l thy cons truct iv e de b a te s on pol icy i ss ues are not u sua ll y w it ne ssed . H ow f a r ca n
thi s b e a ttri b ute d to the anti -de f e cti on la w, which w a s l eg isla te d b u t w i th a di ff e re nt
i nte nti on? ( 2 01 3 )
• T he ‘ P owe rs, P riv ile ge s and Im m uni ti es of P arl iam ent a nd it s Me m be rs ’ as e nvi sage d i n
Arti cl e 10 5 o f t he C ons ti t uti on l e a ve room f or a la rg e num b e r of un-cod if i e d a nd u n-
e num e rat ed pri vile ge s t o cont inue . Ass ess t he re a sons f or the ab sence of l ega l cod if i cat ion
of t he ‘ pa rl i am e nta ry p ri vi le g e s’. H ow ca n t his p rob le m b e a dd res se d ? (2 01 4 )
• T he Indi an Cons ti tuti on ha s p rovis ions for hol di ng joint se ss ion of the t w o house s of the
P a rli am e nt . E nume ra te t he occa si ons w he n thi s woul d norm al ly hap pe n a nd al so the
occas ions whe n it ca nnot , wit h re as ons the re of . (2 01 7 )
• D is cuss the rol e of P ub lic Accoun ts Com mi tte e i n es ta bl i shi ng a ccounta bi l it y of the
gov e rnm e nt t o the p e opl e. ( 20 1 7)
• ‘Sim ul ta ne ou s e l e cti on to t he L ok Sa b ha a nd t he Sta te Ass e mbli e s w i ll li mi t t he a m ount of
ti m e a nd m one y s pe nt i n e le ct ione e ri ng bu t i t w il l re d uce the gov ernm e nt’ s a ccount ab il i ty t o
the pe opl e ’ D is cuss . (2 0 17 )
• W hy do you t hi nk the co mm i tte e s are consi de re d t o be u se ful for pa rl i am e nt ary w ork?
D is cu ss, i n t his conte xt, t he rol e of the E st im a te s Com m i tte e . (2 0 18 )
• Indi vi du al P arl i am ent ari an’s rol e a s t he na ti ona l l aw ma ke r i s on a d e cl ine, w hi ch i n turn, ha s
a dv erse l y i m pa cte d t he qual i ty of d e ba te s a nd t he ir out com e . Di scu ss. ( 2 01 9 )
• Ra jya S ab ha ha s b ee n tra ns f orm e d f rom a ‘ use le ss st epne y ty re ’ t o t he m ost u se f ul sup port ing
orga n i n pa st fe w de ca de s. Hig hl ight the fa ctors as w el l a s the a re a s in w hi ch thi s
tra nsf orm a ti on coul d b e vi si b le . ( 2 02 0 )
• “Once a spe a ke r, Al w a ys a spe a ke r’ ! D o you thi nk t he pract ice s hou ld be a do p te d to i m pa rt
ob je ctiv it y to the off i ce of t he Sp e ak er of Lok Sa bha ? W hat coul d b e i ts im p lica ti ons f or t he
robus t f uncti oni ng of p arli a m e nta ry b us ine ss in Indi a ? ( 2 02 0 )
• To w ha t ex te nt , i n your vi ew, the P arl iam e nt is a b le to e ns ure a ccounta bi li ty of t he e xe cuti ve
i n Ind ia ? ( 20 2 1)
• E xpl ain t he c onsti tu tiona l p rovis ions u nde r w hi ch Le gis la tiv e C ounci ls a re e sta b lis he d. Review
the w orki ng a nd curre nt s ta tus of L e gi sl at iv e Counci ls w it h sui ta b le i ll ust ra ti ons. ( 20 2 1)
• D o Dep artm ent -re l at e d P arl iam e nta ry St and ing Com m i tt e es ke e p the a dm i ni st ra ti on on i t s
toe s and ins pire re ve re nce for pa rl i am e nt ary control ? E va l uat e the worki ng of such com m it te e s
w i th s ui ta bl e e xa m pl e s. ( 20 2 1)
 ST R U CTU RE , O RGANIZAT IO N A ND F UNC TIONING O F T HE E XE CUT IVE AND T HE
J UD ICIAR Y—MINISTRIES AND D EPAR TMENTS OF TH E GOV ER N ME NT; PRES SU RE
GR O UPS AND F OR MAL/INF OR MAL AS SO CIATIONS A ND TH E IR RO LE IN TH E
POL IT Y.
• W ha t i s a quas i-jud ici a l b ody? E xp la in wi th t he he lp of concre te e xa m pl e s. ( 2 01 6 )
• W ha t w as he ld in t he Coe l ho ca se ? In thi s cont e xt , ca n you s ay tha t j udi ci al revi ew i s of k ey
i m porta nce a m ongst t he ba s ic f e at ure s of the Consti tu tion? (2 0 16 )
• Cri ti cal l y e xam i ne the Supre me Court’ s jud gm e nt on ‘N at iona l Jud ici al Ap poi ntm e nts
Com missi on Act, 2 0 14 ’ w i th re fe re nce to a ppoi ntm e nt of ju dge s of hig he r ju di cia ry i n Indi a.
( 20 1 7)
• H ow f a r d o you a gre e w it h t he v iew tha t t rib una ls curta il the juri sd ict ion of ord ina ry cou rt s?
In v ie w of the a b ov e , di scuss the cons ti t uti onal v al i di ty a nd com pe t e ncy of t he trib una ls i n
Indi a . ( 20 1 8)
• F rom the re s ol ut ion of cont e nti ous i ss ue s re ga rdi ng di st ri b uti on of l e gi sl at iv e pow ers b y the
courts, ‘ P rinci pl e of Fe d e ral Sup rem a cy’ a nd ‘H arm oni ou s C onstruct ion’ ha ve e m e rge d.
E xpl a in. (2 0 19 )
• T he jud ici al s ys tem s i n In di a a nd UK se e m to be conv e rg ing as we ll a s di ve rgi ng in the
re ce nt . Di scus s t he de si rabi li ty of gre a ter rep re s e nta ti on t o w om e n i n the hig he r jud ici a ry
to e ns ure d iv ersi ty , e qui ty a nd incl usi ve ne ss . ( 2 02 1 )
• "The m ost signi fica nt a chie v em e nt of m ode rn l a w i n Indi a i s t he const itu ti ona l iza ti on of
e nvi ronm ent al p rob lem s b y t he Su pre m e Court. " Di scuss t his sta te m e nt w i th th e he lp of
re le va nt ca se la w s. ( 20 2 2)

• U nd e r w ha t ci rcumst ance s ca n t he F i nanci al E me rge ncy b e procl a im e d b y t he P re si de nt of

Ind ia ? W ha t cons e qu e nce s f ol low whe n s uch a d e cla ra ti on re m a ins i n f orce ? (2 0 18 )
• D is cu ss t he rol e of the Vi ce P re si de nt of Ind ia as t he chai rm a n of Ra jya Sa b ha. ( 20 2 2)
• D is cuss t he e sse nt ia l conditi ons f or the e xe rcise of t he l e gisla ti ve pow e rs by t he Gov e rnor.
D is cuss the l eg a li ty of re - p rom ulga ti on of ordi nance s b y the G ov e rnor w i thout pl a cing the m
b e fore the L e gi sl at ure . ( 2 02 2 )