In which of the following cases did the Supreme Court held that an amendment of the Constitution under Article 368 was 'law' within the meaning of Article 13 of the Constitution of India

Which of the following statements are correct? Answer by using the code given below:
1. Persons in Govt/Judicial service need not resign to participate in District judge selection process held in "Vijay Kumar Misra and another v. High Court of Judicature at Patna" by the Supreme Court of India
2. The Supreme Court of India held in S. Kazi v. Muslim Education Society that " All Tribunals are not necessary parties to the proceedings where legality of its orders challenged"
3. The Supreme Court of India observed in Cardanumom Marketing Corporation and others v. State of Kerala and others that Social Security to the legal profession becomes an essential part of legal system
4. The Supreme Court of India held in 'Union of India v. Rajasthan High Court and others that High Court judges are exempted from Airport frisking.

A

Only 2 is correct

B

1, 2 and 3 are correct

C

2, 3 and 4 are correct

D

1, 2 and 4 are correct

A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court passes judgment in a matter. In a later case before a high court, a party presents the Supreme Court judgment as a binding authority. The opposing party claims that the high court is not bound by the Supreme Court's judgment because relevant provisions of law were not brought to the notice of the Supreme Court in that case. Which of the following is most correct in this case?
Principle: Article 141 of the Constitution provides that the law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts within the territory of India.

A

Since the relevant provisions of law were not brought to the notice of the Supreme Court, the five-judge bench's decision is not 'law' within the meaning of Article 141, and is not binding on the high court

B

The Supreme Court must expressly declare that its judgment is binding on all courts within the territory of India when passing judgment. In this case, the Supreme Court has not done so, and therefore, the decision of the five-judge bench is not binding on the high court

C

The High Court cannot ignore the decision of the Supreme Court on the ground that relevant provisions of law were not brought to its notice. Under Article 141, it is bound by the decision of the Supreme Court

D

Only those decisions that are passed by a larger bench than the five-judge bench would be hinding on the high court, since legitimate doubts have been raised about the propriety of the five-judge bench's decision

E

The decision of the five-judge bench, since it is in conflict with other decisions, must first be decided upon by a larger bench on the Supreme Court. Only after that would the decision be binding on all other courts under Article 141 of the Constitution

Which of the following reasons led to the setting aside of the practice of 'talaqe- biddat', triple talaq in Shayara Bano v. Union of India, (2017) 9 SCC 1?
(1) Section 2 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 was a pre-constitutional legislation within the meaning of Article 13(1) and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India on the ground of arbitrariness.
(2) Section 2 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 was a pre-constitutional legislation within the meaning of Article 13(1) and violative of Article 15 of the Constitution of India, being discriminatory.
(3) Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 is not a law regulating triple talaq but the practice of triple talaq was against the basic tenets of the Holy Quran and no practice against the tenets of Quran was permissible.
(4) 'Talaq-e-biddat' is integral to the religious denomination but the Supreme Court may injunct this practice as a means for severing matrimonial relationship.

A

(1) and (2) only

B

(1), (2) and (3) only

C

(1) and (4) only

D

(1) and (3) only

Clause (4) of Article 13 of the Indian Constitution which was inserted by the 24^thAmendment Act, 1971, states that a Constitution Amendment Act, passed according to Article 368 of the Indian Constitution is a law within the meaning of Article 13 and would, accordingly be void if it contravenes a fundamental right. This amendment was declared void in which of the following cases?

A

Golak Nath v. State of Punjab

B

Edward Mills Co. Ltd. v. State of Ajmer

C

Minerva Mills v. Union of India

D

Ghulam Sarwar v. Union of India

A seven member bench of the Supreme Court unanimously struck down clauses 2(d) of Article 323A and clause 3(d) of Article 323B of the Constitution relating to tribunals which excluded the jurisdiction of High Court and Supreme Court. The court held that power of judicial review over legislative action is vested in the High Court under Article 226 and in the Supreme Court under Article 32. This is an integral part of the basic structure of the constitution. Name the case:

A

L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India

B

Kihota Hallahan v. Zachilhu

C

Nagaraj v. State of Andhra Pradesh

D

Rajendra Singh Rana v. Swami Prasad Maurya

Parliament in exercise of power under Article 368 makes a law which does away with the 'fundamental right conferred under Article 15 of the Constitution of India. The Executive seeks to defend the challenge instituted in court based on clause (d) of Article 368, which prohibits such action being questioned in court on any ground. Can the challenge in Court be sustained?

A

No, the challenge if made in a court action cannot be sustained

B

Challenge is sustainable

C

The only remedy lies in bringing a fresh amendment

D

None of the above

Consider the following statements:
1. The powers of High Courts under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are wider than those of Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
2. Both High Court and Supreme Court have concurrent power to enforce the fundamental rights.
3. It is mandatory for a petitioner first to approach the High Court instead of approaching the Supreme Court directly for enforcement of fundamental rights.
Which of the statements given above are correct?

A

1, 2 and 3

B

1 and 2

C

2 and 3

D

1 and 3

Which of the following observations on fundamental rights was made by the Supreme Court in K. S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India?
1. There is no overlap between rights enumerated under Article 19 and Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
2. The constitutional values embodied under every Article of Part III of the Constitution of India animates the interpretation of the other.
3. Only Article 21 contains residue of fundamental rights that are not expressly stipulated under Article 19 of the Constitution of India.
Choose the correct option from below:

A

2 and 3 are correct

B

Only 3 is correct

C

Only 2 is correct

D

1 and 2 are correct

Consider the following statements to answer this question.
1. Parliament cannot extend the jurisdiction and power of the Supreme Court.
2. No discussion can take place in Parliament with respect to the conduct of judge of the Supreme Court in discharge of the duties.
3. A retired judge of the Supreme Court cannot appear or plead in any court or before any authority within the territory of India.
4. The salaries and allowances of the Supreme Court are fixed by the Constitution and charged on the Consolidated Fund of India.
Which of these statement are correct?

A

2, 3 and 4

B

1 and 2

C

1 and 3

D

2 and 4

Consider the following statements:
The doctrine of prospective overruling propounded by the Supreme Court in Golaknath Case held that the decision will have only prospective operation and was intended to save
1. Constitution (4^th Amendment) Act
2. Constitution (24^th Amendment) Act
3. Constitution (17^th Amendment) Act
4. Constitution (42^nd Amendment) Act
Which of the statements given above are correct?

A

1, 2 and 3

B

3 and 4

C

2, 3 and 4

D

1 and 2