Indian Polity PYQ – Important Sc Judgements

← Back

Indian Polity PYQ – Important Sc Judgements – 11 questions, subject: Polity. Every question has the correct answer with a one-line explanation; tap "Show Answer". Free practice for TNPSC, UPSC, SSC, Bank and RRB exams – Shanmugam IAS Academy, Coimbatore.

Get daily current affairs & exam alerts – follow us YouTube WhatsApp Channel Telegram Channel Facebook Page Instagram
Share with friends & study groups
Link to this page from your website / blog (HTML code)
1.  
GSASO – 2020
Match the following and choose the correct option
(a) Berubari Union case – 1. 1967
(b) Kesavananda Bharati case – 2. 1980
(c) Minerva Mills case – 3. 1973
(d) Golak Nath case – 4. 1960

Correct Answer: A [4 3 2 1]

Explanation:

Berubari was 1960, Kesavananda Bharati 1973, Minerva Mills 1980 and Golaknath 1967, giving the match 4 3 2 1.

2.  
AGGS – 2021
Match List I (subject) with List II (case) and choose the correct option
(a) Sexual harassment against women – 1. Ashwinder Kaur Vs. Punjab University
(b) Right to equality – 2. Minerva Mills Ltd Vs. Union of India
(c) Double jeopardy – 3. Vishaka Vs. State of Rajasthan
(d) Basic features of the Constitution – 4. Maqbool Vs. State of Bombay

Correct Answer: A [3 1 4 2]

Explanation:

Sexual harassment at workplace is the Vishaka case (1997) and double jeopardy is Maqbool Hussain v. State of Bombay (1953), among the keyed matches 3 1 4 2.

3.  
PTGS – 2021
The Supreme Court has stated that the basic features of the Constitution cannot be amended in which of the following cases?

Correct Answer: D [Minerva Mills Vs. Union of India]

Explanation:

Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980) reaffirmed that the basic features of the Constitution cannot be amended, building on Kesavananda Bharati (1973).

4.  
FISHERY DEPT – 2023
In which of the following judgements did the Supreme Court declare that the Preamble to the Indian Constitution should be treated as part of the Indian Constitution?

Correct Answer: C [Kesavananda Bharati case of 1973]

Explanation:

In Kesavananda Bharati (1973) the Supreme Court held that the Preamble is part of the Constitution, reversing the Berubari view.

5.  
MASS INTERVIEWER – 2023
The concepts of "Separation of Power" and "Independent Judiciary" were upheld by the Supreme Court in the case of

Correct Answer: A [State of Bihar Vs Bal Mukund Sah]

Explanation:

In State of Bihar v. Bal Mukund Sah (2000), the Supreme Court upheld separation of powers and judicial independence by striking down a law reserving judicial posts without consulting the High Court.

6.  
GROUP 1 – 2024
Identify the case which did not deal with the basic structure of the Indian Constitution.

Correct Answer: C [A.K. Roy vs Union of India, 1982]

Explanation:

A.K. Roy v. Union of India (1982) upheld the preventive detention law (National Security Act), and did not concern the basic structure doctrine.

7.  
GROUP 1 & 1A – 2025
Arrange the following events in chronological order.
1. Golaknath v/s State of Punjab
2. Kesavananda Bharati v/s State of Kerala
3. Minerva Mills Ltd. v/s Union of India
4. A.K. Gopalan v/s State of Madras

Correct Answer: C [4, 1, 2, 3]

Explanation:

The cases in order are A.K. Gopalan (1950), Golaknath (1967), Kesavananda Bharati (1973) and Minerva Mills (1980), i.e. 4, 1, 2, 3.

8.  
Which of the following pairs are correctly matched?
1. Right to Privacy – Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) Vs. Union of India
2. Passive Euthanasia – Common Cause (Regd. Society) Vs. Union of India
3. Right to Vote – Ministry of Defence Vs. Babita Puniya
4. NOTA in Elections – Swapnil Tripathi Vs. Supreme Court of India

Correct Answer: B [1 and 2 are correct]

Explanation:

K.S. Puttaswamy (2017) established the right to privacy and the keyed second pair is also correct, while pairs 3 and 4 are mismatched.

9.  
CTS (INTERVIEW POST) – 2025
The recent judgement by the Supreme Court in the case of Congress Rajya Sabha M.P. Imran Pratapgarhi is associated with

Correct Answer: A [Free Speech]

Explanation:

In Imran Pratapgarhi v. State of Gujarat (March 2025), the Supreme Court quashed the FIR over a poem he shared, upholding free speech.

10.  
GROUP 2 & 2A – 2025
Find out which of the following pairs is not correctly matched?

Correct Answer: C [Prakash Singh Case (2006) – Judicial Reforms]

Explanation:

Prakash Singh v. Union of India (2006) concerned police reforms, not judicial reforms, so that pair is incorrectly matched.

11.  
GROUP 1 – 2026
Match the following:
(a) Union of India Vs Naveen Jindal – 1. Reservation in promotion for SC/STs
(b) Prakash Singh Vs Union of India – 2. Women entry into Sabarimala Temple
(c) M. Nagaraj Vs Union of India – 3. Right to fly the National Flag
(d) Indian Young Lawyers Assn. Vs State of Kerala – 4. Police Reforms

Correct Answer: A [3 4 1 2]

Explanation:

Naveen Jindal (2004) concerned the national flag, Prakash Singh (2006) police reforms and M. Nagaraj (2006) reservation in promotion, matching 3 4 1 2.

? Full explanations with tables – Indian Polity PYQ book (₹149): www.shanmugamiasacademy.in/study-materials/tnpsc-indian-polity-pyq

📘 TNPSC பொது அறிவு அலகு IV — இந்திய ஆட்சியியல் (Indian Polity) – முழுமையான பாடநூல்
Here you get the answer with a one-line explanation. TNPSC பொது அறிவு அலகு IV இந்திய ஆட்சியியல் முழுவதும் · 23 அத்தியாயங்கள் · 535 பயிற்சி வினாக்கள் விளக்கத்துடன் · 2 மாதிரித் தேர்வுகள் · Mindmaps, Flowcharts, ஒப்பீட்டு அட்டவணைகள் · 2024–2026 நடப்பு நிகழ்வுகள்
Get the book – ₹249 ₹499 →
Score: 0 Answered: 0 / 0