CLAT PG 2023 Question Paper

Question 1

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: An Ordinance which is promulgated by the Governor has (as clause 2 of Article 213 provides) the same force and effect as an Act of the legislature of the State assented to by the Governor. However - and this is a matter of crucial importance - clause 2 goes on to stipulate in the same vein significant constitutional conditions. These conditions have to be fulfilled before the `force and effect' fiction comes into being. These conditions are prefaced by the expression "but every such Ordinance" which means that the constitutional fiction is subject to what is stipulated in sub-clauses (a) and (b). Sub-clause (a) provides that the Ordinance "shall be laid before the legislative assembly of the state" or before both the Houses in the case of a bi-cameral legislature. Is the requirement of laying an Ordinance before the state legislature mandatory? There can be no manner of doubt that it is. The expression "shall be laid" is a positive mandate which brooks no exceptions. That the word `shall' in sub-clause (a) of clause 2 of Article 213 is mandatory, emerges from reading the provision in its entirety. As we have noted earlier, an Ordinance can be promulgated only when the legislature is not in session. Upon the completion of six weeks of the reassembling of the legislature, an Ordinance "shall cease to operate". Article 213(2)(a) postulates that an ordinance would cease to operate upon the expiry of a period of six weeks of the reassembly of the legislature. The Oxford English dictionary defines the expression "cease" as : "to stop, give over, discontinue, desist; to come to the end." P Ramanatha Aiyar's, The Major Law Lexicon defines the expression "cease" to mean "discontinue or put an end to". Justice C K Thakker's Encyclopaedic Law Lexicon defines the word "cease" as meaning: "to put an end to; to stop, to terminate or to discontinue". The expression has been defined in similar terms in Black's Law Dictionary. The expression "cease to operate" in Article 213(2)(a) is attracted in two situations. The first is where a period of six weeks has expired since the reassembling of the legislature. The second situation is where a resolution has been passed by the legislature disapproving of an ordinance. Apart from these two situations that are contemplated by sub-clause (a), sub-clause (b) contemplates that an ordinance may be withdrawn at any time by the Governor. Upon its withdrawal the ordinance would cease to operate as well. [Extracts from the judgment of majority judgment in Krishna Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar, Civil Appeal No. 5875 of 1994, decided on January 2, 2017 hereafter `KK Singh']

Question: KK Singh overruled two 5-Judge decisions of the Supreme Court, to hold:

Accepted Answer

An Ordinance which is not laid before the Legislature in the manner prescribed by Article 213 shall not have any legal effect and consequences.

Answer

An Ordinance which is not laid before the Legislature in the manner prescribed by Article 213 shall be void from the date that it should have obtained approval.

Answer

An Ordinance which is not laid before the Legislature in the manner prescribed by Article 213 shall be void from the date the ordinance is replaced by a law made by the Legislature to replace the Ordinance.

Answer

An Ordinance which is not laid before the Legislature in the manner prescribed by Article 213 shall be considered as a temporary statute.

Question 2

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: There are two different ways we can think about law and law-making. To put it crudely: we can think of law as partisan, as nothing more than the expression in legislative terms of the particular ideology or policies of a political party; or we can think of law as neutral, as something that stands above party politics, at least in the sense that once passed it ought to command the obedience and respect of everyone... [Political] Parties compete for control of Parliament because they want their values, their ideology, and their programme to be reflected in the law of the land... ...no-one doubts that the Commons stage is the most important, and the reason surely is that the House of Commons is the institution most subject to popular control. If laws passed by one Parliament turn out to be unpopular, the electorate can install a majority that is sworn to repeal them. That is what elections and representative politics are all about. On this model, it is simply fatuous to pretend that law is somehow `above' politics. Maybe there are some laws on which everyone agrees, no matter what their ideology. Everyone agrees there should be a law against murder, for example, and that there should be basic rules of the road. But as soon as we turn to the fine print, it is surprisingly difficult to find a consensus on the detail of any legislative provision. And in many cases, even the fundamental principles are the subject of fierce political dispute... What this model stresses, then, is that legislative attitudes are necessarily partisan attitudes. So long as there is tight party discipline in Parliament, legislative decisions will be taken on the basis of the ideology of the leadership of the party in power. The partisan model stresses the legitimacy of these attitudes and this form of decision-making... By contrast, what I call `the neutral model' enjoins a certain respect for law and law- making which goes beyond purely partisan views. According to this model there is something special about law, and it carries with it special non-partisan responsibilities. Proponents of the neutral model do not deny that laws are made by party politicians, and that legislation is often motivated by disputed values and ideologies... ...their view is that when a law is being made, something solemn is being decided in Parliament in the name of the whole society. Though it is reasonable for bills to be proposed and debated along partisan lines, the decision procedures of Parliament are designed to indicate not merely which is the stronger party, but what is to be the view of society as a whole on some matter for the time being... ...the result, the outcome, is a decision of the House as a whole: it is, literally, an act of Parliament, not merely an act of the Conservative party or an act of the Labour party, whichever commands the majority. By virtue of the parliamentary process, it transcends partisan politics, and presents itself as a norm enacted for and on behalf of the entire community... ...on the neutral model, the social function idea tends to receive more emphasis than the political provenance. For this reason, the neutral model often focuses on aspects of the legal system that do not involve explicitly partisan initiatives. It focuses on those areas of law where there is something approaching unanimity (such as the fundamental principles of the criminal law and some of the basic tenets of private law). And it focuses particularly on `the common law'. when common law doctrine strikes out in new directions, the change is usually presented as the product of reasoning which is independent of politics, as though there were an evolving `logic' of the law which could proceed untainted by partisan values or ideology. [Excerpted, with edits, from The Law, by Jeremy Waldron, Routledge, Oxon, 1990.]

Question: The Public Party wins a second term in power and introduces sweeping changes to Partyland’s laws. Judges now have limited or no discretion in deciding cases but are expected to apply the codified laws of the country strictly. Which of the models of law described in the passage do these changes align most closely with?

Accepted Answer

The partisan model of law

Answer

The neutral model of law

Answer

Equally with both, the neutral and the partisan model of law

Answer

With neither the neutral nor the partisan model of law

Question 3

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: The non-obstante clause in sub-section (1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 makes it clear that when it comes to information contained in an electronic record, admissibility and proof thereof must follow the drill of Section 65B, which is a special provision in this behalf -- Sections 62 to 65 being irrelevant for this purpose. However, Section 65B(1) clearly differentiates between the "original" document -- which would be the original "electronic record" contained in the "computer" in which the original information is first stored and the computer output containing such information, which then may be treated as evidence of the contents of the "original" document. All this necessarily shows that Section 65B differentiates between the original information contained in the "computer" itself and copies made therefrom - the former being primary evidence, and the latter being secondary evidence. Quite obviously, the requisite certificate in sub-section (4) of the Indian Evidence Act is unnecessary if the original document itself is produced. This can be done by the owner of a laptop computer, a computer tablet or even a mobile phone, by stepping into the witness box and proving that the concerned device, on which the original information is first stored, is owned and/or operated by him. In cases where "the computer", as defined, happens to be a part of a "computer system" or "computer network" (as defined in the Information Technology Act, 2000) and it becomes impossible to physically bring such network or system to the Court, then the only means of proving information contained in such electronic record can be in accordance with Section 65B(1), together with the requisite certificate under Section 65B(4). This being the case, it is necessary to clarify what is contained in the last sentence in paragraph 24 of Anvar P.V. (supra) which reads as "... if an electronic record as such is used as primary evidence under Section 62 of the Evidence Act ...". This may more appropriately be read without the words "under Section 62 of the Evidence Act, ...". With this minor clarification, the law stated in paragraph 24 of Anvar P.V. (supra) does not need to be revisited. [Excerpted from the judgment delivered by R.F. Nariman, J., in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash K. Gorantyal, (2020) 7 SCC 1.]

Question: The judgment of the Supreme Court in Tomaso Bruno v. State of u.P., (2015) 3 SCC (Cri) 54, has been held to be per incuriam. In law, a judgment is per incuriam when:

Accepted Answer

Both (A) and (B)

Answer

The judgment is against binding precedent of a higher court or larger bench.

Answer

The judgment is against binding provisions of law applicable to the subject.

Answer

Neither (A) nor (B)

Question 4

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: The philosophy of Corporate Social Responsibility ("CSR") has had a long-standing history in India. India is one of the first countries in the world to create a legal framework on CSR and statutorily mandate companies to report on the same. It emanates from the Gandhian principles of trusteeship and giving back to the society. The intent of the law is to mainstream the practice of business involvement in CSR and make it socially, economically and environmentally responsible. The Companies Act, 2013 (the `Act') mandates companies meeting a certain minimum threshold in terms of turnover/net worth/net profit to undertake CSR activities as per Schedule VII of the Act. Schedule VII specifies the areas or subjects to be undertaken by the company as CSR activities. These areas broadly align with national priorities and relate to sustainable and inclusive development. The Act does not recognise any expenditure on areas/activities outside of Schedule VII as CSR expenditure. Companies (CSR Policy) Rules, 2014 prescribes the operational framework and manner in which companies should comply with CSR provisions under the Act. The mode of implementation of CSR activities, content of CSR policy, impact assessment, reporting requirements and disclosure for CSR are covered under these Rules. The CSR architecture is disclosure-based and CSR- mandated companies are required to file details of CSR activities annually in the MCA-21 registry in e-form AOC4. A High-Level Committee set up in 2018 to review the CSR framework recommended that Schedule VII of the Act be mapped with Sustainable Development Goals (`SDGs'). The Committee noted that companies need to balance CSR spending between local area/areas around where it operates, and less developed regions such as aspirational districts. The Government of India launched the `Transformation of Aspirational Districts' Programme (`ADP') in January 2018 with the aim to improve [the] socio-economic status of the least developed regions across India. The programme is based on five socio-economic themes such as - Health & Nutrition, Education, Agriculture and Water Resources, Financial Inclusion and Skill Development and improvement of basic infrastructure... As on date, 112 aspirational districts are recognised by the Government wherein Jharkhand has the highest number of aspirational districts i.e., 19 followed by Bihar (13), Odisha and Chhattisgarh (10 each). The Government has been taking various initiatives to encourage CSR in aspirational districts and to remove regional disparities. [Source: Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India "Compendium on Corporate Social Responsibility in India" (2021)]

Question: The chief objective of the Government’s aspirational district programme is to:

Accepted Answer

improve India’s ranking in the Human Development Index

Answer

ensure access to financial services like banking, remittance, credit, insurance, pension in an affordable manner

Answer

promote entrepreneurship in India in manufacturing and other sectors

Answer

facilitate easy access to credit facilities for people belonging to vulnerable populations

Question 5

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: An Ordinance which is promulgated by the Governor has (as clause 2 of Article 213 provides) the same force and effect as an Act of the legislature of the State assented to by the Governor. However - and this is a matter of crucial importance - clause 2 goes on to stipulate in the same vein significant constitutional conditions. These conditions have to be fulfilled before the `force and effect' fiction comes into being. These conditions are prefaced by the expression "but every such Ordinance" which means that the constitutional fiction is subject to what is stipulated in sub-clauses (a) and (b). Sub-clause (a) provides that the Ordinance "shall be laid before the legislative assembly of the state" or before both the Houses in the case of a bi-cameral legislature. Is the requirement of laying an Ordinance before the state legislature mandatory? There can be no manner of doubt that it is. The expression "shall be laid" is a positive mandate which brooks no exceptions. That the word `shall' in sub-clause (a) of clause 2 of Article 213 is mandatory, emerges from reading the provision in its entirety. As we have noted earlier, an Ordinance can be promulgated only when the legislature is not in session. Upon the completion of six weeks of the reassembling of the legislature, an Ordinance "shall cease to operate". Article 213(2)(a) postulates that an ordinance would cease to operate upon the expiry of a period of six weeks of the reassembly of the legislature. The Oxford English dictionary defines the expression "cease" as : "to stop, give over, discontinue, desist; to come to the end." P Ramanatha Aiyar's, The Major Law Lexicon defines the expression "cease" to mean "discontinue or put an end to". Justice C K Thakker's Encyclopaedic Law Lexicon defines the word "cease" as meaning: "to put an end to; to stop, to terminate or to discontinue". The expression has been defined in similar terms in Black's Law Dictionary. The expression "cease to operate" in Article 213(2)(a) is attracted in two situations. The first is where a period of six weeks has expired since the reassembling of the legislature. The second situation is where a resolution has been passed by the legislature disapproving of an ordinance. Apart from these two situations that are contemplated by sub-clause (a), sub-clause (b) contemplates that an ordinance may be withdrawn at any time by the Governor. Upon its withdrawal the ordinance would cease to operate as well. [Extracts from the judgment of majority judgment in Krishna Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar, Civil Appeal No. 5875 of 1994, decided on January 2, 2017 hereafter `KK Singh']

Question: The Constitution Bench in D.C. Wadhwa v. State of Bihar (1987) 1 SCC 378 held that re-promulgation of an Ordinance was a ‘fraud on the Constitution’ because:

Accepted Answer

It is a colourable exercise of power under the Constitution of India

Answer

Legislative power is vested in the legislatures by the Constitution of India

Answer

The role of the Executive is to implement a law, not make it

Answer

None of the above

Question 6

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: The other material which prompted the High Court to reach the conclusion that the subsoil/minerals vest in the State is ... recitals of a patta which ..... states that if minerals are found in the property covered by the patta and if the pattadar exploits those minerals, the pattadar is liable for a separate tax in addition to the tax shown in the patta and .... certain standing orders of the Collector of Malabar which provided for collection of seigniorage fee in the event of the mining operation being carried on. We are of the clear opinion that the recitals in the patta or the Collector's standing order that the exploitation of mineral wealth in the patta land would attract additional tax, in our opinion, cannot in any way indicate the ownership of the State in the minerals. The power to tax is a necessary incident of sovereign authority (imperium) but not an incident of proprietary rights (dominium). Proprietary right is a compendium of rights consisting of various constituent, rights. If a person has only a share in the produce of some property, it can never be said that such property vests in such a person. In the instant case, the State asserted its `right' to demand a share in the `produce of the minerals worked' though the expression employed is right - it is in fact the Sovereign authority which is asserted. From the language of the BSO No.10 it is clear that such right to demand the share could be exercised only when the pattadar or somebody claiming through the pattadar, extracts/works the minerals - the authority of the State to collect money on the happening of an event - such a demand is more in the nature of an excise duty/a tax. The assertion of authority to collect a duty or tax is in the realm of the sovereign authority, but not a proprietary right.... The only other submission which we are required to deal with before we part with this matter is the argument of the learned counsel for the State that in view of the scheme of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (hereafter `MMDRA') which prohibits under Section 4 the carrying on of any mining activity in this country except in accordance with the permit, licence or mining lease as the case may be, granted under the Act, the appellants cannot claim any proprietary right in the sub-soil... [Extract from the judgment in Thressiamma Jacob v. Dept. of Mining & Geology, (2013) 9 SCC 725] (hereafter `T Jacob')

Question: The Supreme Court in State of Meghalaya v. All Dimasa Students Union Hasao [2019] held that in the Sixth Schedule State of meghalaya, where most lands are either privately or community-owned: i. Landowners of privately owned/ community owned lands can lease their lands for mining. ii. the State Government alone can grant a lease for mining in privately owned/community owned lands. iii. Landowners of privately owned/ community owned lands can lease their lands for mining after obtaining previous approval of the Central Government through the State Government. iv. All of the above

Accepted Answer

i and iii are correct

Answer

iv is correct

Answer

ii and iii are correct

Answer

None of the above is correct

Question 7

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: The philosophy of Corporate Social Responsibility ("CSR") has had a long-standing history in India. India is one of the first countries in the world to create a legal framework on CSR and statutorily mandate companies to report on the same. It emanates from the Gandhian principles of trusteeship and giving back to the society. The intent of the law is to mainstream the practice of business involvement in CSR and make it socially, economically and environmentally responsible. The Companies Act, 2013 (the `Act') mandates companies meeting a certain minimum threshold in terms of turnover/net worth/net profit to undertake CSR activities as per Schedule VII of the Act. Schedule VII specifies the areas or subjects to be undertaken by the company as CSR activities. These areas broadly align with national priorities and relate to sustainable and inclusive development. The Act does not recognise any expenditure on areas/activities outside of Schedule VII as CSR expenditure. Companies (CSR Policy) Rules, 2014 prescribes the operational framework and manner in which companies should comply with CSR provisions under the Act. The mode of implementation of CSR activities, content of CSR policy, impact assessment, reporting requirements and disclosure for CSR are covered under these Rules. The CSR architecture is disclosure-based and CSR- mandated companies are required to file details of CSR activities annually in the MCA-21 registry in e-form AOC4. A High-Level Committee set up in 2018 to review the CSR framework recommended that Schedule VII of the Act be mapped with Sustainable Development Goals (`SDGs'). The Committee noted that companies need to balance CSR spending between local area/areas around where it operates, and less developed regions such as aspirational districts. The Government of India launched the `Transformation of Aspirational Districts' Programme (`ADP') in January 2018 with the aim to improve [the] socio-economic status of the least developed regions across India. The programme is based on five socio-economic themes such as - Health & Nutrition, Education, Agriculture and Water Resources, Financial Inclusion and Skill Development and improvement of basic infrastructure... As on date, 112 aspirational districts are recognised by the Government wherein Jharkhand has the highest number of aspirational districts i.e., 19 followed by Bihar (13), Odisha and Chhattisgarh (10 each). The Government has been taking various initiatives to encourage CSR in aspirational districts and to remove regional disparities. [Source: Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India "Compendium on Corporate Social Responsibility in India" (2021)]

Question: Which one of the following comes within the scope of the ADP?

Accepted Answer

Skill Development

Answer

Labour Welfare

Answer

Maternity Benefits

Answer

Urban Employment

Question 8

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: The philosophy of Corporate Social Responsibility ("CSR") has had a long-standing history in India. India is one of the first countries in the world to create a legal framework on CSR and statutorily mandate companies to report on the same. It emanates from the Gandhian principles of trusteeship and giving back to the society. The intent of the law is to mainstream the practice of business involvement in CSR and make it socially, economically and environmentally responsible. The Companies Act, 2013 (the `Act') mandates companies meeting a certain minimum threshold in terms of turnover/net worth/net profit to undertake CSR activities as per Schedule VII of the Act. Schedule VII specifies the areas or subjects to be undertaken by the company as CSR activities. These areas broadly align with national priorities and relate to sustainable and inclusive development. The Act does not recognise any expenditure on areas/activities outside of Schedule VII as CSR expenditure. Companies (CSR Policy) Rules, 2014 prescribes the operational framework and manner in which companies should comply with CSR provisions under the Act. The mode of implementation of CSR activities, content of CSR policy, impact assessment, reporting requirements and disclosure for CSR are covered under these Rules. The CSR architecture is disclosure-based and CSR- mandated companies are required to file details of CSR activities annually in the MCA-21 registry in e-form AOC4. A High-Level Committee set up in 2018 to review the CSR framework recommended that Schedule VII of the Act be mapped with Sustainable Development Goals (`SDGs'). The Committee noted that companies need to balance CSR spending between local area/areas around where it operates, and less developed regions such as aspirational districts. The Government of India launched the `Transformation of Aspirational Districts' Programme (`ADP') in January 2018 with the aim to improve [the] socio-economic status of the least developed regions across India. The programme is based on five socio-economic themes such as - Health & Nutrition, Education, Agriculture and Water Resources, Financial Inclusion and Skill Development and improvement of basic infrastructure... As on date, 112 aspirational districts are recognised by the Government wherein Jharkhand has the highest number of aspirational districts i.e., 19 followed by Bihar (13), Odisha and Chhattisgarh (10 each). The Government has been taking various initiatives to encourage CSR in aspirational districts and to remove regional disparities. [Source: Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India "Compendium on Corporate Social Responsibility in India" (2021)]

Question: The High-Level Committee reviewing the CSR framework in 2018 recommended that:

Accepted Answer

companies should balance CSR spending between local areas and the less developed regions of the country

Answer

a national CSR data portal be set up to monitor the progress of implementation of CSR policies by companies

Answer

spending of CSR funds on Covid-19 related activities be considered as an eligible CSR activity

Answer

CSR implementing agencies should mandatorily register with the central government

Question 9

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: An Ordinance which is promulgated by the Governor has (as clause 2 of Article 213 provides) the same force and effect as an Act of the legislature of the State assented to by the Governor. However - and this is a matter of crucial importance - clause 2 goes on to stipulate in the same vein significant constitutional conditions. These conditions have to be fulfilled before the `force and effect' fiction comes into being. These conditions are prefaced by the expression "but every such Ordinance" which means that the constitutional fiction is subject to what is stipulated in sub-clauses (a) and (b). Sub-clause (a) provides that the Ordinance "shall be laid before the legislative assembly of the state" or before both the Houses in the case of a bi-cameral legislature. Is the requirement of laying an Ordinance before the state legislature mandatory? There can be no manner of doubt that it is. The expression "shall be laid" is a positive mandate which brooks no exceptions. That the word `shall' in sub-clause (a) of clause 2 of Article 213 is mandatory, emerges from reading the provision in its entirety. As we have noted earlier, an Ordinance can be promulgated only when the legislature is not in session. Upon the completion of six weeks of the reassembling of the legislature, an Ordinance "shall cease to operate". Article 213(2)(a) postulates that an ordinance would cease to operate upon the expiry of a period of six weeks of the reassembly of the legislature. The Oxford English dictionary defines the expression "cease" as : "to stop, give over, discontinue, desist; to come to the end." P Ramanatha Aiyar's, The Major Law Lexicon defines the expression "cease" to mean "discontinue or put an end to". Justice C K Thakker's Encyclopaedic Law Lexicon defines the word "cease" as meaning: "to put an end to; to stop, to terminate or to discontinue". The expression has been defined in similar terms in Black's Law Dictionary. The expression "cease to operate" in Article 213(2)(a) is attracted in two situations. The first is where a period of six weeks has expired since the reassembling of the legislature. The second situation is where a resolution has been passed by the legislature disapproving of an ordinance. Apart from these two situations that are contemplated by sub-clause (a), sub-clause (b) contemplates that an ordinance may be withdrawn at any time by the Governor. Upon its withdrawal the ordinance would cease to operate as well. [Extracts from the judgment of majority judgment in Krishna Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar, Civil Appeal No. 5875 of 1994, decided on January 2, 2017 hereafter `KK Singh']

Question: The power to promulgate an ordinance is an instance of the:

Accepted Answer

Executive power of the Governor

Answer

Delegated power of the Governor

Answer

Sovereign prerogative power of the Governor

Answer

None of the above

Question 10

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: An Ordinance which is promulgated by the Governor has (as clause 2 of Article 213 provides) the same force and effect as an Act of the legislature of the State assented to by the Governor. However - and this is a matter of crucial importance - clause 2 goes on to stipulate in the same vein significant constitutional conditions. These conditions have to be fulfilled before the `force and effect' fiction comes into being. These conditions are prefaced by the expression "but every such Ordinance" which means that the constitutional fiction is subject to what is stipulated in sub-clauses (a) and (b). Sub-clause (a) provides that the Ordinance "shall be laid before the legislative assembly of the state" or before both the Houses in the case of a bi-cameral legislature. Is the requirement of laying an Ordinance before the state legislature mandatory? There can be no manner of doubt that it is. The expression "shall be laid" is a positive mandate which brooks no exceptions. That the word `shall' in sub-clause (a) of clause 2 of Article 213 is mandatory, emerges from reading the provision in its entirety. As we have noted earlier, an Ordinance can be promulgated only when the legislature is not in session. Upon the completion of six weeks of the reassembling of the legislature, an Ordinance "shall cease to operate". Article 213(2)(a) postulates that an ordinance would cease to operate upon the expiry of a period of six weeks of the reassembly of the legislature. The Oxford English dictionary defines the expression "cease" as : "to stop, give over, discontinue, desist; to come to the end." P Ramanatha Aiyar's, The Major Law Lexicon defines the expression "cease" to mean "discontinue or put an end to". Justice C K Thakker's Encyclopaedic Law Lexicon defines the word "cease" as meaning: "to put an end to; to stop, to terminate or to discontinue". The expression has been defined in similar terms in Black's Law Dictionary. The expression "cease to operate" in Article 213(2)(a) is attracted in two situations. The first is where a period of six weeks has expired since the reassembling of the legislature. The second situation is where a resolution has been passed by the legislature disapproving of an ordinance. Apart from these two situations that are contemplated by sub-clause (a), sub-clause (b) contemplates that an ordinance may be withdrawn at any time by the Governor. Upon its withdrawal the ordinance would cease to operate as well. [Extracts from the judgment of majority judgment in Krishna Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar, Civil Appeal No. 5875 of 1994, decided on January 2, 2017 hereafter `KK Singh']

Question: In States which are bicameral, the Governor can promulgate an Ordinance only when:

Accepted Answer

Both Houses are not in session

Answer

When a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation

Answer

When the state has been placed under President’s rule

Answer

None of the above

Question 11

CLAT PG 2023 Question Paper with Answers