UPSC Prelims Practice Questions — Scope of legal fiction in party mergers

Question 1

Under which one of the following Constitutional Amendment Acts was the threshold for a valid merger of a legislature party under the Tenth Schedule raised from one-third to two-thirds of its members?

Accepted Answer

The Ninety-First Constitutional Amendment Act, 2003

Answer

The Fifty-Second Constitutional Amendment Act, 1985

Answer

The Seventy-Third Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992

Answer

The Ninety-Seventh Constitutional Amendment Act, 2011

Question 2

With reference to the changes brought by the Constitution (Ninety-First Amendment) Act, 2003 as compared to the position obtaining under the original Tenth Schedule, consider the following statements:
1. Prior to the amendment, defection by not less than one-third of the members of a legislature party was protected as a 'split'.
2. The amendment retained the split provision in Paragraph 3 while additionally introducing a two-thirds threshold for mergers in Paragraph 4.
3. The amendment also disqualifies a defecting legislator from being appointed as a Minister until he is re-elected or his term expires.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Accepted Answer

1 and 3 only

Answer

1 and 2 only

Answer

2 and 3 only

Answer

1, 2 and 3

Question 3

In Indian constitutional jurisprudence, the expression 'legal fiction', as reaffirmed by the Supreme Court while interpreting the merger provision of the Tenth Schedule, is best described as:

Accepted Answer

A statutory assumption of a fact as true for a defined purpose, even when factually untrue, and confined strictly to that purpose

Answer

A rule of evidence that shifts the burden of proof onto the party asserting a constitutional violation

Answer

A judicial device by which a court reads down an otherwise unconstitutional provision to save it from being struck down

Answer

A doctrine that allows Parliament to give retrospective effect to a law in order to validate executive action

Question 4

With reference to the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution and judicial doctrine governing party mergers, consider the following statements:
1. The Tenth Schedule was inserted into the Constitution by the Fifty-Second Constitutional Amendment Act, 1985.
2. Under Paragraph 4, the consent of not less than two-thirds of the members of the 'original political party' (and not of the legislature party) is the threshold for a valid merger.
3. The Bengal Immunity Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar (1955) ruling confined a legal fiction to the purpose for which it was created.
4. In Rajendra Singh Rana v. Swami Prasad Maurya (2007), the Supreme Court held that numerical support of the legislature party alone is sufficient to constitute a valid merger under the Tenth Schedule.
Which of the statements given above is/are NOT correct?

Accepted Answer

2 and 4 only

Answer

1 and 3 only

Answer

1, 2 and 4

Answer

3 only

Question 5

In April 2026, how many of the ten Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) Rajya Sabha members were accepted by the Rajya Sabha Chairman as having merged with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), triggering the constitutional debate on the scope of legal fiction under Paragraph 4 of the Tenth Schedule?

Accepted Answer

Seven

Answer

Five

Answer

Six

Answer

Eight

UPSC Prelims Practice Questions — Scope of legal fiction in party mergers

Q1. Under which one of the following Constitutional Amendment Acts was the threshold for a valid merger of a legislature party under the Tenth Schedule raised from one-third to two-thirds of its members?

Q3. In Indian constitutional jurisprudence, the expression 'legal fiction', as reaffirmed by the Supreme Court while interpreting the merger provision of the Tenth Schedule, is best described as:

Q5. In April 2026, how many of the ten Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) Rajya Sabha members were accepted by the Rajya Sabha Chairman as having merged with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), triggering the constitutional debate on the scope of legal fiction under Paragraph 4 of the Tenth Schedule?