UPSC Prelims Practice Questions — Provision on partition of royal estate stays valid: Karnataka HC

Q1. Under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, an 'estate which descends to a single heir', kept outside the Act by Section 5(ii), is best described as which one of the following?

  • A. Any estate held by a person once recognised as a Ruler, which is wholly exempt from every law of succession in force in India
  • B. An estate devolving on one heir under the terms of a covenant or agreement with the Government of India, or under an enactment predating the Act
  • C. Every impartible estate in India, all of which necessarily pass by the rule of primogeniture irrespective of any covenant or enactment
  • D. All property of a joint Hindu family governed by Mitakshara law that has permanently remained undivided in the hands of its holder

Q2. Consider the following statements regarding the properties and persons kept outside the operation of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956: 1. The non-application of the Act to members of a Scheduled Tribe flows from Section 2 of the Act, and not from any clause of Section 5. 2. Section 5 excludes property the succession to which is regulated by the Indian Succession Act, 1925 by reason of the provisions of the Special Marriage Act, 1954. 3. Section 5 excludes the Valiamma Thampuran Kovilagam Estate and the Palace Fund, administered by the Palace Administration Board under a Proclamation of the Maharaja of Cochin. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. The non-application of the Act to members of a Scheduled Tribe flows from Section 2 of the Act, and not from any clause of Section 5.
  2. Section 5 excludes property the succession to which is regulated by the Indian Succession Act, 1925 by reason of the provisions of the Special Marriage Act, 1954.
  3. Section 5 excludes the Valiamma Thampuran Kovilagam Estate and the Palace Fund, administered by the Palace Administration Board under a Proclamation of the Maharaja of Cochin.
  • A. 1 and 2 only
  • B. 2 and 3 only
  • C. 1 and 3 only
  • D. 1, 2 and 3

Q3. With reference to the Constitution (Twenty-sixth Amendment) Act, 1971, consider the following: 1. Omission of Article 291, which had provided for privy purse sums payable to Rulers of Indian States. 2. Omission of Article 362, which had dealt with the rights and privileges of Rulers of Indian States. 3. Insertion of Article 363A, ending recognition of Rulers and abolishing privy purses. 4. Omission of Article 363, which bars interference by courts in disputes arising out of covenants and agreements with Rulers. Which of the above is/are correctly identified as changes made by that Amendment?

  1. Omission of Article 291, which had provided for privy purse sums payable to Rulers of Indian States.
  2. Omission of Article 362, which had dealt with the rights and privileges of Rulers of Indian States.
  3. Insertion of Article 363A, ending recognition of Rulers and abolishing privy purses.
  4. Omission of Article 363, which bars interference by courts in disputes arising out of covenants and agreements with Rulers.
  • A. 1 and 2 only
  • B. 2, 3 and 4
  • C. 1, 2 and 3
  • D. 3 and 4 only

Q4. With reference to the Constitution (Twenty-sixth Amendment) Act, 1971 and Article 363A, consider the following statements: 1. A Prince, Chief or other person recognised by the President as the Ruler of an Indian State before the commencement of the Amendment ceases to be recognised as such Ruler. 2. Privy purses are abolished and all rights, liabilities and obligations in respect of privy purses are extinguished. 3. The Amendment simultaneously repealed Section 5(ii) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, ending the exclusion of single-heir royal estates from that Act. 4. The Amendment retained privy purses at a reduced rate, substituting the expression 'Ruler' with 'successor of a Ruler' wherever it occurred in the Constitution. Which of the above is/are NOT correct?

  1. A Prince, Chief or other person recognised by the President as the Ruler of an Indian State before the commencement of the Amendment ceases to be recognised as such Ruler.
  2. Privy purses are abolished and all rights, liabilities and obligations in respect of privy purses are extinguished.
  3. The Amendment simultaneously repealed Section 5(ii) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, ending the exclusion of single-heir royal estates from that Act.
  4. The Amendment retained privy purses at a reduced rate, substituting the expression 'Ruler' with 'successor of a Ruler' wherever it occurred in the Constitution.
  • A. 1 and 2
  • B. 3 and 4
  • C. 2, 3 and 4
  • D. 4 only

Q5. Which one of the following best describes the ground on which the Karnataka High Court in 2026 rejected the challenge to Section 5(ii) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956?

  • A. The statutory exclusion in personal law and the constitutional provisions on privy purses operate in separate domains, so deleting Articles 291 and 362 does not invalidate the provision
  • B. Article 363 bars courts from examining any dispute arising out of a covenant with a Ruler, so the validity of the provision could not be gone into at all
  • C. Covenants entered into by Rulers with the Government of India were placed in the Ninth Schedule, immunising the provision from judicial review on any ground
  • D. Estates covered by the provision vested in the Union on abolition of privy purses, leaving the petitioners without any surviving cause of action

Q6. The lead petitioner in the 2015 petitions decided by the Karnataka High Court in 2026, Chaduranga Kantharaj Urs, is the grandson of which one of the following?

  • A. Jayachamarajendra Wadiyar, the last ruler of the princely State of Mysore
  • B. Yeshwantrao Ghorpade, the erstwhile Maharaja of the princely State of Sandur
  • C. Krishnaraja Wadiyar IV, the ruler of Mysore during the early twentieth century
  • D. Kanteerava Narasimharaja Wadiyar, the Yuvaraja of the princely State of Mysore

Q7. Under the Instrument of Accession as executed by the Rulers of princely States in 1947, the jurisdiction of the central government over an acceding State was initially confined to how many subjects?

  • A. Two
  • B. Three
  • C. Four
  • D. Five

Q8. Immediately after 15 August 1947, the negotiation of accession and merger arrangements with the Rulers of the princely States was carried out by which one of the following?

  • A. The States Department of the Government of India, under Vallabhbhai Patel with V.P. Menon as its senior officer
  • B. The Political Department of the Government of India, functioning under the Governor-General's Executive Council
  • C. The Ministry of External Affairs and Commonwealth Relations, through its division for territories and treaties
  • D. The Union Powers Committee of the Constituent Assembly, through its sub-committee on States and territories

Q9. With reference to impartible estates in Hindu law, consider the following statements: 1. Section 5(ii) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 brings a single-heir estate within the Act's succession provisions where the estate descends under a covenant with the Government of India. 2. The holder of an impartible estate is deemed to be the individual owner of all the properties comprised in the estate. 3. Under the Tamil Nadu (Madras) Impartible Estates Act, 1904 an estate is impartible if it is specified in the Schedule to the Act or is later declared to be so by an Act of the legislature. 4. Impartibility is conferred on an estate by a notification issued by the Central Government in the Official Gazette. Which of the above is/are NOT correct?

  1. Section 5(ii) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 brings a single-heir estate within the Act's succession provisions where the estate descends under a covenant with the Government of India.
  2. The holder of an impartible estate is deemed to be the individual owner of all the properties comprised in the estate.
  3. Under the Tamil Nadu (Madras) Impartible Estates Act, 1904 an estate is impartible if it is specified in the Schedule to the Act or is later declared to be so by an Act of the legislature.
  4. Impartibility is conferred on an estate by a notification issued by the Central Government in the Official Gazette.
  • A. 1 and 4
  • B. 2 and 3
  • C. 1, 3 and 4
  • D. 2 only

Q10. Consider the following pairs of terms and their descriptions in the context of succession to former royal estates: 1. Gaddi — the ceremonial throne or seat, succession to which follows single-heir descent. 2. Mitakshara coparcenary — a body of persons who take an interest in joint family property by birth. 3. Dayabhaga school — the school under which a son acquires a right by birth in his father's property during the father's lifetime. 4. Palace Administration Board — the body administering the Valiamma Thampuran Kovilagam Estate and the Palace Fund. Which of the above is/are correctly identified?

  1. Gaddi — the ceremonial throne or seat, succession to which follows single-heir descent.
  2. Mitakshara coparcenary — a body of persons who take an interest in joint family property by birth.
  3. Dayabhaga school — the school under which a son acquires a right by birth in his father's property during the father's lifetime.
  4. Palace Administration Board — the body administering the Valiamma Thampuran Kovilagam Estate and the Palace Fund.
  • A. 1 and 3
  • B. 2 and 3 only
  • C. 1, 2 and 4
  • D. 3 and 4

Q11. The Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as amended in 2005, is administered by which one of the following?

  • A. The Legislative Department of the Ministry of Law and Justice
  • B. The Department of Justice of the Ministry of Law and Justice
  • C. The Department of Social Justice and Empowerment of the Ministry of Social Justice
  • D. The Department of Women and Child Development of the concerned Ministry

Q12. Counting both the Articles omitted and the Article newly inserted, the Constitution (Twenty-sixth Amendment) Act, 1971 affected how many Articles of the Constitution in all?

  • A. Two
  • B. Three
  • C. Four
  • D. Five