UPSC Prelims Practice Questions — RS clears Bill to increase number of SC judges

Q1. The following pairs relate the year of a statutory revision to the maximum number of judges, excluding the Chief Justice of India, fixed for the Supreme Court under the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956: 1. 1956 — ten judges 2. 1960 — thirteen judges 3. 1977 — seventeen judges 4. 1986 — thirty judges Which of the above pairs is/are NOT correctly matched?

  1. 1956 — ten judges
  2. 1960 — thirteen judges
  3. 1977 — seventeen judges
  4. 1986 — thirty judges
  • A. 1 only
  • B. 3 and 4
  • C. 4 only
  • D. 2 and 4

Q2. Which one of the following correctly describes the authority that may enlarge the number of judges of the Supreme Court of India and the source from which their salaries are met?

  • A. Parliament, by law under Article 124(1), with salaries charged on the Consolidated Fund of India
  • B. Parliament, by law under Article 124(1), with salaries charged on the Contingency Fund of India
  • C. The President, by order under Article 124(2), with salaries charged on the Consolidated Fund of India
  • D. The Supreme Court collegium, by recommendation under Article 124(1), with salaries voted annually by Parliament

Q3. With reference to the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Bill/Act, 2026, consider the following statements: 1. It raises the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court from 34 to 38, including the Chief Justice of India. 2. It substitutes the word 'thirty-three' by 'thirty-seven' in section 2 of the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956. 3. It replaces an Ordinance that had been promulgated on 16 May 2026. 4. It was introduced in the Rajya Sabha on 20 July 2026 and thereafter transmitted to the Lok Sabha. Which of the above is/are NOT correct?

  1. It raises the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court from 34 to 38, including the Chief Justice of India.
  2. It substitutes the word 'thirty-three' by 'thirty-seven' in section 2 of the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956.
  3. It replaces an Ordinance that had been promulgated on 16 May 2026.
  4. It was introduced in the Rajya Sabha on 20 July 2026 and thereafter transmitted to the Lok Sabha.
  • A. 1 and 3
  • B. 2 only
  • C. 4 only
  • D. 2 and 4

Q4. Consider the following statements comparing the 2019 and the 2026 revisions of the Supreme Court's sanctioned judge strength: 1. The 2019 revision raised the number of judges other than the Chief Justice from 30 to 33, while the 2026 revision raises it from 33 to 37. 2. Each of the two revisions added an identical number of judges to the sanctioned strength. 3. Unlike the 2019 revision, the enhanced strength in 2026 first took legal effect through an Ordinance before Parliament enacted the amending law. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. The 2019 revision raised the number of judges other than the Chief Justice from 30 to 33, while the 2026 revision raises it from 33 to 37.
  2. Each of the two revisions added an identical number of judges to the sanctioned strength.
  3. Unlike the 2019 revision, the enhanced strength in 2026 first took legal effect through an Ordinance before Parliament enacted the amending law.
  • A. 1 only
  • B. 1 and 3 only
  • C. 2 and 3 only
  • D. 1, 2 and 3

Q5. Consider the following statements comparing the treatment of a Money Bill with that of an Ordinary Bill in Parliament: 1. The Rajya Sabha may amend but not reject a Money Bill, whereas it may both amend and reject an Ordinary Bill. 2. An Ordinary Bill may be introduced in either House, whereas a Money Bill may be introduced only in the Lok Sabha and that too on the prior recommendation of the President. 3. A deadlock over an Ordinary Bill may be resolved through a joint sitting under Article 108, but no joint sitting is provided for in the case of a Money Bill. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. The Rajya Sabha may amend but not reject a Money Bill, whereas it may both amend and reject an Ordinary Bill.
  2. An Ordinary Bill may be introduced in either House, whereas a Money Bill may be introduced only in the Lok Sabha and that too on the prior recommendation of the President.
  3. A deadlock over an Ordinary Bill may be resolved through a joint sitting under Article 108, but no joint sitting is provided for in the case of a Money Bill.
  • A. 1 and 2 only
  • B. 1 and 3 only
  • C. 2 and 3 only
  • D. 1, 2 and 3

Q6. If a dispute arises as to whether a Bill pending before Parliament is a Money Bill or not, whose decision on that question is final?

  • A. The Speaker of the Lok Sabha, whose certificate is endorsed on the Bill
  • B. The Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, acting in consultation with the Speaker
  • C. The President of India, at the stage of granting assent to the Bill
  • D. The Attorney-General of India, on a reference made by the Union Government

Q7. With reference to the ordinance-making power of the President under Article 123, consider the following statements: 1. The power is available only when Parliament is not in session, and requires the President's satisfaction that circumstances render immediate action necessary. 2. An Ordinance so promulgated has the same force and effect as an Act of Parliament. 3. Once promulgated, an Ordinance remains in force permanently unless it is struck down by the Supreme Court. 4. An Ordinance may be withdrawn by the President at any time. Which of the above is/are NOT correct?

  1. The power is available only when Parliament is not in session, and requires the President's satisfaction that circumstances render immediate action necessary.
  2. An Ordinance so promulgated has the same force and effect as an Act of Parliament.
  3. Once promulgated, an Ordinance remains in force permanently unless it is struck down by the Supreme Court.
  4. An Ordinance may be withdrawn by the President at any time.
  • A. 1 and 3
  • B. 3 only
  • C. 3 and 4
  • D. 1 only

Q8. Consider the following statements about ordinance-making power and its recent exercise: 1. The power to promulgate an Ordinance when the legislature is not in session is conferred on the President by Article 123 and on the Governor of a State by Article 213. 2. An Ordinance promulgated under Article 123 ceases to operate on the expiry of six weeks from the reassembly of Parliament unless it is approved earlier. 3. The Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance, 2026 was promulgated pursuant to a Union Cabinet approval given on 20 July 2026. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. The power to promulgate an Ordinance when the legislature is not in session is conferred on the President by Article 123 and on the Governor of a State by Article 213.
  2. An Ordinance promulgated under Article 123 ceases to operate on the expiry of six weeks from the reassembly of Parliament unless it is approved earlier.
  3. The Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance, 2026 was promulgated pursuant to a Union Cabinet approval given on 20 July 2026.
  • A. 1 and 2 only
  • B. 2 only
  • C. 1 and 3 only
  • D. 1, 2 and 3

Q9. Which one of the following statements regarding the appointment of a 'distinguished jurist' as a judge of the Supreme Court is correct?

  • A. Article 124(3) allows such appointment on the President's opinion, but no such appointment has so far been made
  • B. Article 124(3) allows such appointment only where the person has additionally practised as an advocate of a High Court for ten years
  • C. Article 124(2) allows such appointment, and every such appointment necessarily requires prior approval of both Houses of Parliament
  • D. Article 217 allows such appointment, though all judges so appointed must retire at the age of sixty-two years

Q10. The legislative proposal to enhance the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court, and the pendency data placed before Parliament in its support, were piloted by which one of the following Union Ministries?

  • A. Ministry of Law and Justice
  • B. Ministry of Home Affairs
  • C. Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions
  • D. Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs

Q11. The following pair each category of Bill with a feature of its passage through Parliament: 1. Constitution Amendment Bill — no provision exists for a joint sitting to resolve a disagreement between the two Houses. 2. Financial Bill under Article 117(3) — it cannot be passed by either House unless the President has recommended its consideration. 3. Money Bill — it is deemed to have been passed by both Houses if the Rajya Sabha does not return it within fourteen days of receipt. 4. Ordinary Bill — it may be introduced in either House, but only with the prior recommendation of the President. Which of the above is/are correctly identified?

  1. Constitution Amendment Bill — no provision exists for a joint sitting to resolve a disagreement between the two Houses.
  2. Financial Bill under Article 117(3) — it cannot be passed by either House unless the President has recommended its consideration.
  3. Money Bill — it is deemed to have been passed by both Houses if the Rajya Sabha does not return it within fourteen days of receipt.
  4. Ordinary Bill — it may be introduced in either House, but only with the prior recommendation of the President.
  • A. 1 and 3 only
  • B. 2 and 4 only
  • C. 1, 2 and 3 only
  • D. 1, 2, 3 and 4