Judicial Interpretation — MCQs

All questions with answers and explanations

Read the full set here, or use the practice card above to test yourself one question at a time.

1. In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (12 January 1988, AIR 1988 SC 1115, the Kanpur Nagar Mahapalika case), the Supreme Court relied on Article 51A(g) for which direction?

   • Closing the Kanpur tanneries
   • Directing the Central Government to have lessons on the natural environment taught in the first ten classes (correct answer)
   • Fixing compensation for dairy owners
   • Banning all new industries on the Ganga

   Explanation. The Court called protecting the natural environment one of the fundamental duties under Article 51A(g). It used that for the direction on environment lessons in schools.

2. Which of the following best describes how Article 51A(g) operated in the M.C. Mehta judgment of 12 January 1988?

   • It was the basis for closing industries under Article 21
   • It was cited for the direction to the Central Government on environment education in schools (correct answer)
   • It had no role at all in the judgment
   • It was used to punish individual citizens for pollution

   Explanation. The judgment uses Article 51A(g) only for the environment education direction. It does not use Articles 21 or 51A(g) to close any industry.

3. For how long each week did the Court direct that lessons on protecting the natural environment be taught in the first ten classes?

   • At least one hour (correct answer)
   • At least one day
   • At least ten minutes
   • Only during examinations

   Explanation. The Court directed teaching of at least one hour in a week, with free text books and a consideration of short training courses for teachers.

4. In Rangnath Misra v. Union of India (2003), the Supreme Court:

   • Struck down the Fundamental Duties
   • Took note of the Verma Committee's recommendations and said the Government should consider them and take steps to implement them as expeditiously as possible (correct answer)
   • Made Article 51A enforceable by writ
   • Ignored the Verma Committee

   Explanation. The Court took note of the Verma Committee's recommendations on making the duties real. It said the Government of India should consider them and take steps for their implementation as expeditiously as possible.

5. In the Ganga pollution case (M.C. Mehta, 1988), Article 51A(g) was:

   • The source of a penalty on the polluters
   • A support for a direction, not the source of a penalty (correct answer)
   • Ignored by the Court
   • Held to be enforceable by writ

   Explanation. The Court held it the duty of the Central Government to direct educational institutions to teach environment lessons for at least one hour a week in the first ten classes. The duty supported a direction. It was not the source of a penalty.

6. Which of these is NOT one of the three ways courts give Fundamental Duties practical effect despite non-justiciability?

   • As support for the way a court reads a statute
   • As support for a direction that a court gives
   • Against a rule that would force a person to act, where no law requires it
   • As an independent ground to impose criminal punishment on a citizen (correct answer)

   Explanation. Article 51A creates no offence and no penalty. The other three are the uses that appear in the cases.

7. A litigant argues that Article 51A(g) is 'not enforceable law', so a court cannot refer to it at all. Based on the M.C. Mehta judgment of 12 January 1988, this argument is:

   • Correct, because Article 51A can never be cited
   • Misconceived, because the Court cited Article 51A(g) in directing the Central Government on environment education (correct answer)
   • Correct only for government undertakings
   • Correct only after the 86th Amendment

   Explanation. The duties are not enforceable by writ on their own. The Court nevertheless cited Article 51A(g) as the ground for a direction.

8. The honest, exam-ready answer to 'are Fundamental Duties enforceable?' is:

   • Yes, fully and directly, like Fundamental Rights
   • No, in the narrow formal sense, but they have practical effect through interpretation and enabling legislation (correct answer)
   • No, in every sense, with no practical effect at all
   • Only Article 51A(a) is enforceable

   Explanation. Article 51A cannot found a writ on its own, but Fundamental Duties have real practical effect through interpretation, reasonable-restriction analysis and enabling statutes.

9. M.C. Mehta is associated with numerous separate public interest cases. What should a student always check when a question cites 'M.C. Mehta v. Union of India'?

   • Nothing, all M.C. Mehta cases are legally identical
   • Which specific matter (for example the Kanpur Nagar Mahapalika case of 12 January 1988, or vehicular pollution) the question refers to (correct answer)
   • Only the year of the case
   • Whether the case was decided in the Delhi High Court

   Explanation. M.C. Mehta litigated many distinct public interest matters over decades. The specific subject matter must be checked, not just the party name.

10. In M.K. Janardhanam v. District Collector, Tiruvallur (2002), a Madras High Court judge said that:

    • Fundamental Duties can be enforced by prosecution
    • It is every citizen's fundamental duty under Articles 48A and 51A(g) to protect and improve the natural environment (correct answer)
    • Article 51A was repealed
    • Article 51A applies only to the State

    Explanation. The judge said it is every citizen's fundamental duty under Articles 48A and 51A(g) to protect and improve the natural environment.