Official: SFG / RLG All Tests Discussions in one place
Hello All,
The Group usage here is a little cumbersome, so I am creating this thread to make sure that all questions with doubts stay in one place. Can someone push all the doubts and queries here? I will make this an announcement?
-Faceless, Anonymous "root"
Kindly, re evaluate answer Q or delete Q at all. It is for weaker section not vulnerable. And if you want to keep answer as it is kindly show format of the act with word VULNERABLE from any official publication.
It's not about to do rebel but any worng information or incomplete information can alter students thought process and consequently he or she may create mistake in CSE PT or other examination taken by government.
Hello guys,
what is the debate in this question? If the kegal language says weaker section of the society, then you have to mark vulnerable as correct!
Pls dont go by language issue. The statement will be deemed correct!
Lighthouse,w.r.t Question no 37 in Test no 11. statement no 3.
"The constitution of India provides for reservation of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes in the State Legislative assembly of Every state" has been marked correct in answer key.
However, Article 332(1) clearly states thatthis is not applicable in case of " Scheduled Tribes in the tribal areas of Assam, in Nagaland and in Meghalaya" i.e Reservation for Scheduled Castes shall not apply to Nagaland and Meghalaya.
This provision has been specifically provided in the constitution due tovery low presence of Indigenous Scheduled Castes in these 2 states and tribal regions of Assam.
So the answer to Question no 37 should be "D".
Plz clarify accordingly.
------------------------------
Also the answer of Ques 30 is also marked as incorrect. it would be "B" instead of "D".
Lighthouse,BASSICK
w.r.t Question no 37 in Test no 11. statement no 3.
"The constitution of India provides for reservation of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes in the State Legislative assembly of Every state" has been marked correct in answer key.
However, Article 332(1) clearly states thatthis is not applicable in case of " Scheduled Tribes in the tribal areas of Assam, in Nagaland and in Meghalaya" i.e Reservation for Scheduled Castes shall not apply to Nagaland and Meghalaya.
This provision has been specifically provided in the constitution due tovery low presence of Indigenous Scheduled Castes in these 2 states and tribal regions of Assam.
So the answer to Question no 37 should be "D".
Plz clarify accordingly.
------------------------------
Also the answer of Ques 30 is also marked as incorrect. it would be "B" instead of "D".
Reservation is not provided for STs from Scheduled Areas of Assam and not from the entire area of Assam. The entire list of reserved Constituency is available on ECI handouts.
In Meghalaya, 55 out of 60 seats are reserved for STs. The constitution doesn't prohibit the reservation for SCs in the state. However, in the background of the low SC population in the state, the reservation has not been provided.
In Nagaland 59 out of 60 seats are reserved for STs. The constitution doesn't prohibit the reservation for SCs in the state. However, in the background of the low SC population in the state, the reservation has not been provided.
Also it is not the discretion of parliament/president that reservation have not been provided for SCs in Nagaland and Meghalaya, rather a specific mention of the provision in constitution and that is why constitution "does not provide for reservation for Scheduled castesandscheduled tribes inAllstates."
Other reason for specific mention is the constitution is the factor of "IndigenousSchedule Castes" while providing reservation in state legislature of the these two states, which requires specific exemption provision in A332(1). Since Meghalaya do provides 5% reservations to Scheduled castes in Services.
Que No.: 14 ... Statement 3...." which is wrong as per the Key"
If any one consider the Answer key is right , Can he share the link about that info... where Constitution of india defined the term "Misbehavior".
Article 317 (4) has defined it clearly. If the Chairman or any other member of a Public Service Commission is or becomes in any way concerned or interested in any contract or agreement made by or on behalf of the Government of India or the Government of a State or participates in any way in the profit thereof or in any benefit or emolument arising therefrom otherwise than as a member and in common with the other members of an incorporated company, he shall, for the purposes of clause ( 1 ), be deemed to be guilty of misbehaviour
@Thinker It is clearly mentioned in article 332 thatexcept Meghalaya and Nagaland.And since the statement is about providing reservation i.e constitution "provides for" it ain't about the prohibitions.It's a simple statement with specific mention of "Scheduled casteandScheduled tribe" and not "Scheduled caste or Scheduled tribes" in that case it would have been correct.
Also it is not the discretion of parliament/president that reservation have not been provided for SCs in Nagaland and Meghalaya, rather a specific mention of the provision in constitution and that is why constitution "does not provide for reservation for Scheduled castesandscheduled tribes inAllstates."
Other reason for specific mention is the constitution is the factor of "IndigenousSchedule Castes" while providing reservation in state legislature of the these two states, which requires specific exemption provision in A332(1). Since Meghalaya do provides 5% reservations to Scheduled castes in Services.
@Thinker It is clearly mentioned in article 332 thatexcept Meghalaya and Nagaland.And since the statement is about providing reservation i.e constitution "provides for" it ain't about the prohibitions.It's a simple statement with specific mention of "Scheduled casteandScheduled tribe" and not "Scheduled caste or Scheduled tribes" in that case it would have been correct.
Also it is not the discretion of parliament/president that reservation have not been provided for SCs in Nagaland and Meghalaya, rather a specific mention of the provision in constitution and that is why constitution "does not provide for reservation for Scheduled castesandscheduled tribes inAllstates."
Other reason for specific mention is the constitution is the factor of "IndigenousSchedule Castes" while providing reservation in state legislature of the these two states, which requires specific exemption provision in A332(1). Since Meghalaya do provides 5% reservations to Scheduled castes in Services.
There are certain discrepancies in the sources that we are using. https://www.constitution.org/cons/india/p16332.html. This website doesn't mention the point which you are presenting. The constitution has not provided for the exception in case of Scheduled Caste reservation. But still, I will reverify the statements. Please go through the link again and let me know if you are satisfied. Thanks and regards.
Write your comment…
