Q. With reference to Net Demand and Time Liabilities (NDTL), consider the following statements:
1. It includes inter-bank deposits.
2. It is used to determine both CRR and SLR.
3. It represents the total liabilities of a bank to the public.
Which of the above statements is/are correct?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3
1. It includes inter-bank deposits.
2. It is used to determine both CRR and SLR.
3. It represents the total liabilities of a bank to the public.
Which of the above statements is/are correct?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3
Answer: (b) — Statements 2 and 3 are correct.
NDTL = (Deposits from public + Deposits from institutions + Other liabilities) – (Inter-bank deposits)
☑️Legal Basis :
•Mentioned under Section 42(1) of the RBI Act, 1934 (for Scheduled Banks).
•RBI defines NDTL precisely in its Master Circular on CRR and SLR issued annually.
NDTL = (Deposits from public + Deposits from institutions + Other liabilities) – (Inter-bank deposits)
☑️Legal Basis :
•Mentioned under Section 42(1) of the RBI Act, 1934 (for Scheduled Banks).
•RBI defines NDTL precisely in its Master Circular on CRR and SLR issued annually.
✨Can Finance Commission recommendations be challenged in court?
✅ Technically, yes — they can be challenged,
but
👉courts usually do not interfere, because Finance Commission recommendations are advisory, not binding.
☑️Constitutional Basis
•Article 280 establishes the Finance Commission (FC) and defines its functions.
•The FC’s duty is to make recommendations to the President regarding:
•Distribution of taxes between Union & States,
•Grants-in-aid to States,
•Measures to augment State finances,
•and any other matter referred by the President in the interest of sound finance (Art. 280(3)(d)).
However —
👉 these are recommendations, not enforceable directions.
☑️Judicial Viewpoint
•Courts have consistently held that the Finance Commission is a recommendatory body.
•Its report does not have legal force by itself — it becomes operational only when accepted by the President / Union Government and implemented through Finance Acts or budgetary processes.
Hence, unless:
•there is a violation of constitutional provisions (e.g., discrimination, violation of federal principles), or
•procedural irregularity in the Commission’s functioning,
…the courts will not entertain challenges to its recommendations.
☑️Example (Judicial Observations)
•In Union of India v. State of Punjab (1987) and later cases, the Supreme Court observed that the Finance Commission’s recommendations are advisory in nature and not justiciable in ordinary circumstances.
✅ Technically, yes — they can be challenged,
but
👉courts usually do not interfere, because Finance Commission recommendations are advisory, not binding.
☑️Constitutional Basis
•Article 280 establishes the Finance Commission (FC) and defines its functions.
•The FC’s duty is to make recommendations to the President regarding:
•Distribution of taxes between Union & States,
•Grants-in-aid to States,
•Measures to augment State finances,
•and any other matter referred by the President in the interest of sound finance (Art. 280(3)(d)).
However —
👉 these are recommendations, not enforceable directions.
☑️Judicial Viewpoint
•Courts have consistently held that the Finance Commission is a recommendatory body.
•Its report does not have legal force by itself — it becomes operational only when accepted by the President / Union Government and implemented through Finance Acts or budgetary processes.
Hence, unless:
•there is a violation of constitutional provisions (e.g., discrimination, violation of federal principles), or
•procedural irregularity in the Commission’s functioning,
…the courts will not entertain challenges to its recommendations.
☑️Example (Judicial Observations)
•In Union of India v. State of Punjab (1987) and later cases, the Supreme Court observed that the Finance Commission’s recommendations are advisory in nature and not justiciable in ordinary circumstances.
❤2
CSR's IAS - Official UPSC/PSC Preparation Channel
Q.1852) Consider the following statements with reference to the Speaker of Lok Sabha. 1. The decision of Speaker cannot be criticised in the House or outside. 2. The Speaker is the ex-officio President of the Indian Parliamentary Group. 3. The Lok Sabha…
Hello everyone , I will be continuing the MCQ series from here on (Q.1852) i.e.
“UPSC Daily Edge – 1 MCQ a Day”
This will create the idea of daily competitive advantage.
“UPSC Daily Edge – 1 MCQ a Day”
This will create the idea of daily competitive advantage.
👍2❤1
“Daily MCQ Edge Series”
[ Topic : Indian Polity ]
Q.1853) Consider the following statements.
1. The Constitution provides power to change the legal status of a State to a Union Territory.
2. J&K was split into two UTs in accordance with Article 3.
[ Topic : Indian Polity ]
Q.1853) Consider the following statements.
1. The Constitution provides power to change the legal status of a State to a Union Territory.
2. J&K was split into two UTs in accordance with Article 3.
Explanation :
This question is a prime example of a debatable MCQ with interpretation.
Both statements are INCORRECT.
👉Statement 1: “The Constitution provides power to change the legal status of a State to a Union Territory.”
This statement is Incorrect.
Why?
•Article 3 empowers Parliament to:
•form new States
•alter areas
•alter boundaries
•alter names
•But Article 3 does NOT explicitly say that a State can be converted into a Union Territory.
•True, the Explanation to Article 3 says that “State includes Union Territory”,
but the Constitution never expressly gives power to downgrade a State into a UT.
So, constitutionally, the power is derived through interpretation, not explicitly “provided”.
👉Statement 2: “J&K was split into two UTs in accordance with Article 3.”
This statement is also Incorrect.
Why?
•The 2019 reorganisation (J&K → J&K UT + Ladakh UT) involved Article 3,
but NOT directly.
Before Article 3 could be applied:
1.Presidential Order C.O. 272 altered J&K’s constitutional position.
2.Under Article 356, J&K was placed under President’s Rule.
3.Only after this, Parliament (acting as State Legislature) could “give its views”.
4.Then Article 3 was used to reorganize the territory.
Thus, to say “it was split in accordance with Article 3” is not accurate because:
•Article 3 cannot apply to a State without consultation of its Legislature,
and J&K did not have a Legislature in 2019.
•So Article 356 + Presidential Orders changed the situation first.
Therefore, the statement is oversimplified and incorrect.
✅ Final Answer: (d) Neither 1 nor 2
This question is a prime example of a debatable MCQ with interpretation.
Both statements are INCORRECT.
👉Statement 1: “The Constitution provides power to change the legal status of a State to a Union Territory.”
This statement is Incorrect.
Why?
•Article 3 empowers Parliament to:
•form new States
•alter areas
•alter boundaries
•alter names
•But Article 3 does NOT explicitly say that a State can be converted into a Union Territory.
•True, the Explanation to Article 3 says that “State includes Union Territory”,
but the Constitution never expressly gives power to downgrade a State into a UT.
So, constitutionally, the power is derived through interpretation, not explicitly “provided”.
👉Statement 2: “J&K was split into two UTs in accordance with Article 3.”
This statement is also Incorrect.
Why?
•The 2019 reorganisation (J&K → J&K UT + Ladakh UT) involved Article 3,
but NOT directly.
Before Article 3 could be applied:
1.Presidential Order C.O. 272 altered J&K’s constitutional position.
2.Under Article 356, J&K was placed under President’s Rule.
3.Only after this, Parliament (acting as State Legislature) could “give its views”.
4.Then Article 3 was used to reorganize the territory.
Thus, to say “it was split in accordance with Article 3” is not accurate because:
•Article 3 cannot apply to a State without consultation of its Legislature,
and J&K did not have a Legislature in 2019.
•So Article 356 + Presidential Orders changed the situation first.
Therefore, the statement is oversimplified and incorrect.
✅ Final Answer: (d) Neither 1 nor 2
❤2👏2🙏1
“Daily MCQ Edge Series”
[ Topic : Indian Polity ]
Q.1854) Under Article 142, the Supreme Court can pass decrees for “complete justice”. Which of the following limitations apply?
1. Such decrees cannot override express statutory provisions.
2. Such decrees are enforceable as if they were decrees of a civil court.
3. Parliament can by law curtail this power.
[ Topic : Indian Polity ]
Q.1854) Under Article 142, the Supreme Court can pass decrees for “complete justice”. Which of the following limitations apply?
1. Such decrees cannot override express statutory provisions.
2. Such decrees are enforceable as if they were decrees of a civil court.
3. Parliament can by law curtail this power.
Explanation:
Article 142(1) of the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to pass any decree or order necessary for doing “complete justice” in any cause or matter pending before it.
Statement 1:
Such decrees cannot override express statutory provisions.
✅ Correct
• Though Article 142 gives wide discretionary powers, it cannot be used to contravene or ignore substantive statutory provisions.
• The Court clarified this in several judgments:
• A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak (1988) — SC held that Article 142 cannot be used to supplant substantive law.
• Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India (1998) — reiterated that this power cannot override existing law, especially where statutes lay down specific procedures or punishments.
👉Therefore, limited by statutory law, but not by procedural technicalities.
Statement 2:
Such decrees are enforceable as if they were decrees of a civil court.
✅ Correct
• Article 142(1) expressly provides that “any decree or order so made shall be enforceable throughout the territory of India in such manner as may be prescribed by Parliament and, until so prescribed, in such manner as the President may by order determine.”
• The Supreme Court (Decrees and Orders) Enforcement Order, 1954 makes them enforceable like civil court decrees.
Statement 3:
Parliament can by law curtail this power.
❌ Incorrect
• This power flows directly from the Constitution itself.
• Parliament cannot curtail or restrict it through ordinary legislation.
• Only a Constitutional Amendment could theoretically modify Article 142.
👉Final Answer:
✅ (a) 1 and 2 only
Article 142(1) of the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to pass any decree or order necessary for doing “complete justice” in any cause or matter pending before it.
Statement 1:
Such decrees cannot override express statutory provisions.
✅ Correct
• Though Article 142 gives wide discretionary powers, it cannot be used to contravene or ignore substantive statutory provisions.
• The Court clarified this in several judgments:
• A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak (1988) — SC held that Article 142 cannot be used to supplant substantive law.
• Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India (1998) — reiterated that this power cannot override existing law, especially where statutes lay down specific procedures or punishments.
👉Therefore, limited by statutory law, but not by procedural technicalities.
Statement 2:
Such decrees are enforceable as if they were decrees of a civil court.
✅ Correct
• Article 142(1) expressly provides that “any decree or order so made shall be enforceable throughout the territory of India in such manner as may be prescribed by Parliament and, until so prescribed, in such manner as the President may by order determine.”
• The Supreme Court (Decrees and Orders) Enforcement Order, 1954 makes them enforceable like civil court decrees.
Statement 3:
Parliament can by law curtail this power.
❌ Incorrect
• This power flows directly from the Constitution itself.
• Parliament cannot curtail or restrict it through ordinary legislation.
• Only a Constitutional Amendment could theoretically modify Article 142.
👉Final Answer:
✅ (a) 1 and 2 only
❤3
“Daily MCQ Edge Series”
[ Topic : Environment and Ecology]
Q.1855) With reference to CITES, consider the following about “Non-Detriment Findings (NDFs)”
1. NDFs are required only for Appendix I species.
2. NDFs assess whether international trade will not negatively impact survival of the species.
3. NDFs are issued by the Management Authority.
[ Topic : Environment and Ecology]
Q.1855) With reference to CITES, consider the following about “Non-Detriment Findings (NDFs)”
1. NDFs are required only for Appendix I species.
2. NDFs assess whether international trade will not negatively impact survival of the species.
3. NDFs are issued by the Management Authority.
Explanation:
• NDFs are required for Appendix I and II, not only I → so 1 is wrong.
• NDFs are prepared by Scientific Authority, NOT Management Authority → 3 is wrong.
• Only statement 2 is correct.
• NDFs are required for Appendix I and II, not only I → so 1 is wrong.
• NDFs are prepared by Scientific Authority, NOT Management Authority → 3 is wrong.
• Only statement 2 is correct.
☑️What are Non-Detriment Findings (NDFs) in CITES ?
👉A Non-Detriment Finding (NDF) is a scientific assessment that a CITES-listed species can be legally exported without harming its survival in the wild.
👉It is mandatory for export of species in Appendix I & II.
✨Who prepares NDF?
👉 The Scientific Authority of the exporting country
(In India: Wildlife Crime Control Bureau (WCCB) functions as SA + experts approved by MoEFCC)
✨Purpose of NDF
To ensure:
•Trade is sustainable
•Trade is not detrimental to the survival of the species
•Harvest/export does not reduce wild population viability
•Species’ role in the ecosystem is not compromised
Without an NDF, export permit cannot be issued (even if other conditions are met).
✨What NDF assesses?
NDF involves these key parameters:
1.Population status (size, trends, structure)
2.Distribution & habitat condition
3.Reproductive biology & life history
4.Impact of past & proposed harvests
5.Regeneration and recovery capability
6.Threats (poaching, habitat loss, trade pressure)
7.Effectiveness of management plans
8.Legal protection and monitoring systems
✨When is NDF not required?
👉Appendix III species
👉Re-export of already certified specimens
👉Captive-bred species under certain exemptions
👉Artificially propagated plants
👉A Non-Detriment Finding (NDF) is a scientific assessment that a CITES-listed species can be legally exported without harming its survival in the wild.
👉It is mandatory for export of species in Appendix I & II.
✨Who prepares NDF?
👉 The Scientific Authority of the exporting country
(In India: Wildlife Crime Control Bureau (WCCB) functions as SA + experts approved by MoEFCC)
✨Purpose of NDF
To ensure:
•Trade is sustainable
•Trade is not detrimental to the survival of the species
•Harvest/export does not reduce wild population viability
•Species’ role in the ecosystem is not compromised
Without an NDF, export permit cannot be issued (even if other conditions are met).
✨What NDF assesses?
NDF involves these key parameters:
1.Population status (size, trends, structure)
2.Distribution & habitat condition
3.Reproductive biology & life history
4.Impact of past & proposed harvests
5.Regeneration and recovery capability
6.Threats (poaching, habitat loss, trade pressure)
7.Effectiveness of management plans
8.Legal protection and monitoring systems
✨When is NDF not required?
👉Appendix III species
👉Re-export of already certified specimens
👉Captive-bred species under certain exemptions
👉Artificially propagated plants
❤1
“Daily MCQ Edge Series”
[ Topic : Environment and Ecology ]
Q.1856) Which of the following types of land remain covered under the Forest (Conservation) Amendment Act, 2023?
1. Forests notified under Indian Forest Act, 1927
2. Forests recorded in government records but not notified
3. Private plantations declared as forest by Supreme Court in Godavarman case
4. Land notified as forest under any state law
[ Topic : Environment and Ecology ]
Q.1856) Which of the following types of land remain covered under the Forest (Conservation) Amendment Act, 2023?
1. Forests notified under Indian Forest Act, 1927
2. Forests recorded in government records but not notified
3. Private plantations declared as forest by Supreme Court in Godavarman case
4. Land notified as forest under any state law
Select the correct answer
Anonymous Quiz
25%
1 and 4
16%
1, 2 and 3
13%
2, 3 and 4
46%
All of the above
☑️ Snippets from the ongoing Mains Q&A batch.
[Topic : Fundamental Rights - Article 19 ]
Q) How does the concept of “reasonable restrictions” balance individual liberty with social control under the Indian Constitution.
👉A perfect Mains answer isn’t just written — it begins with a clear context , built with analysis, and ends with a perspective that ties it all together. —- that’s how a Mains answer earns depth.
[Topic : Fundamental Rights - Article 19 ]
Q) How does the concept of “reasonable restrictions” balance individual liberty with social control under the Indian Constitution.
👉A perfect Mains answer isn’t just written — it begins with a clear context , built with analysis, and ends with a perspective that ties it all together. —- that’s how a Mains answer earns depth.
❤1👍1