Reasoning the Reason



A larger Bench of the Supreme Court said its objective was not to review the Sabrimala Entry case but to examine “larger issues” of law arising from practices such as the prohibition of women from entering mosques and temples , female genital mutilation among Dawoodi Bohras and the ban on Parsi women who married inter-faith from entering the fire temple.

The Bench however clarified that it would not go into the legality of issues such as the practice of polygamy and nikah-halala in Islam.
Chief Justice Bobde explained that the basis of Bench’s Judicial enquiry would be seven questions referred to a Larger Bench by a Five Judge Bench on November 14, 2019. He said the nine-judge Bench was only examining propositions of law raised about religious practices believed to be essential to various religions. The Bench would go into the individual facts of the various petitions before it.

On November 14, the five-judge Bench led by then CJI Ranjan Gogoi instead of deciding the Sabrimala review entrusted to it, sought an “authoritative pronouncement” on the Court’s power to decide the essentiality of religious practices. Framing seven questions, the Bench referred them to a seven-judge Bench. These referral questions included – whether “essential questions on religious practices” be afforded constitutional protection.
(Extracted, with edits from, Supreme Court not to review Sabrimala case to examine larger issues, The Hindu, 13th January 2020)

1. Which of the following views can be correctly attributed to the author of the passage?
(a) The idea of women’s entry in Sabrimala temple is to be looked into by the Supreme Court
(b) The idea of women’s entry in Sabrimala temple and mosques is to be looked into by the Supreme Court
(c) The idea is to look into the legality of issues such as nikah- halala and polygamy by the Supreme Court
(d) The idea is to look into essential religious practices and its relationship with constitutional law.

2. Freedom to manage religious affairs is covered by which of the following Articles of the Constitution?
(a) Article 24
(b) Article 25
(c) Article 26
(d) None of the above

3. According to the passage, the aforesaid case headed by Chief Justice Bobde called for
(a) banning the entry of women in Sabrimala temple and mosques
(b) reviewing the Judgment of Sabrimala temple and thereby banning the entry of women in the Temple
(c) issuing guidelines relating to nikah halala and polygamy.
(d) None of the above

4. The review petition filed in respect of women’s entry in Sabrimala Temple is to be decided by a Bench comprising of
(a) 5 Judges
(b) 7 Judges
(c) 9 Judges
(d) None of the above

5. In which of the following cases has the Supreme Court allowed the entry of the women in Sabrimala Temple?
(a) Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala, 2018
(b) Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, 2018
(c) Student Federation of India v. Union of India, 2020
(d) None of the above
The answers are: 1. (d); 2. (c); 3. (b); 4. (c); 5. (a).


Directions (Qs. 1 to 5): Read the following information carefully and then answer the questions based on them.
There are five persons P, Q, R, S and T. One is a Football player, one is a Chess player, one is a Hockey player. P and S are unmarried ladies and do not participate in any game. None of the ladies plays Chess or Football. There is a married couple in which T is the husband. Q is the brother of R and is neither a Chess player nor a Hockey player.

1. Who is the Football player?
(a) P
(b) Q
(c) R
(d) S.
2. Who is the Hockey player?
(a) T
(b) S
(c) R
(d) Q.
3. Who is the chess player?
(a) S
(b) P
(c) T
(d) R.
4. Who is the wife of T?
(a) P
(b) Q
(c) R
(d) S.
5. Which of the following is the correct group of ladies?
(a) P, Q and R
(b) Q, R and S
(c) P, Q and S
(d) P, R and S.

Directions (Qs. 6-10): Study the following information carefully and answer the questions given below.
Three ladies and four men are a group of friends, i.e. R, M, T, S, L, W and Z. Each one has a different profession, Lawyer, Travel Agent, Air-hostess, Doctor, Professor, Consultant and Jeweller and each one owns a different car, i.e. Alto, Corolla, Santro, Lancer, Ikon, Scorpio and Esteem, not necessarily in that order. None of the ladies is a Consultant or a Lawyer. T is an Air-hostess and she owns an Ikon car. R owns a Scorpio. M is not a Doctor. L is a Jeweller and he owns Corolla. W is a Lawyer and does not own Alto. Z is a Consultant and owns Santro. The Doctor owns Esteem car whereas the Professor owns Scorpio. The Travel Agent owns an Alto. None of the ladies owns a Scorpio.

6. What car does S own?
(a) Alto
(b) Santro
(c) Lancer
(d) Esteem.
7. Who owns the car Lancer?
(a) Z
(b) M
(c) W
(d) Data inadequate.
8. What is the profession of R?
(a) Professor
(b) Travel Agent
(c) Doctor
(d) Data inadequate.
9. Who is the doctor?
(a) R
(b) S
(c) L
(d) Data inadequate.
10. Who are the three ladies in the group?
(a) T, R, L
(b) T, M, S
(c) W, T, M
(d) Data inadequate.
The answers are: 1. (b); 2. (c); 3. (c); 4. (c); 5. (d); 6. (d); 7. (c); 8. (a); 9. (b); 10. (b).


Directions (Qs. 1-5): In the following question, a passage is followed by several inferences. You have to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity. Mark answer
(a) If you think the inference is ‘definitely true’;
(b) If you think the inference is ‘probably true’ though not definitely true in the light of the facts given;
(c) If you think the inference is ‘probably false’ though not definitely false in the light of the facts given;
(d) If you think the inference is ‘definitely false’, i.e. it contradicts the given facts.


India and other developing countries, while expressing their commitment to the upgradation of labour standards, have been resisting the move to link international trade, not only with labour standards, but also with environmental concerns and human rights. The move was set afoot on the successful conclusion of the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations with a proposal for the inclusion of a social clause in the World Trade Organisation (WTO), which succeeds GATT. Later, on stiff opposition to the move on the ground that the matter did not fall in the area of trade, a proposal was mooted for the inclusion of a social clause in ILO.
1. India has been sidelined on the issue of linking international trade with labour.
2. The efforts of linking international trade with labour are being carried out by developed countries.
3. All countries appear committed to the cause of upgradation of labour standards.
4. The Uruguay round concluded successfully.
5. India claims that environmental issue and trade are uncorrelated.
The answers are: 1. (d); 2. (b); 3. (b); 4. (a); 5. (b).

Leave a Comment