Constitution of India says that Trade, Commerce and Intercourse throughout the territory of Union of India is free, but this is subject to some other provisions of the same part. Article 301 says that parliament may impose restriction in some parts of the territory in the interest of general public. For example a famine struck state may lead the parliament to enact some discriminatory law also, if that discrimination is in favor of the public interests. The states, as per article 303 of the constitution are allowed to impose taxes on goods imported from the other states provided they goods produced in other states are also taxes in that state in the same manner. But who will decide, whether the states can enact such law or not? This is to be decided by the President. Thus, if we consider that Rajasthan wants to impose a tax on a good that is imported from Gujarat, the bill of such kind has necessarily get a sanction from President. President may hold his/ her sanction after looking in details that the said bill is in the public interest.

It is true that the DPSP are not enforceable by law, yet the Supreme Court has constantly endeavored to make the executive at least make some laws in that regard. The first option is incorrect, most of us can figure it out. The second stands provisional as the original constitution had 14 years of age, out of which 6-14 years has now become and RTE and 0-6 years is the DPSP. There is no law in India which follows option D. The only DPSP which has been enforced by a law is “Equal pay for equal work”. The principle of equal pay for equal work for men and women embodied in Article 39(d) of the Constitution was first considered in Kishori Mohanlal Bakshi vs Union of India in 1962. The Supreme Court then said that it was not capable of being enforced in a court of law. However, the situation changed in 1982, when in Randhir Singh vs Union of India it was unequivocally ruled that the principle was not an abstract doctrine and could be enforced by reading into it the equality precepts enshrined in Articles 14 and 16. The court went so far as to say that even a daily wage employee who is performing duties similar to regular employees is entitled to the same pay. However, the Supreme Court took another turn by 1988 and veered round to the view that the principle cannot be enforced and it should remain only as a guiding star for the law makers and judiciary. For the same purpose there is an act “Equal Remuneration Act of 1976”, but the act has been proved toothless so far.

The first thing we have to note that constitution of India has provided for a single citizenship for the whole country. Despite of having concepts such as OCI and PIO , which have been merged now, there is NO Dual Citizenship in India. The persons who are in these categories cannot exercise voting rights. This means that we can eliminate option 1. The voting rights option can be eliminated because voting is our constitutional right and the age 18 years replaced the 21 years in article 326 by Constitution (Sixty-first Amendment) Act, 1988. The 3rd option is correct and shows the purpose of the act.

The first thing we have to note that constitution of India has provided for a single citizenship for the whole country. Despite of having concepts such as OCI and PIO , which have been merged now, there is NO Dual Citizenship in India. The persons who are in these categories cannot exercise voting rights. This means that we can eliminate option 1. The voting rights option can be eliminated because voting is our constitutional right and the age 18 years replaced the 21 years in article 326 by Constitution (Sixty-first Amendment) Act, 1988. The 3rd option is correct and shows the purpose of the act.

Under the system, fingerprints of the voters would be recorded by finger print reading machines along with their photographs by the web cameras fitted to computers.

n case the number of contesting candidates goes beyond 64 in any constituency, EVMs cannot be used in such a constituency. The conventional method of voting by means of ballot box and ballot paper will have to be adopted in such a constituency. EVMs can cater to a maximum of 64 candidates. There is provision for 16 candidates in a Balloting Unit. If the total number of candidates exceeds 16, a second Balloting Unit can be linked parallel to the first Balloting Unit. Similarly, if the total number of candidates exceeds 32, a third Balloting Unit can be attached and if the total number of candidates exceeds 48, a fourth Balloting Unit can be attached to cater to a maximum of 64 candidates.

EVMs can cater to a maximum of 64 candidates. There is provision for 16 candidates in a Balloting Unit. If the total number of candidates exceeds 16, a second Balloting Unit can be linked parallel to the first Balloting Unit. Similarly, if the total number of candidates exceeds 32, a third Balloting Unit can be attached and if the total number of candidates exceeds 48, a fourth Balloting Unit can be attached to cater to a maximum of 64 candidates.

According to Para 3 of Chapter II of Handbook for Returning Officers, polling stations should be set up in such a manner that ordinarily no voter is required to travel more than two kms to reach his polling station.

EVMs can record a maximum of 3840 votes. As normally the total number of electors in a polling station will not exceed 1500, the capacity of EVMs is more than sufficient

In Modakurichi Assembly Constituency of Tamil Nadu there were 1033 contesting candidates during the general election to Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly in 1996. The ballot papers were in the form of a booklet.

Ministers and other authorities shall not sanction grants/payments out of discretionary funds from the time elections are announced by the Commission