Law: Nature and Classification (AILET (All India Law Entrance Test) Legal-Aptitude): Questions 66 - 67 of 74

Get 1 year subscription: Access detailed explanations (illustrated with images and videos) to 151 questions. Access all new questions we will add tracking exam-pattern and syllabus changes. View Sample Explanation or View Features.

Rs. 150.00 or

Question number: 66

» Law: Nature and Classification

Appeared in Year: 2016

MCQ▾

Question

LEGAL PRINCIPLE: No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law and Civil Courts have coercive powers to compel attendance of witness only within its local territory.

FACTUAL SITUATION: Puchu, a resident’ of Faridabad was summoned by the Delhi High Court as a witness in a civil case regarding wrongful possession of immovable property filed by Amu against Kichu. He refused to appear before the court due to his office job. He was prosecuted by the court. Is he liable?

Choices

Choice (4) Response

a.

He is not liable because he is not the resident of Delhi.

b.

He is not liable because he has no interest in the suit property.

c.

He is not liable because he has fundamental right under Article 21 of personal liberty. ·

d.

He is not liable because he has fundamental right under Article 21 of personal liberty.

Question number: 67

» Law: Nature and Classification

Appeared in Year: 2016

MCQ▾

Question

LEGAL PRINCIPLE: A reasonable classification having nexus with the object sought to be achieved is not violative of Article 14 or Article 16 of the Constitution of India.

FACTUAL SITUATION: ‘X’ is a male teacher in a women’s college, who applied for the post of Principal of that College. His candidature was rejected on the basis of the Government’s policy of appointing only women as Principal of a women’s college. ‘X’ challenges the policy on the ground of discrimination. Whether the challenge is sustainable?

Choices

Choice (4) Response

a.

Yes, because the policy is violating of the guarantee of equality before law under Article 14 of the Constitution.

b.

No, because the policy of appointment of only lady Principal in a women’s college is a reasonable classification having a nexus with the object sought to be achieved.

c.

No, the rejection does not amount to discrimination since it is a reasonable classification permissible under the Constitution.

d.

Yes, because rejection of X’s candidature amounts to sexual discrimination and deprivation of opportunity.

f Page
Sign In