Working of Institutions – Case-based Questions with Answers
Class 9 • Social Science
Political Science — Democratic Politics I: Chapter 4 — Working of Institutions
20 Case-Based Questions — How major policy decisions are taken | Parliament | Political executive | The judiciary
NCERT-aligned • CBSE exam standard
Application-based practice for comprehension and evaluation
CBSE Board Examinations (Systematic order):
- Read the case carefully and identify key institutional concepts.
- Answer using NCERT terms, examples and clear structure (definition, explanation, short conclusion).
- Keep answers concise and focused on the question asked.
Topic A — How is a major policy decision taken? (Cases 1–5)
Case 1: A state faces severe water scarcity. NGOs and media highlight the crisis; the ministry prepares a draft plan but parties disagree over funding sources.
Q1. Identify the stages this issue will go through before becoming a state policy. (3 marks)
A1. Agenda setting (NGO/media push), policy formulation by the ministry and bureaucracy, Cabinet/State Cabinet approval, legislative/financial sanction (if needed), implementation by administrative machinery; courts may review if rights affected.
Case 2: Experts recommend a new tax to fund healthcare. The government needs quick action while Parliament is in recess.
Q2. What executive tool can the government use and what limitation applies? (2 marks)
A2. Issue an ordinance to create temporary legal backing; limitation: it must be approved by Parliament within a stipulated time when it reconvenes, else it lapses.
Case 3: A ministry seeks public opinion before launching a scheme; it publishes a draft online and invites comments.
Q3. Explain the benefit of this approach. (2 marks)
A3. Public consultation improves inclusivity, reveals ground realities, increases legitimacy and reduces implementation resistance by incorporating stakeholder inputs.
Case 4: A sudden health emergency requires rapid policy decisions, but drafting a Bill would take time.
Q4. Besides an ordinance, name two administrative actions the executive can take immediately. (2 marks)
A4. Issue administrative orders and notifications; reallocate existing budgetary resources under delegated powers for urgent measures.
Case 5: After implementing a new transport policy, citizens challenge it in court alleging violation of rights.
Q5. Which institution will adjudicate and on what grounds? (3 marks)
A5. Judiciary (High Court/Supreme Court) via judicial review; courts examine constitutionality, legality, procedural fairness and whether fundamental rights were violated.
Topic B — Parliament (Cases 6–10)
Case 6: A controversial Bill on land acquisition is introduced; opposition MPs demand more time and committee scrutiny.
Q6. How can Parliament ensure detailed examination and what is the advantage? (3 marks)
A6. Refer the Bill to a Select/Standing Committee for clause-by-clause scrutiny; advantage: expert inputs, stakeholder evidence, improved legislation and reduced hasty law-making.
Case 7: A government survives a no-confidence motion by a narrow margin after a heated debate on a major policy failure.
Q7. What does surviving such a motion imply about the government's position? (2 marks)
A7. It indicates the government retains legislative majority and can continue; however narrow margins may weaken political legitimacy and affect stability.
Case 8: During Budget session, opposition allegations force a detailed review of public spending by an oversight committee.
Q8. Name the committee and explain its role briefly. (3 marks)
A8. Public Accounts Committee examines government expenditure to ensure funds are used efficiently and according to Parliament's intent; it audits past spending and recommends corrective actions.
Case 9: Rajya Sabha suggests amendments to a money-related proposal passed by Lok Sabha, but the Lok Sabha disagrees.
Q9. Explain how this disagreement is resolved in the parliamentary process. (3 marks)
A9. For Money Bills, Lok Sabha has finality; for ordinary disagreements, a joint sitting may be called to resolve differences, though rarely used; political negotiation often settles disputes.
Case 10: MPs raise urgent constituency grievances during Question Hour exposing administrative failure in implementation.
Q10. How does Question Hour strengthen parliamentary control over the executive? (2 marks)
A10. It compels ministers to answer publicly, exposes administrative lapses, provides accountability, and generates records for further scrutiny by committees and media.
Topic C — Political Executive (Cases 11–15)
Case 11: A powerful minister publicly disagrees with a Cabinet decision and threatens to resign.
Q11. What constitutional principle is tested here and what is the likely outcome? (3 marks)
A11. Principle of collective responsibility; public dissent undermines Cabinet unity—minister may be asked to resign or be compelled to accept collective decision to preserve solidarity.
Case 12: The Prime Minister convenes an urgent Cabinet meeting to decide on foreign aid allocation after a natural disaster.
Q12. Explain the PM's role in such emergency decision-making. (2 marks)
A12. PM chairs Cabinet, sets agenda, coordinates inter-ministerial responses, ensures consensus and provides political leadership necessary for swift policy action.
Case 13: A ministry official delays signing approvals citing unclear political directives, resulting in project hold-up.
Q13. Identify two administrative steps to resolve such delay. (2 marks)
A13. Issue clear ministerial instructions or guidelines; convene inter-departmental meeting to clarify responsibilities and set timelines with monitoring mechanisms.
Case 14: The Council of Ministers wants to maintain secrecy on a sensitive security policy but Parliament demands details.
Q14. How can the government balance secrecy and parliamentary oversight? (3 marks)
A14. Provide classified briefings to select parliamentary committees (e.g., defence committee) under confidentiality, while giving Parliament general information to preserve accountability without compromising security.
Case 15: An elected government faces administrative resistance implementing a controversial welfare program due to bureaucratic pushback.
Q15. Suggest two political-administrative measures to ensure implementation. (3 marks)
A15. Political measures: PM/Cabinet intervention and clear ministerial directives; Administrative measures: reassign responsibility, set performance targets, strengthen monitoring and incentivise compliance.
Topic D — The Judiciary & Institutional Interaction (Cases 16–20)
Case 16: A law passed by Parliament is challenged for violating fundamental rights.
Q16. Which remedies can affected citizens seek and what can the court do? (3 marks)
A16. Citizens can file writ petitions (e.g., habeas corpus, mandamus) in High Court or Supreme Court; court can strike down law, read down provisions or issue directions to restore rights.
Case 17: Public interest litigation exposes a failure in environmental governance leading to court-ordered policy changes.
Q17. How has PIL expanded the role of judiciary in governance? (2 marks)
A17. PIL allows courts to address public issues proactively, enforce environmental and social protections, and direct executive/legislative action to uphold rights and standards.
Case 18: A lower court judgement conflicts with a recently passed central law; parties appeal to a High Court.
Q18. Explain the appellate role of High Courts in maintaining legal uniformity. (2 marks)
A18. High Courts hear appeals, interpret laws, correct errors, and ensure consistent application of law across subordinate courts, maintaining legal uniformity within the state.
Case 19: Concerns about delay in justice result in proposals to increase judges and improve infrastructure.
Q19. Suggest two reforms that would speed up judicial processes. (3 marks)
A19. Increase number of judges and courtrooms; introduce case management systems, fast-track courts and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms to reduce backlog and accelerate decisions.
Case 20: After a controversial policy, legislature amends a law that the Supreme Court previously interpreted in a particular way.
Q20. How do constitutional amendment and judicial review interact in this situation? (3 marks)
A20. Parliament can amend the Constitution within limits to change law's effect; judiciary reviews amendments for constitutional validity (basic structure doctrine may limit amendments); interaction reflects checks and balances.
Note: These 20 case-based questions and model answers follow NCERT Class 9 Political Science — Chapter 4: Working of Institutions. Use them to practice application, reasoning and exam-style answers.