General Studies 2022 GS Paper II 10 marks 150 words Compulsory Comment

Q2

"Right of movement and residence throughout the territory of India are freely available to the Indian citizens, but these rights are not absolute." Comment. (Answer in 150 words) 10

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

"भारत के सम्पूर्ण क्षेत्र में निवास करने और विचरण करने का अधिकार स्वतंत्र रूप से सभी भारतीय नागरिकों को उपलब्ध है, किन्तु ये अधिकार असीम नहीं हैं।" टिप्पणी कीजिए। (150 शब्दों में उत्तर दीजिए)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2022 General Studies questions

Directive word: Comment

This question asks you to comment. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

The directive 'Comment' requires a balanced, analytical response that acknowledges both the constitutional guarantee and its qualified nature. Structure: brief introduction affirming Article 19(1)(d) and (e) → body explaining constitutional provisions with reasonable restrictions under Article 19(5) → conclusion on balancing individual liberty with public interest.

Key points expected

Article 19(1)(d) guarantees freedom of movement and 19(1)(e) guarantees residence throughout India
Article 19(5) permits reasonable restrictions in interest of general public or protection of Scheduled Tribes
Key case laws: Shantistar Builders (1989), Olga Tellis (1985), or State of U.P. v. Kaushalya Devi
Specific restrictions: ILP in NE states, CAA/NRC debates, COVID-19 lockdown restrictions, eviction of encroachers
Balance between individual liberty and collective interests like public order, morality, tribal rights

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	2	Correctly interprets 'Comment' as requiring balanced analysis of both 'freely available' and 'not absolute' aspects; addresses the tension without being one-sided	Addresses both aspects but treats them sequentially without analytical integration; or slightly imbalanced treatment	Misinterprets directive as 'describe' or 'explain'; treats only one side (either freedom or restrictions) dominantly
Content depth & accuracy	20%	2	Precisely cites Articles 19(1)(d), 19(1)(e), 19(5); explains 'reasonable restrictions' doctrine; mentions ILP/CAA/COVID context accurately	Mentions correct articles but vague on 'reasonable restrictions' test; or conflates with other fundamental rights	Wrong articles cited (e.g., 21, 14); confuses with foreigners' rights; factually incorrect on restrictions
Structure & flow	20%	2	Compact 150-word structure with clear thesis-antithesis-synthesis; smooth transitions between constitutional guarantee and limitations	Basic intro-body-conclusion but uneven weightage; or abrupt shifts without connectives	Disorganized; no clear paragraphing; exceeds word limit significantly or severely underwrites
Examples / case-law / data	20%	2	Cites 2+ specific examples: Shantistar Builders (right to shelter linked), ILP states (Arunachal/Mizoram), COVID-19 restrictions, or CAA debates; case names accurate	One generic example (e.g., 'lockdown') without specificity; or mentions 'Supreme Court said' without case name	No examples; or invented case laws; irrelevant examples like Right to Privacy or Aadhaar without connection
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	2	Synthesizes with mature observation: restrictions must be 'reasonable' (proportionality test), not arbitrary; or notes contemporary relevance (CAA, migrant crisis)	Generic conclusion repeating introduction; or mere summary without forward-looking insight	No conclusion; or contradictory ending; or normative statement without analytical basis (e.g., 'government should protect rights')

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →