General Studies 2023 GS Paper II 15 marks 250 words Compulsory Explain

Q15

Explain the significance of the 101st Constitutional Amendment Act. To what extent does it reflect the accommodative spirit of federalism? (Answer in 250 words) 15

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

101 वें संविधान संशोधन अधिनियम का महत्व समझाइए। यह किस हद तक संघवाद के समावेशी भावना को दर्शाता है? (250 शब्दों में उत्तर) 15

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2023 General Studies questions

Directive word: Explain

This question asks you to explain. 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 'explain' requires a clear exposition of the 101st Amendment Act's provisions and significance, followed by analytical assessment of its federal character. Structure: brief introduction identifying GST as the amendment's core; body divided into significance (economic integration, cooperative federalism mechanisms) and federalism evaluation (balancing union-state powers, GST Council as innovation, limitations); conclusion with balanced assessment of whether it strengthens or dilutes federalism.

Key points expected

Identification of 101st Amendment Act (2016) as enabling GST and establishing concurrent taxation powers
Explanation of GST Council structure (Article 279A) as embodiment of cooperative federalism with weighted voting
Analysis of significance: 'One Nation, One Tax', removal of tax-on-tax, enhanced revenue base, formalization of economy
Federalism evaluation: states' loss of fiscal autonomy vs. compensation mechanism (5-year guarantee), dispute resolution framework
Critical assessment of asymmetrical federalism concerns (manufacturing states vs. consuming states, special category states)
Reference to Supreme Court observations in Union of India v. Mohit Minerals (2022) on GST Council recommendations

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	3	Clearly distinguishes between 'explain significance' (descriptive-proactive) and 'to what extent' (evaluative-analytical), allocating appropriate word balance; treats federalism assessment as requiring nuanced 'extent' judgment rather than binary conclusion	Addresses both parts but treats them sequentially without integration; 'to what extent' answered as 'whether' rather than degree-based evaluation	Conflates both demands into generic GST description; misses 'accommodative spirit' specificity or treats federalism evaluation superficially
Content depth & accuracy	20%	3	Precise constitutional provisions (Articles 246A, 269A, 279A); accurate GST Council composition (33 states, 1/3rd weightage); distinguishes between CGST, SGST, IGST mechanisms; identifies specific federalism tensions (manufacturing states' revenue loss)	Broadly correct on GST structure but vague on constitutional specifics; mentions cooperative federalism without explaining institutional mechanisms; minor inaccuracies in Council composition or compensation period	Factual errors (wrong year, confusing 101st with other amendments); conflates GST with earlier tax reforms; misrepresents state voting power or compensation framework
Structure & flow	20%	3	Logical progression: constitutional change → economic significance → federalism mechanisms → critical evaluation; smooth transitions between descriptive and analytical segments; signposting clear within 250-word constraint	Identifiable introduction and conclusion but body paragraphs lack clear thematic separation; some repetition between significance and federalism sections; adequate but not crisp organization	Disorganized or list-like presentation; no clear separation between significance and federalism analysis; abrupt shifts or missing conclusion within word limit
Examples / case-law / data	20%	3	References Mohit Minerals case (2022) on GST Council's recommendatory vs. binding nature; cites specific state concerns (Tamil Nadu, Kerala on revenue loss); mentions pre-GST tax multiplicity (VAT, CST, octroi) for contrast; uses GST revenue collection data or compensation cess figures	Generic mention of 'some states opposed' without specificity; broad reference to 'Supreme Court judgments' without case names; no quantitative illustration	No examples, cases, or data; or irrelevant examples (confusing with 73rd/74th Amendment); fabricated case names
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	3	Synthesizes tension: GST as 'holding-together federalism' innovation that sacrifices autonomy for collective efficiency; acknowledges unfinished federalism (pending inclusion of petroleum, alcohol); forward-looking observation on fiscal federalism evolution	Balanced but generic conclusion ('both strengths and weaknesses'); restates points without synthesis; no recognition of ongoing federalism challenges	One-sided conclusion (only positive or only negative); abrupt ending; or introduces new arguments in conclusion; no analytical elevation from body content

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 →