General Studies 2025 GS Paper II 15 marks 250 words Compulsory Explain

Q11

"Constitutional morality is the fulcrum which acts as an essential check upon the high functionaries and citizens alike...." In view of the above observation of the Supreme Court, explain the concept of constitutional morality and its application to ensure balance between judicial independence and judicial accountability in India. (Answer in 250 words) 15

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

"संवैधानिक नैतिकता एक आलम्ब है जो कि उच्च पदाधिकारियों और नागरिकों पर समान रूप से आवश्यक नियंत्रण का कार्य करता है...।" सर्वोच्च न्यायालय के उपर्युक्त प्रेक्षण के संदर्भ में, संवैधानिक नैतिकता की अवधारणा तथा भारत में न्यायपालिका की स्वतंत्रता एवं न्यायिक उत्तरदायित्व के मध्य संतुलन सुनिश्चित करने में इसकी प्रयोज्यता की व्याख्या कीजिए। (उत्तर 250 शब्दों में दीजिए)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2025 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 constitutional morality as a concept, followed by demonstrating how it operates as a balancing mechanism between judicial independence and accountability. Structure: brief conceptual introduction → elaboration of constitutional morality with constitutional sources → analysis of its role in maintaining judicial independence → examination of how it ensures accountability → synthesis showing the balance → forward-looking conclusion.

Key points expected

Definition of constitutional morality drawing from B.R. Ambedkar's Constituent Assembly speeches and Supreme Court's Navtej Singh Johar (2018) and Sabarimala (2018) verdicts
Constitutional sources: Preamble, Fundamental Rights (Articles 14, 15, 21), Directive Principles, and the 'transformative' nature of the Constitution
Judicial independence aspect: constitutional morality protects judges from executive/legislative pressure, enables fearless decision-making in cases like Kesavananda Bharati (1973)
Judicial accountability aspect: constitutional morality restrains judicial overreach, demands adherence to constitutional text, separation of powers (Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain 1975)
Balancing mechanism: internal checks (collegium, impeachment), external checks (review, curative petitions), and the doctrine of 'constitutional silences'
Contemporary relevance: NJAC judgment (2015), concerns about judicial populism vs. constitutional fidelity

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	3	Correctly identifies 'explain' as requiring conceptual clarity plus causal demonstration; addresses both limbs—defining constitutional morality AND showing its balancing function—without conflating them with mere description	Recognizes 'explain' but treats it descriptively; covers constitutional morality superficially or addresses only one limb (independence OR accountability)	Misreads directive as 'discuss' or 'analyse'; produces generic essay on judicial independence without linking to constitutional morality; ignores the balancing requirement entirely
Content depth & accuracy	20%	3	Precisely defines constitutional morality as 'ethos of the Constitution' per Chandrachud J.; accurately distinguishes it from popular morality; correctly identifies Articles 14, 15, 21 as substantive anchors; explains the tension between Articles 124-147 (independence) and Articles 124(4), 217 (accountability)	Vague definition conflating constitutional and public morality; mentions independence and accountability without constitutional article references; minor factual errors like misattributing NJAC to 2016	Defines constitutional morality incorrectly as 'morality of the constitution' or judges' ethics; confuses judicial review with accountability; fundamental errors like citing Article 352 or treating collegium as constitutional provision
Structure & flow	20%	3	Logical progression: concept → constitutional foundations → independence dimension → accountability dimension → synthesis of balance → conclusion; smooth transitions using signposting; maintains 250-word discipline with proportional allocation	Recognizable structure but uneven weightage (heavy on concept, thin on balance); abrupt shifts; minor word limit violations	Disorganized or circular argument; no clear demarcation between independence and accountability; severe word limit breach or incomplete answer
Examples / case-law / data	20%	3	Minimum 3 precise case citations: Navtej/Sabarimala for constitutional morality doctrine; Kesavananda/Second Judges Case for independence; NJAC verdict or Justice Karnan contempt for accountability; specific paragraphs or judge names where relevant	Mentions cases without specifics ('in the Sabarimala case'); generic references to 'Supreme Court judgments'; mixes up case facts	No case law or entirely incorrect citations; uses non-legal examples (social movements) without constitutional mooring; fabricated case names
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	3	Synthesizes that constitutional morality is dynamic—evolving through judicial interpretation yet anchored in constitutional text; offers nuanced observation on current challenges (e.g., judicial appointments logjam, perception of 'judicial legislation'); ends with forward-looking prescription	Summarizes main points without synthesis; generic conclusion on 'need for balance'; no contemporary relevance	No conclusion or abrupt ending; contradictory final statement; regressive conclusion suggesting judicial supremacy or executive control

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 →