Education Portal for Students in India

Education is part of which of the following?A.State ListB.Union ListC.Concurrent ListD.Residuary powers Answer Verified Hint: Unlike the British Parliament, the Indian Parliament does not have unlimited power to legislate. The Seventh Schedule (Articles 245-246) of the Indian Constitution provides that the Parliament can make laws for the whole or any part of India within its area of competence as defined under the distribution of legislative powers between the Union and States.

The constitutional provisions on the subject of the distribution of legislative powers between the Union and States contain three lists: Union or Federal List, State List and Concurrent List. The Parliament has exclusive right to legislate on those items mentioned in the Union or Federal List and the state legislatures have the exclusive right to legislate on items in the State List.

Both the Parliament and state legislatures can legislate on items mentioned in the Concurrent List. Complete Step by Step answer: Option A: State List is incorrect. Earlier education was a subject in the State List but the 42nd Amendment to the Constitution in 1976 shifted it to the Concurrent List.

1. Now, education is available to both the Parliament and state assemblies to legislate upon.
2. Option B: Union List is incorrect.Option C: Concurrent List is correct.
3. The 42nd Amendment to the Constitution moved education from the State List to the Concurrent List and thus both the Parliament and the state assemblies can legislate upon it.

Option D: Residuary powers are incorrect. Note: The Union List has 97 numbered topics, the State List has 66 numbered topics and the Concurrent List has 47 numbered topics. In the 42nd Constitutional Amendment of 1976, five topics were moved from the State List to the Concurrent List.
View complete answer

Why was education transferred from state to Concurrent List?

Which subject was transferred from State List to Concurrent List by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment in 1976?(A) Education(B) Local self-government(C) Agriculture(D) Irrigation Answer Verified

Hint: The 42nd Amendment Act was enacted in 1976, reorganizing the Seventh Amendment to ensure that the subjects of the State list such as education, forestry, wildlife and bird protection, the administration of justice, and weights and measures were transferred to the Concurrent List. Complete solution: Hence, the correct answer is option A. Note:

The Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India includes powers that will be overseen by the union and the state government. The clause is divided into three categories: Union List, State List and Concurrent List. Unlike the governments of the United States, Switzerland or Australia, the remaining power remains in the Federal Government, as in the Canadian federal government.

• Through the 42nd Amendment Act of 1976, Five subjects were transferred from State to Concurrent List.
• They are:(1)Education(2)Forests(3)Weights & Measures(4)Protection of Wild Animals and Birds(5)Administration of Justice.The similarities are interesting but not essential to the same list.
• If any provision of legislation passed by the State Legislature is detrimental to any provision of legislation enacted by Parliament with the power to legislate, or to any provision of legislation in respect of one of the provisions of Concurrent, of that country, or, as the case may be, the existing law will apply and the law enacted by the Legislature, to the point of abhorrence, shall be null and void.

: Which subject was transferred from State List to Concurrent List by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment in 1976?(A) Education(B) Local self-government(C) Agriculture(D) Irrigation
View complete answer

What is the 24th Amendment Act 1971?

References –

1. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f R.C. Bhardwaj, ed. (1 January 1995). Constitution Amendment in India (Sixth ed.). New Delhi: Northern Book Centre. pp.41–42, 180, 317–318. ISBN 9788172110659, Retrieved 7 December 2013,
2. ^ “Texts of the Constitution Amendment Acts” (PDF), Lok Sabha Secretariat, pp.446–447. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 December 2013, Retrieved 7 December 2013, This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain,
3. ^ “The Constitution (Twenty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1971”, Retrieved 7 December 2013, This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain,
4. ^ Jump up to: a b “The Constitution of India (1949)” (PDF), Lok Sabha Secretariat, pp.905–906. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 December 2013, Retrieved 30 November 2013, This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain,
5. ^ Jump up to: a b “Constitution Amendment: Nature and Scope of the Amending Process” (PDF), Lok Sabha Secretariat, pp.14–17. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 December 2013, Retrieved 7 December 2013, This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain,
6. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g G.G. Mirchandani (1 January 1977). Subverting the Constitution, Abhinav Publications. pp.34–37, 182. ISBN 9788170170570, Retrieved 7 December 2013,
7. ^ “Constitution Amendment in India” (PDF), Lok Sabha Secretariat,p.112. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 December 2013, Retrieved 7 December 2013, This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain,
8. ^ “The Constitution (Amendment) Acts”, Constitution.org, Retrieved 5 December 2013, This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain,
9. ^ Jump up to: a b c d V.G. Ramachandran (1971). “The Constitution 24th Amendment Act And 25th Amendment Bill”, Supreme Court Cases,2 (11), Retrieved 7 December 2013,
10. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Scott, Paul (23 November 1971). “Indira Gandhi Moving To Increase Her Power”, Bangor Daily News, Washington, Retrieved 7 December 2013,
11. ^ “Constitution Amendment: Nature and Scope of the Amending Process” (PDF), Lok Sabha Secretariat, pp.16–17. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 December 2013, Retrieved 1 December 2013, This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain,
12. ^ Austin, Granville (1999). Working a Democratic Constitution – A History of the Indian Experience, New Delhi: Oxford University Press. pp.258–277. ISBN 019565610-5,
13. ^ Satya Prateek (2008). “Today’s Promise, Tomorrow’s Constitution: ‘Basic Structure’, Constitutional Transformations And The Future Of Political Progress In India” (PDF), NUJS Law Review, West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences,1 (3), Retrieved 17 July 2012,
14. ^ “Supreme Court Bar Association”, Archived from the original on 4 October 2009, Retrieved 8 December 2013,

View complete answer

Did Brown v Board of Education Change Add to take from the Constitution or any of the amendments?

Brown v. Board of Education | Case, 1954, Definition, Decision, Facts, & Impact In Brown v. Board of Education, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously that racial segregation in public schools violated the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. The 1954 decision declared that separate educational facilities for white and African American students were inherently unequal.

Brown v. Board of Education is considered a milestone in American civil rights history and among the most important rulings in the history of the U.S. Supreme Court. The case, and the efforts to undermine the Court’s decision, brought greater awareness to the racial inequalities that African Americans faced.

The case also galvanized civil rights activists and increased efforts to end institutionalized racism throughout American society. After the Brown v. Board of Education decision, there was wide opposition to desegregation, largely in the southern states.

• Violent protests erupted in some places, and others responded by implementing “school-choice” programs that subsidized white students’ attendance at private, segregated academies, which were not covered by the Brown ruling. The U.S.
• Supreme Court ruled on Brown v.
• Board of Education on May 17, 1954.
• The case had been argued before the Court on December 9, 1952, and reargued on December 8, 1953.

In Brown v. Board of Education, the attorney for the plaintiffs was, He later became, in 1967, the first African American to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. Brown v. Board of Education, in full Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, case in which, on May 17, 1954, the ruled unanimously (9–0) that in public schools violated the to the, which prohibits the states from denying of the laws to any person within their jurisdictions.

The decision declared that separate educational facilities for white and students were inherently unequal. It thus rejected as inapplicable to public the “separate but equal” doctrine, advanced by the Supreme Court in (1896), according to which laws separate public facilities for whites and African Americans do not violate the equal protection clause if the facilities are approximately equal.

Although the 1954 decision strictly applied only to public schools, it implied that segregation was not permissible in other public facilities. Considered one of the most important rulings in the Court’s history, Brown v. Board of Education helped inspire the American of the late 1950s and ’60s.

In the late 1940s the (NAACP) began a concentrated effort to challenge the segregated school systems in various states, including Kansas. There, in, the NAACP encouraged a number of African American parents to try to enroll their children in all-white schools. All of the parents’ requests were refused, including that of Oliver Brown.

He was told that his daughter could not the nearby white school and instead would have to enroll in an African American school far from her home. The NAACP subsequently filed a lawsuit. While it claimed that the education (including facilities, teachers, etc.) offered to African Americans was inferior to that offered to whites, the NAACP’s main argument was that segregation by its nature was a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause.

A U.S. district court heard Brown v. Board of Education in 1951, and it ruled against the plaintiffs. While sympathetic to some of the plaintiffs’ claims, it determined that the schools were similar, and it cited the precedent set by Plessy and (1927), which the segregation of Asian Americans in grade schools.

The NAACP then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. In October 1952 the Court consolidated Brown with three other class-action school-segregation lawsuits filed by the NAACP: (1951) in, (1952) in, and Gebhart v. Belton (1952) in Delaware; there was also a fifth case that was filed independently in the, Bolling v.

• Sharpe (1951).
• As with Brown, U.S.
• District courts had decided against the plaintiffs in Briggs and Davis, ruling on the basis of Plessy that they had not been deprived of equal protection because the schools they attended were comparable to the all-white schools or would become so upon the completion of improvements ordered by the district court.

In, however, the Supreme Court affirmed a lower court’s ruling that the original plaintiffs’ right to equal protection had been violated because the African American schools were inferior to the white schools in almost all relevant respects. In Bolling v.

• Sharpe (1951), a U.S.
• District court held that school segregation did not violate the clause of the (the equal protection clause was not relevant since the Fourteenth only applies to states).
• The plaintiffs in Brown, Biggs, and Davis appealed directly to the Supreme Court, while those in Gebhart and Bolling were each granted (a writ for the reexamination of an action of a lower court).

Brown v. Board of Education was argued on December 9, 1952. The attorney for the plaintiffs was, who later became the first African American to serve on the Supreme Court (1967–91). The case was reargued on December 8, 1953, to address the question of whether the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment would have understood it to be inconsistent with racial segregation in public education.
View complete answer

What is Concurrent List in education?

What is concurrent list? Answer at BYJU’S IAS The concurrent list consists of subjects of common interest to both the Union and the States. Both the Parliament and the State Legislatures can make laws on the subjects included in this list. But in case of a conflict between the Union and the State law relating to the same subject, the Union law prevails over the State law. , : What is concurrent list? Answer at BYJU’S IAS
View complete answer

In which list is education included in India?

Under the Constitution of India legislative section is divided into three lists; Union List, State List and Concurrent List. Among the 52 items education is one of the item in Concurrent List.
View complete answer

Grady A. Lowry