UPSC Essentials brings to you its initiative of daily subject-wise quizzes. These quizzes are designed to help you revise some of the most important topics from the static part of the syllabus. Attempt today’s subject quiz on Polity and Governance to check your progress. Click Here to read the UPSC Essentials magazine for March 2026. Share your views and suggestions in the comment box or at manas.srivastava@indianexpress.comWith reference to the removal of the chief election commissioner (CEC), consider the following statements:2. The CEC can only be removed by an order of the President passed after an address by each House of Parliament supported by a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting.Which of the statements given above is/are correct?(a) 1 only(b) 2 only(c) Both 1 and 2(d) Neither 1 nor 2Relevance: Removal provisions of constitutional authorities are crucial for understanding institutional independence and checks and balances. It can be asked in the UPSC prelims as it tests clarity on comparison-based constitutional provisions.Explanation— The Rajya Sabha Chairman and Lok Sabha Speaker rejected the impeachment motions submitted in both Houses by the Opposition over three weeks ago to remove Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar from office. Both the presiding officers did not assign any reason for their decisions.Story continues below this ad— The removal of a CEC is governed by the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023 and the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.— The process to remove a CEC is the same as that for a Supreme Court judge, according to Article 324 (5) of the Constitution. Hence, statement 1 is not correct.— Article 124 (4), which details the process, states that Supreme Court judges, and as a result the CEC, can only be removed “by an order of the President passed after an address by each House of Parliament supported by a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting has been presented to the President in the same session for such removal on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity”. Hence, statement 2 is correct.Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer.QUESTION 2Consider the following statements:1. Article 16(1) guarantees eligible candidates a right to be fairly considered for promotion, as part of equality of opportunity in public employment.Story continues below this ad2. Denial of consideration for promotion to an eligible candidate within the zone of consideration amounts to a violation of this fundamental right.Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?(a) Both Statement 1 and Statement 2 are correct and Statement 2 is the correct explanation for Statement 1.(b) Both Statement 1 and Statement 2 are correct and Statement 2 is not the correct explanation for Statement 1.(c) Statement 1 is correct but Statement 2 is incorrect.(d) Statement 1 is incorrect but Statement 2 is correct.Story continues below this adRelevance: Questions on Article 16 of the Constitution of India are important as they test understanding of equality of opportunity in public employment. It is relevant for both static and current affairs portions.Explanation— The High Court’s intervention was based on a right built over decades by the Supreme Court, rooted in Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution that guarantee equality before the law and equal opportunity in matters of public employment, respectively. Over the years, courts have interpreted “employment” broadly to encompass the entire arc of a person’s career, meaning equal opportunity extends to career progression.— The Supreme Court distinguished between the right to be considered and the right to an actual promotion in 1991. In a case involving the Orissa-based Lift Irrigation Corporation, the apex court ruled that “there is no fundamental right to promotion, but an employee has only right to be considered for promotion, when it arises, in accordance with relevant rules.”— This principle was underlined in 1999 by a five-judge Constitution Bench in the Ajit Singh vs State of Punjab case. “Article 16(1) provides to every employee otherwise eligible for promotion or who comes within the zone of consideration, a fundamental right to be ‘considered’ for promotion,” the court held. Hence, statement 1 is correct.Story continues below this ad— “If a person satisfies the eligibility and zone criteria but is not considered for promotion, then there will be a clear infraction of his fundamental right to be ‘considered’ for promotion, which is his personal right,” it said. Hence, statement 2 is correct.Both Statement 1 and Statement 2 are correct and Statement 2 is the correct explanation for Statement 1.Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.QUESTION 3Which of the following Constitutional Amendment Bill led to change in the name and language of Orissa and Oriya to Odisha and Odia?(a) 113th Constitutional Amendment Bill(b) 97th Constitutional Amendment Bill(c) 101st Constitutional Amendment Bill(d) 104th Constitutional Amendment BillRelevance: Constitutional amendments relating to states’ names and languages can be tested to assess knowledge of federal structure and identity-related changes. Such topics are relevant as they reflect how the Constitution of India adapts to cultural and linguistic demands. Aspirants must also read about Article 3 of the Constitution of India.ExplanationStory continues below this ad— Odisha, the first state in India to be formed on a linguistic identity, turned 90 on Wednesday as the state celebrated Utkal Divas (Odisha Day) to commemorate its formation on April 1, 1936.— Under British rule, the Odia-speaking regions were scattered across different provinces: Bengal, Madras, Central, and Bihar. During the latter half of the 19th century, a movement began for the unification of the regions under a single administration.— Until 2011, the state continued to be known as Orissa and its language was called Oriya. After Parliament passed the 113th Constitutional Amendment Bill in March 2011, it was changed to Odisha and Odia.Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.QUESTION 4Who among the following has the authority to grant formal legal recognition to the new capital of the state?(a) President(b) Prime Minister(c) Parliament(d) Supreme CourtStory continues below this adRelevance: Questions on constitutional authority test clarity on division of powers between executive, legislature and judiciary. It is important for Prelims as it links with static polity.Explanation— Amaravati has been officially notified as the new capital of Andhra Pradesh. The gazette notification proclaiming Amaravati as the new capital under the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation (Ammendment) Act, 2026, was signed on Monday, April 6. The notification will apply retrospectively from June 2, 2024, as per the gazette.— The decision has come 12 years after the bifurcation of the erstwhile united stated into Andhra Pradesh and Telangana in 2014. While the state government had already notified Amaravati as the capital on April 23, 2016, it received legal status from the Centre with the notification of the latest Act. The Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly had passed a resolution on March 28, 2026, urging the Centre to amend Section 5(2) of the Act to grant the formal legal recognition to Amaravati as the capital of the state.Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.QUESTION 5The Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023, had amended 183 provisions across 42 laws to improve:(a) Expansion of criminal penalties across regulatory laws(b) Centralisation of regulatory powers in the Union Government(c) ease of doing business(d) Promotion of agricultural subsidies and rural welfare schemesStory continues below this adRelevance: The Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023 reflects a shift toward decriminalisation and rationalisation of regulatory frameworks. These reforms are important due to the news, and can be asked in UPSC prelims. Aspirants must read about important amendments and its constitutional procedure.Explanation— The Parliament passed the Jan Vishwas (Amendment to Provisions) Bill, 2026. The Bill proposes to amend 784 provisions across 79 Central laws. Earlier, the Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023, had amended 183 provisions across 42 laws to improve ease of doing business.— The present Bill, however, moves beyond this. By extensively decriminalising and rationalising punishments across a wider spectrum of laws, it pushes the reform into areas that shape a citizen’s routine, day-to-day encounters with the law.— In an attempt to rationalise the penal framework, the Bill amends laws across a broad range of sectors. These amendments collectively decriminalise or rationalise 1,018 individual actions and omissions treated as offences under the law.Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.To read more: Jan Vishwas Bill 2026: Scale, scope and impact of India’s major decriminalisation exercisePrevious Daily Subject-Wise-QuizDaily Subject-wise quiz — History, Culture, and Social Issues (Week 152)Daily subject-wise quiz — Polity and Governance (Week 156)Daily subject-wise quiz — Science and Technology (Week 156)Daily subject-wise quiz — Economy (Week 156)Daily subject-wise quiz — Environment and Geography (Week 156)Daily subject-wise quiz – International Relations (Week 156)Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week.Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – IndianExpress UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.