Question map
Consider the following statements in respect of Bharat Ratna and Padma Awards: 1. Bharat Ratna and Padma Awards are titles under the Article 18(1) of the Constitution of India. 2. Padma Awards, which were instituted in the year 1954, were suspended only once. 3. The number of Bharat Ratna Awards is restricted to a maximum of five in a particular year. Which of the above statements are **not** correct?
Explanation
The correct answer is Option 4 (1, 2 and 3) because all three statements are factually incorrect based on constitutional provisions and historical precedents.
- Statement 1 is incorrect: In the Balaji Raghavan case (1996), the Supreme Court ruled that Bharat Ratna and Padma Awards are "National Honours" and do not amount to "titles" under Article 18(1). Therefore, they cannot be used as prefixes or suffixes to the name of the recipient.
- Statement 2 is incorrect: These awards have been suspended more than once. They were suspended from 1977 to 1980 (during the Morarji Desai administration) and again from 1992 to 1995 due to litigation regarding their constitutional validity.
- Statement 3 is incorrect: According to the official guidelines, the number of Bharat Ratna awards is restricted to a maximum of three in any particular year, not five (though exceptions have occurred via political decisions in 2024, the standing rule remains three).
Since the question asks for statements that are not correct, Option 4 is the right choice as it encompasses all three inaccuracies.
PROVENANCE & STUDY PATTERN
Full viewThis is a 'Reading Comprehension Check' on standard Polity texts (Laxmikanth). It proves that skimming headings is fatal; you must read the fine print about 'suspensions' and 'numerical caps' in the commentary. It is a fair question because the Balaji Raghavan case is a landmark judgment covered in every serious preparation.
This question can be broken into the following sub-statements. Tap a statement sentence to jump into its detailed analysis.
- Statement 1: Are the Bharat Ratna and Padma Awards considered "titles" prohibited by Article 18(1) of the Constitution of India?
- Statement 2: How many times were the Padma Awards (instituted in 1954 in India) suspended?
- Statement 3: Is there a rule restricting the number of Bharat Ratna awards to a maximum of five in a single year in India?
- Supreme Court in Bajaji Raghavan (1995) upheld the constitutional validity of Bharat Ratna and Padma awards.
- Court ruled these awards do not amount to 'titles' within Article 18, which prohibits hereditary titles of nobility.
- Affirms that recognising merit by State awards is not inconsistent with Article 18's equality principle.
- Notes Article 18(1) exception for military or academic distinctions and the judicial finding on non-military awards.
- Specifically states non-military merit awards (e.g., Padma awards) are not titles of nobility, subject to non-use as name prefixes/suffixes.
- Clarifies the conditional nature: awards are permissible provided they are not used as titles.
- Explains that recipients cannot use Bharat Ratna or Padma as a title and thus such awards do not fall under the constitutional prohibition.
- Provides contextual background on the introduction of these decorations (Bharat Ratna and Padma categories).
- Explicitly states the Padma awards were instituted in 1954.
- Reports the Janata Party government discontinued (i.e., suspended) them in 1977 and they were revived in 1980.
- The discontinue→revive sequence documents one suspension episode (1977–1980).
- Confirms the Padma decorations were introduced in 1954, matching the statement's institution date.
- Provides supporting context for the time-frame referenced in the discontinuation/revival note.
- This is the official Padma Awards website stating the numerical restriction for Bharat Ratna.
- It explicitly says the maximum number in a particular year is three, which contradicts a claim of five.
- A reputable news source summarizing official rules also states the yearly cap.
- It notes the number of awards is normally restricted to a maximum of three in a year, not five.
States a numerical cap for national honours: it says Padma Awards are limited to 120 per year and explicitly asserts Bharat Ratna is restricted to a maximum of three in a particular year.
A student could treat this as a clear rule to check against the 'maximum of five' claim by verifying primary sources (presidential notifications, statutes or authoritative commentary) to confirm whether the cap is 3 or differs.
Gives an example where a government scheme explicitly sets an annual numerical cap and gender reservation (100 awards per year, 30% for women), illustrating that awards often have formal yearly limits.
Use this pattern to infer that other national awards (like Bharat Ratna) may also be governed by explicit yearly numerical rules and so should be checked for any stated cap.
Explains the formal creation and categories of national decorations (Bharat Ratna, Padma Vibhushan, etc.), indicating these awards are part of an organized system that can carry formal rules.
A student could look up the founding notifications or government orders for these categories to find any specified numerical limits for each award.
Shows the general pattern that government/granting authorities set numeric ceilings (e.g., investment limits for Maharatna CPSEs), demonstrating a precedent for statutory or administrative caps in government policy.
Apply this general understanding to suspect that a numeric limit on Bharat Ratna might exist in official rules and therefore check official award statutes or notifications.
Includes an exam-style reference about statements concerning Bharat Ratna and Padma Awards, suggesting that numeric rules about these awards are typical factual points tested in study material.
Treat this as a prompt that reliable study sources or previous exam keys likely record the precise numerical limits; a student could consult such authoritative reference material to resolve whether the cap is three or five.
- [THE VERDICT]: Sitter. Directly solvable from M. Laxmikanth (Chapter: Fundamental Rights > Abolition of Titles). If you missed this, you are reading too fast.
- [THE CONCEPTUAL TRIGGER]: Article 18 (Abolition of Titles). The core constitutional conflict: Does recognizing merit violate the Right to Equality?
- [THE HORIZONTAL EXPANSION]: Memorize the 'Award Profile': 1. Monetary Grant (Zero). 2. Rank (7A in Table of Precedence). 3. Suspensions (Twice: 1977-80 & 1992-95). 4. Eligibility (Foreigners allowed: Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, Nelson Mandela).
- [THE STRATEGIC METACOGNITION]: When studying statutory bodies or awards, apply the 'Administrative Filter': Check the Validity (SC Judgment), the Timeline (Interruptions), and the Limits (Caps/Quotas).
Article 18 prohibits titles of nobility, but this prohibition is limited and does not automatically include State awards conferred for merit.
High-yield for questions on Fundamental Rights and equality: distinguishes constitutional ban on hereditary nobility from permissible State recognitions. Connects to debates on equality, privileges, and rights under Part III and helps answer fact-patterns about honours, titles, and State awards.
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > El l Abolition of Titles > p. 85
- Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties IJl > p. 117
Non-military merit awards like the Padma series are acceptable provided recipients do not use them as prefixes or suffixes to their names.
Useful for applying constitutional text to real cases: tests nuance between receiving an award and using it as a formal title. Helps in answering questions on restrictions on usage of honours and the interplay of statutory practice with constitutional prohibitions.
- Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties IJl > p. 117
- Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties IJl > p. 116
The Supreme Court decision is the key judicial authority holding that Bharat Ratna and Padma awards are not 'titles' within Article 18.
Mastering landmark judgments is essential for UPSC law and polity questions; this precedent is frequently relied upon for explaining scope of Fundamental Rights and State recognitions. Enables candidates to cite authoritative rulings when evaluating constitutional claims about honours.
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > El l Abolition of Titles > p. 85
The awards were discontinued in 1977 and reinstated in 1980, constituting a single suspension period.
High-yield for polity/history questions on civilian honours and their interruptions; links to political regime changes and government policy shifts. Useful for questions asking timelines of national awards or examples of administrative actions by different governments.
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > El l Abolition of Titles > p. 85
- Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties IJl > p. 116
National awards like the Padma series are recognised as non-hereditary honours and not 'titles' under Article 18.
Important for constitutional law questions on equality and prohibition of titles; connects to Supreme Court interpretations and challenges to state honours. Prepares candidates for questions on judiciary rulings that clarify constitutional exceptions.
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > El l Abolition of Titles > p. 85
- Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties IJl > p. 117
Change of government led to discontinuation (Janata Party) and later revival (Indira Gandhi) of the Padma awards.
Useful for essays and polity answers linking administrative decisions to partisan politics and regime change. Helps explain how honours reflect broader political priorities and can be used as examples in governance questions.
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > El l Abolition of Titles > p. 85
- Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 35: TABLES > C. PRIME MINISTERS OF INDIA > p. 534
The question concerns an annual numeric limit on the Bharat Ratna; the material identifies a specific yearly cap of three.
High-yield for polity and current-affairs questions about civilian honours; helps answer MCQs and short-answers on award rules and limits. Connects to broader topics on state honours, constitutional constraints on titles, and government notification practices.
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > El l Abolition of Titles > p. 85
The Table of Precedence. Bharat Ratna recipients sit at Rank 7A, which places them above Chief Ministers (outside their state) and Supreme Court Judges. This is the next logical 'hierarchy' question.
The 'Only Once' Historical Heuristic. In Indian administrative history, policies tied to the 'Congress vs. Janata' rivalry (like these awards) usually flip-flop more than once due to the volatile 1970s and 1990s. 'Suspended only once' is historically unlikely for such a politically charged symbol.
GS2 (Governance) & GS4 (Ethics): The shift from 'Elite Awards' to 'People's Padma' (Jan Bhagidari). The democratization of the nomination process via the Padma Portal is a prime example of Transparency and reducing Patronage in Governance.