The doctrine that a pre-Constitution law inconsistent with Part III is void to the extent of that inconsistency flows from
A{'text': 'Article 12', 'label': 'A'}
B{'text': 'Article 13', 'label': 'B'}
C{'text': 'Article 14', 'label': 'C'}
D{'text': 'Article 15', 'label': 'D'}
Answer & Solution
Correct answer: B. {'text': 'Article 13', 'label': 'B'}
1. Article 13(1) states that laws in force before the Constitution are void to the extent of any inconsistency with Part III.
2. Article 13(2) forbids the State from making any post-Constitution law that abridges Part III rights.
3. Article 12 defines "the State"; it does not deal with law inconsistency.
4. Article 13(3) defines "law" and "laws in force" for this article.
_Source: Constitution of India (as on May 2022), Part III, Art. 13(1)_
Related questions
Which of the following classes of Fundamental Rights can be claimed against both the StateThe 44th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1978 removed which right from the list of FundamentA writ of habeas corpus is issued primarily toThe right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of FundThe right of any section of citizens to conserve their distinct language, script or culturArticle 27 of the Constitution forbids compelling any person toArticle 26 of the Constitution grants which right to religious denominations?Under Article 25, the freedom to profess, practise and propagate religion is available