Remedial English Test Series 83

Remedial English Test Series 83

 Identify  the ONE mistake in each line and make corrections    (1 mark for each correct answer. Total score   ___ )       

01 Appealing for votes on the basis of the religion, race, caste, community or language of all stakeholder,
02 including the voters, will invite disqualification of the candidates, the Supreme Court rule today in a
03 majority verdict. The landmark 4-3 decision by the seven-judge constitution bench essentially seek  to drive
04 home the message that religion and other features of identity politic  have no place in a secular activity like
06 elections. Till now, it was unsettle whether the word “his” in the relevant section of the Representation of
07 the People Act refer  to the candidate alone or to the voters also. The distinction has far-reaching
08 consequences because if “his” meant only the candidate, he or she can still appeals to the religious or caste
09 sentiments of voters as long as the candidates personal religion does not come into play. But the majority
10 verdict today settled the matter. “The word ‘his’… must necessary  be taken to embrace the entire
11 transaction of the appeal to vote made to voters and must be held referable to all the actors involve i.e. the
12 candidate, his election agent etc. and the voter,” Justice S.A. Bobde, who concur  with the majority
13 verdict, wrote in his separate judgment. After this judgments, the use of religion, race, caste, community or
14 language to canvass votes will amounts  to a “corrupt practice”. Some politicians felt that since the latest
15 constitution bench did not went  into a 1995 verdict that defined Hindutva as “a way of life”, Sangh parivar
16 sympathisers might continue to seek votes on the Hindutva plank by contend that it is not a religion. But
17 several lawyers said today’s verdict explicitly state  that votes should not be sought on religion and there
18 was little scope for confusion. The effectiveness of today’s verdict will be test  soon in poll-bound Uttar
19 Pradesh, where communal polarisation and caste politic often play a decisive role during elections. The
20 majority view was share  by Chief Justice T.S. Thakur and Justices Bobde, Madan B. Lokur and L.
21 Nageswara Rao, while the dissent opinion was given by Justices A.K. Goel, D.Y. Chandrachud and U.U.
22 Lalit. Justice Thakur said in the judge: “Electoral processes are doubtless secular activities of the State.
23 Religion can have no placed in such activities for religion is a matter personal to the individual with which
24 neither the State  or any other individual has anything to do.” The Chief Justice added: “The relationship
25 between man and God and the means which human  adopt to connect with the Almighty are matters of
26 individual preferences and choices. The State is under a obligation to allow complete freedom for
27 practising, professing and propagating religious faith… but the freedom so guarantee has nothing to do
28 with secular activities which the State undertakes.” The minority view also put forwards a compelling
29 argument. Authored by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, the minority opinion held that people has been
30 discriminate  against on the basis of religion and caste, and access to governance is a means of addressing
31 social disparities. If a candidate is prevent  from speaking on the need for a remedy to such injustices,
32 democracy might be reduced to a  abstraction, the minority view said (The Telegraph 3 Jan 2016).

  KEY TO Remedial English Test Series 83   Note the correct answers below

01 Appealing for votes on the basis of the religion, race, caste, community or language of all stakeholders,
02 including the voters, will invite disqualification of the candidates, the Supreme Court ruled today in a
03 majority verdict.The landmark 4-3 decision by the seven-judge constitution bench essentially seeks to drive
04 home the message that religion and other features of identity politics have no place in a secular activity like
06 elections. Till now, it was unsettled whether the word “his” in the relevant section of the Representation of
07 the People Act referred to the candidate alone or to the voters also. The distinction has far-reaching
08 consequences because if “his” meant only the candidate, he or she can still appeal to the religious or caste
09 sentiments of voters as long as the candidate’s personal religion does not come into play. But the majority
10 verdict today settled the matter. “The word ‘his’… must necessarily be taken to embrace the entire
11 transaction of the appeal to vote made to voters and must be held referable to all the actors involved i.e. the
12 candidate, his election agent etc. and the voter,” Justice S.A. Bobde, who concurred with the majority
13 verdict, wrote in his separate judgment. After this judgment, the use of religion, race, caste, community or
14 language to canvass votes will amount to a “corrupt practice”. Some politicians felt that since the latest
15 constitution bench did not go into a 1995 verdict that defined Hindutva as “a way of life”, Sangh parivar
16 sympathisers might continue to seek votes on the Hindutva plank by contending that it is not a religion. But
17 several lawyers said today’s verdict explicitly stated that votes should not be sought on religion and there
18 was little scope for confusion. The effectiveness of today’s verdict will be tested soon in poll-bound Uttar
19 Pradesh, where communal polarisation and caste politics often play a decisive role during elections. The
20 majority view was shared by Chief Justice T.S. Thakur and Justices Bobde, Madan B. Lokur and L.
21 Nageswara Rao, while the dissenting opinion was given by Justices A.K. Goel, D.Y. Chandrachud and U.U.
22 Lalit. Justice Thakur said in the judgment: “Electoral processes are doubtless secular activities of the State.
23 Religion can have no place in such activities for religion is a matter personal to the individual with which
24 neither the State nor any other individual has anything to do.” The Chief Justice added: “The relationship
25 between man and God and the means which humans adopt to connect with the Almighty are matters of
26 individual preferences and choices. The State is under an obligation to allow complete freedom for
27 practising, professing and propagating religious faith… but the freedom so guaranteed has nothing to do
28 with secular activities which the State undertakes.” The minority view also put forward a compelling
29 argument. Authored by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, the minority opinion held that people had been
30 discriminated against on the basis of religion and caste, and access to governance is a means of addressing
31 social disparities. If a candidate is prevented from speaking on the need for a remedy to such injustices,
32 democracy might be reduced to an abstraction, the minority view said (The Telegraph 3 Jan 2016).