Revision summary
Tarkunde, Goswami, Law Commission 170/255 and the Election Commission have long asked for ceilings on party spend, faster petitions, and inner-party democracy. Candidate spend is capped; party spend is not, which is why money still dominates the poll. ADR disclosure and Lily Thomas reduced opacity and the conviction cushion; they did not end criminalisation. ONOE, as framed by the Kovind committee, promises one Model Code freeze, lower cost and less policy freeze. Federal cost: truncated Assemblies, President’s Rule risk, and nationalisation of State polls. Simultaneity is not a substitute for audited party finance and a statutory Code. Reform that works is a package, not a single polling date.
Model answer
Introduction
Indian elections are legal, large and still expensive. From the Tarkunde and Dinesh Goswami exercises through the Law Commission and the Election Commission’s own notes, the unfinished list has been money, muscle, inner-party democracy and a Code that can postpone a transfer but cannot unseat a candidate. One nation, one election is one item on that list. It is not a substitute for the rest.
Body
Why reform is still asked
Committees have not been asking for a new polling date. They have been asking for a cleaner poll.
- Peg: Section 77 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, caps what a candidate may spend; it does not capture what a party spends on the same campaign.
- Peg: Criminalisation continues even after Association for Democratic Reforms forced disclosure of assets and pending cases, and even after Lily Thomas v. Union of India struck down the three-month cushion for convicted sitting members.
- Peg: Paid news, dummy candidates, and parties that never hold inner elections were already flagged in the Law Commission’s 170th Report; the Model Code cannot, by itself, unseat anyone.
- Peg: Voter ID, EVM-VVPAT and the EPIC roll improved the count; they still do not tell the voter who funded the campaign.
One nation, one election
Simultaneous polls are a calendar design with real fiscal appeal and a real federal cost.
- Peg: The Kovind High-Level Committee (2024) argued that Lok Sabha and Assembly elections on a shared clock would freeze the Model Code once instead of several times, and would use security and school buildings once.
- Peg: India is not a presidential republic with a single election day; in S.R. Bommai v. Union of India a State government’s majority is tested on the floor, not dismissed by a remote calendar.
- Peg: If an Assembly collapses, forcing it onto the Union’s clock means a truncated House or a spell of President’s Rule — a constitutional invention, not mere housekeeping.
- Peg: A simultaneous poll can turn every Assembly contest into a referendum on Delhi; hung Houses and no-confidence votes would still need a mechanical fix the Constitution does not presently give.
Package, not a date
Committees that liked a common calendar still put criminality, money and inner-party democracy first.
- Peg: One nation, one election without audited party accounts, a statutory core of the Model Code, and faster election petitions is a change of date.
- Peg: If simultaneity is still wanted, it needs State consent rather than a Union whip on every Assembly’s life.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD C[Committee agenda] --> M[Money and crime] C --> P[Party democracy] C --> O[ONOE calendar] O --> F[Federal cost] M --> V[Cleaner vote] P --> V
Conclusion
- Electoral reform is a cluster: money, crime, parties and the Code. One nation, one election may cut cost and Model Code fatigue. It cannot, by itself, clean politics, and it must not flatten the federal clock.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Explain and distinguish between Lok Adalats and Arbitration Tribunals. Whether they entertain civil as well as criminal cases?
Next question in the 2024 paper (Q2). View answer →
-
Did the Election Commission invent one nation, one election?
It has, at times, supported a common schedule for logistics. The political design and any amendment bills are the Union’s.
-
Would one nation, one election end horse-trading?
No. Floor tests and the Tenth Schedule would still decide mid-term collapse. The calendar only decides when the next common poll is.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2025 · Q3 · GS II · 10 marks
Compare and contrast the President's power to pardon in India and in the USA. Are there any limits to it in both the countries? What are 'preemptive pardons'? -
2024 · Q12 · GS II · 15 marks
Right to privacy is intrinsic to life and personal liberty and is inherently protected under Article 21 of the constitution. Explain. In this reference discuss the law relating to D.N.A. testing of child in the womb to establish its paternity. -
2024 · Q15 · GS II · 15 marks
Discuss India as a secular state and compare with the secular principles of the US constitution. -
2023 · Q1 · GS II · 10 marks
"Constitutionally guaranteed judicial independence is a prerequisite of democracy". Comment. -
2023 · Q11 · GS II · 15 marks
" The Construction of India is a living instrument with capabilities of enormous dynamism. It is a constitution made for a progressive society". Illustrate with special reference to the expanding horizons of the right to life and personal liberty. -
2023 · Q12 · GS II · 15 marks
Explain the constitutional perspectives of Gender Justice with the help of relevant Constitutional Provisions and case laws. -
2023 · Q13 · GS II · 15 marks
Account for the legal and political factors responsible for the reduced frequency of using Article 356 by the Union Governments since mid 1990s. -
2022 · Q4 · GS II · 10 marks
Discuss the role of the Vice -Presidents of India as the chairman of the Rajyasabha.
More from this paper
Q2 · UPSC Mains 2024 · GS II · 10 marks
Explain and distinguish between Lok Adalats and Arbitration Tribunals. Whether they entertain civil as well as criminal cases?
Separation of Powers
Lok Adalat is a Legal Services Authorities Act forum: conciliation, award as a decree, generally no appeal. It hears civil matters and compoundable criminal cases, not non-compoundable crime. Arbitration is contractual under the 1996 Act: civil-commercial disputes, Section 34 challenge, no criminal trial. Booz Allen and Vidya Drolia mark what cannot be sent to a private tribunal. Permanent Lok Adalats for public utilities are a statutory hybrid, still not private arbitration. The working distinction is public compromise at little cost versus paid private adjudication.
Q3 · UPSC Mains 2024 · GS II · 10 marks
"The growth of cabinet system has practkally resulted in the marginalisation of the parliamentary supremacy." Elucidate.
Parliament and State Legislatures
Articles 74–75 keep the Cabinet responsible to the Lok Sabha; that is the legal core of parliamentary government. Whips and the Tenth Schedule, ordinances and money-bill classification have moved real initiation to the Cabinet. This is practical marginalisation of the floor, not a legal repeal of Parliament. PAC, standing committees, Rajya Sabha and the floor test still bite. Keisham Meghachandra pressed Speakers to decide disqualification on a clock. A narrower anti-defection law would restore some of the supremacy the quote says is lost. The examiner’s misspelling does not change the demand: show practice squeezing text, not text dying.
Q4 · UPSC Mains 2024 · GS II · 10 marks
"The duty of the Comptroller and Auditor General is not merely to ensure the legality of expenditure but also its propriety." Comment.
Governance and Policy
Articles 148–151 and the 1971 Act make the CAG the Union and State auditor. Legality is sanction, appropriation and rule-compliance. Propriety and performance audit test waste and value for money even when vouchers are valid. PAC is the parliamentary partner; major performance reports mixed both functions. Indian audit is overwhelmingly after the spend, so the report must sting. The CAG cannot convict or make policy; it can still refuse to be a mere notary.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.