Legislative Continuity during Crises

Statement 3 is correct. Under the Proviso to Article 83(2) of the Constitution of India, Parliament may extend the term by law for a period not exceeding one year at a time, which the 5th Lok Sabha utilized. Statement 1 is incorrect because only a simple majority law is needed, not a constitutional amendment. Statement 2 is incorrect because the extension is not perpetual; it must be renewed annually and expires six months post-emergency.

A is true as the 5th Lok Sabha was extended twice up to 1978. R is false. According to Article 83(2) of the Constitution of India, extensions are never automatic. Parliament must explicitly pass a law with a simple majority to extend the tenure by one year at a time.

Option 2 is the correct constitutional protocol. As per Article 83(2) of the Constitution, tenure extensions require parliamentary legislation (not executive orders), are granted in one-year increments (not six-month blocks), and absolutely terminate six months after the emergency ends. The other options misapply these foundational facts.

Two statements are correct. The second and third statements are correct as per Article 83(2) and historical precedent (up to 1978). The first statement is a distractor; a simple majority is sufficient to pass the tenure extension law, misapplying the special majority requirement meant for approving the emergency itself.