Right to Constitutional RemediesExpanding scope of rights

Correct answer: A. Wider access to justice through Public Interest Litigation

Explanation: The governing concept is Public Interest Litigation, or PIL. It allows a public-spirited person or organisation to approach a court when a vulnerable or disadvantaged group may be unable to do so effectively itself. The purpose is not personal profit; it is to seek enforcement of rights and accountability in a matter affecting the public or a section of it. Therefore, option A is correct because the social worker’s action can widen access to justice and make Fundamental Rights practically enforceable for the deprived community. Option B changes the purpose to private gain, option C contradicts access to justice, and option D treats rights as merely theoretical. Courts still examine whether the petition genuinely serves public interest.

Correct answer: A. When the court links the right to life not merely with existence but with dignified life

Explanation: The governing concept is purposive and broad constitutional interpretation that strengthens the practical protection of rights. The right to life is not sensibly limited to biological survival; courts may understand it as including conditions necessary for a life with dignity, subject to constitutional reasoning and legal limits. Option A is therefore the best example of rights expansion. Option B reduces protection rather than expanding it. Option C is overbroad because not every private preference creates a constitutional claim, and option D rejects the Constitution itself instead of interpreting it. The key exam clue is that an existing right receives a richer, rights-protective meaning in response to human needs and changing circumstances.