The Indian parliamentary system is different from the British parliamentary system in that India hasSelect one:a. both a real and a nominal executiveb. a system of collective responsibilityc. the system of judicial reviewd. bicameral legislature

The Indian parliamentary system is different from the British parliamentary system in that India has both a real and a nominal executive.

Here's why:

a. Both a real and a nominal executive: In India, the President is the nominal executive (i.e., the head of state), while the Prime Minister is the real executive (i.e., the head of government). In the UK, however, the monarch is the nominal executive, and the Prime Minister is the real executive. The key difference is that in India, the President has certain powers and responsibilities that the British monarch does not.

b. A system of collective responsibility: Both India and the UK have a system of collective responsibility, where the Cabinet (led by the Prime Minister) is collectively responsible to the Parliament. So, this is not a point of difference.

c. The system of judicial review: Both India and the UK have a system of judicial review, where the judiciary can review the constitutionality of laws and government actions. However, the scope and nature of judicial review can vary between the two countries.

d. Bicameral legislature: Both India and the UK have a bicameral legislature, which consists of two houses of Parliament. In India, it's the Rajya Sabha (Council of States) and the Lok Sabha (House of the People). In the UK, it's the House of Lords and the House of Commons. So, this is also not a point of difference.