Which one of the following statements is correct?

Let's analyze each statement: A) Only the Rajya Sabha and not the Lok Sabha can have nominated members This statement is incorrect. While currently (after the 104th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2019), only the Rajya Sabha has nominated members (12 by the President), historically, the Lok Sabha also had a provision for two nominated members from the Anglo-Indian community (under Article 331), which has now been abolished. Therefore, in a broader constitutional sense of "can have," the Lok Sabha historically could have had nominated members. B) There is a constitutional provision for nominating two members belonging to the Anglo-Indian community to the Rajya Sabha This statement is incorrect on two counts. Firstly, the constitutional provision for nominating two members from the Anglo-Indian community was for the LOK SABHA (Article 331), not the Rajya Sabha. Secondly, this provision has been abolished by the 104th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2019. C) There is no constitutional bar for a nominated member to be appointed Union minister This statement is correct. Once a nominated member takes the oath as a Member of Parliament, they are eligible to be appointed as a Union Minister. The Constitution does not differentiate between elected and nominated members regarding eligibility for ministerial office. Article 75(5) only requires a minister to be a member of either House of Parliament within six months of their appointment, which a nominated member fulfills. D) A nominated member can vote both in the Presidential and Vice Presidential elections This statement is incorrect. Nominated members can vote in the Vice-Presidential election (as the electoral college includes all members of both Houses of Parliament). However, nominated members CANNOT vote in the Presidential election, as the electoral college for the President consists only of ELECTED members of both Houses of Parliament and elected members of the State Legislative Assemblies. The final answer is C