Logical deduction – constraint on selection order: "When Anu comes first and Tanu comes second, Nikki and Sona cannot be selected in that order." Choose a consistent pair. (i) Anu and Tanu came first. (ii) Anu came first and Tanu came second. (iii) Nikki and Sona got selected in that order. (iv) Sona and Nikki got selected in that order.

Introduction / Context:
The conditional bans a specific outcome (Nikki then Sona) when a particular ranking holds (Anu 1st, Tanu 2nd). It does not forbid the reverse (Sona then Nikki).

Given Data / Assumptions:

• If (Anu 1st ∧ Tanu 2nd) then Not(Nikki then Sona).
• No other orders are excluded by the rule.

Concept / Approach:
Pick the option that asserts the condition and a permitted selection order. (ii) states the condition, and (iv) supplies an allowed order.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Check (ii) (iii): violates the constraint, so invalid. (i) is vague and incomplete about positions.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
(ii) (iii) contradicts the rule. (i) (iv) is ambiguous since (i) does not fully specify "first" and "second" respectively for Anu and Tanu.

Common Pitfalls:
Thinking both orders (Nikki→Sona and Sona→Nikki) are banned; only one is.

Final Answer:
(ii) (iv)