Residents of Ramnagar appeal to the city bus company: “If the city bus which runs between Ramnagar and Sant Colony is extended to Vasant Vihar, it will be convenient for us.” Consider this appeal as true and decide which of the given assumptions is implicit.

Introduction / Context:
This question tests your understanding of implicit assumptions in a public appeal. The residents of Ramnagar are requesting that the existing city bus route between Ramnagar and Sant Colony be extended to Vasant Vihar because they believe it will be more convenient. You must decide whether certain negative statements about the bus company are assumptions behind this appeal or not. Distinguishing between the content of an appeal and critical comments that are not logically required is a key critical reasoning skill.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Statement (Appeal): If the city bus which runs between Ramnagar and Sant Colony is extended to Vasant Vihar, it will be convenient.
• Assumption 1: The convenience of the city bus company is much more important than the needs of consumers.
• Assumption 2: The city bus company is indifferent to the aspirations of the residents of Sant Colony.
• We must decide which of these, if any, is logically taken for granted by the residents when they make the appeal.

Concept / Approach:
An assumption is something that must be true for the statement or appeal to make sense. It is not simply any opinion or criticism that might be related. Here, the residents are asking for an extension of the route in order to increase convenience. For this appeal to be meaningful, we assume that the company can in principle adjust routes and that greater convenience is desirable. We do not need to assume anything about whether the company values its own convenience more than that of passengers, nor that it is indifferent to others. Those are negative judgments, not logical foundations of the appeal.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: The key idea in the appeal is convenience for Ramnagar residents if the route is extended to Vasant Vihar.Step 2: For the appeal to be sensible, the residents must assume that the bus company is capable of extending the route and may consider passengers needs.Step 3: Assumption 1 claims that the convenience of the bus company is much more important than passenger needs. This is a negative value judgment about the company and directly clashes with the spirit of the appeal, which hopes the company will care about passengers.Step 4: If the residents truly believed Assumption 1, they might still appeal, but it is not required for the appeal. In fact, the appeal requires exactly the opposite hope that passenger convenience will be considered.Step 5: Assumption 2 claims that the bus company is indifferent to the aspirations of the residents of Sant Colony. Again, this is a critical comment about the company and residents of another area. The appeal does not need to take any stance on the aspirations of Sant Colony residents.Step 6: The appeal is about extending the existing route further to Vasant Vihar, not about ignoring Sant Colony. Thus, Assumption 2 is not logically necessary either.Step 7: Therefore neither Assumption 1 nor Assumption 2 is implicit in the appeal.

Verification / Alternative check:
Imagine a situation where the bus company does value passenger needs and is very responsive. The residents could still make the same appeal for convenience. This shows that Assumption 1 is not necessary. Similarly, whether or not the company is indifferent to Sant Colony residents, the appeal about extending the route remains fully meaningful. Thus, the core logic of the appeal does not depend on either Assumption 1 or Assumption 2.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Option a and option b incorrectly claim that one of the negative statements is implicit, but neither is required for the appeal to make sense.
• Option d states that both are implicit, which is even stronger and clearly not justified.
• Option e adds an unnecessary idea about contradiction without correctly addressing which assumptions are needed.

Common Pitfalls:

• Confusing emotional or critical statements about an organisation with logical assumptions underlying a request.
• Thinking that any sentence involving the bus company must be an assumption, rather than asking whether the appeal fails without it.
• Over interpreting the appeal to include negative attitudes that are not actually expressed or required.

Final Answer:
Neither assumption 1 nor assumption 2 is implicit in the residents appeal.