Read the following statement about development planning and the suggested courses of action, and then decide which course of action logically follows, assuming the statement is completely true. Statement: The state government X has chalked out a development plan for the underdeveloped district Y, under which 80 percent of the funds will be placed in the hands of a committee of local representatives. Courses of action: I. The state government X should decide clear guidelines and norms for the functioning of the committee. II. Other state governments may follow a similar plan only if directed by the Central government.

Introduction / Context:
This course of action question is about decentralised development planning. State government X has planned to place a major share of funds for district Y in the hands of a committee of local representatives. Your task is to determine which suggested course of action logically follows from this plan. The question tests whether you can identify what steps are necessary for such a committee based system to function effectively.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• District Y is underdeveloped.
• State government X has created a plan for its development.
• Under the plan, 80 percent of funds will be handled by a local representatives committee.
• The committee will be responsible for deciding how these funds are used.
• No information is given about other states or any Central government instructions.

Concept / Approach:
When a large amount of public funds is handed over to a committee:

• There must be guidelines and norms to ensure transparency, accountability, and proper utilisation.
• The state that initiates the plan bears responsibility for defining these rules.
• Actions regarding other states or Central directions must not be assumed without explicit information.

We evaluate courses I and II against this background.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Evaluate course of action I. If 80 percent of the funds are in the hands of a local committee, clear guidelines and norms are essential to prevent misuse and to ensure effective implementation. Therefore, the state government X should definitely define how the committee will function, what procedures it will follow, and how accountability will be maintained. This is directly implied by the plan. Step 2: Evaluate course of action II. This statement talks about other state governments possibly following a similar plan, but only if the Central government directs them. The given statement does not mention any Central government role or any suggestion that the plan is meant as a model for other states. Thus, II introduces new information not supported by the original statement. Step 3: Decide which courses follow. I clearly follows as a necessary supporting step for the new plan, while II is speculative and unrelated to the core details given. Therefore, only I follows. Step 4: Choose the correct option. The option that states Only I follows is the right answer.

Verification / Alternative check:
Ask what would happen if no guidelines were given. The local committee might take arbitrary decisions, misuse funds, or face internal conflicts, which would undermine the goal of developing district Y. This shows that defining norms is essential. On the other hand, whether other states adopt similar plans depends on many separate policy decisions and is not logically mandated by the single example of state X, especially in the absence of any Central directive in the statement.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Only II follows: Incorrect because II brings in other states and Central government directions, which are not connected to the given information.
• Either I or II follows: Incorrect because I and II are not alternative solutions to the same problem; only I is clearly required.
• Neither I nor II follows: Incorrect because I is clearly necessary for sound implementation of the development plan.

Common Pitfalls:
Students sometimes think that any statement involving policy spread to other states is automatically valid. However, logical following requires explicit or strongly implied support from the statement. Another pitfall is to underestimate the importance of rules and norms when public funds are delegated. In reality and in reasoning questions, such guidelines are fundamental to any decentralised funding scheme.

Final Answer:
Only I follows.