Every establishment/institution has the legal right to protest by way of strike. However, Course of Action II is right Course of Action.
It is an accident and hence suspending licences of other utilities for this happening is not right courses of action. However, instructions should be given to the people to remain inside their houses.
The first course of action does not match the scale of the problem. The problem is not big as to merit a Government enquiry, It is enough that civic body takes action and hence, II follows.
Only Conclusion II follows as primary education may eradicate the problem
only Conclusion II can follow as text book must available but lack of experiment may be the reason.
Only Conclusions I can follow.
II and III Courses of action logically follow because for such time the pumping system for removal of water should be kept ready and the people should be advised to stay indoor during the period.
I and II Courses of action logically follow. Since, in the next century the increased population will have to be fed more rice, hence, it is necessary to allocate more funds for rice research to help ensure adequate supplies. Besides, the rice should be grown in countries outside Asia to meet the demand.
Main problem according to question is that most of the development plans are on paper only. But if field work was supervised properly. Hence, only Acton I follows.
Clearly, the contamination of ground water doesn't provide sufficient grounds to shift people to other areas. The problem demands creating awareness among people of the dangers of drinking contaminated water and arranging to provide them safe drinking water. Thus, only course II follows.
Clearly, such a finding demands a probe into the matter along with sealing of the premises for further checks to avoid any mishap. Thus, both the courses of action I and II follows.
Comments
There are no comments.Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.