Statement–Courses of Action (external financing for port development): The Asian Development Bank has approved a $285 million loan for coal-port projects at Paradip and Madras Port Trusts; determine which course(s) follow—(I) similarly use international financial assistance to develop such ports elsewhere, (II) avoid seeking financial assistance from international agencies—considering consistency with the stated context.

Given data

• Statement: ADB has approved a substantial loan for specified coal-port construction.
• Course I: Extend the approach by tapping similar assistance for other suitable locations.
• Course II: Do not seek international financial assistance.

Concept / Approach
When a financing route is already accepted for a public-infrastructure purpose, a consistent extension (I) is reasonable, whereas a blanket rejection (II) contradicts the premise.

Step-by-step evaluation
Step 1: The statement itself demonstrates the feasibility/acceptance of such funding.Step 2: Therefore, using similar avenues for appropriate projects (I) follows logically.Step 3: Course II is inconsistent with the stated action (approval already taken); it does not follow.

Verification / Alternative
Project-wise appraisal can still apply, but the category-level feasibility of such financing is established.

Common pitfalls

• Assuming one instance mandates all; here, the logic is permissive (what can be done), not prohibitive.

Final Answer
Only I follows.