Assertion–Reason (Food Security Policy):\nAssertion (A): The government provides food grains to the poor at a very low price.\nReason (R): The poor cast their vote in large numbers in the elections.

Introduction / Context:
This Assertion–Reason item tests whether a true observation about public policy (food grains to the poor at subsidized prices) is being explained accurately by a political claim (that the poor vote in large numbers). The core skill is to distinguish factual truth from causal sufficiency and policy rationale.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• A: The State supplies subsidized food grains to poor households.
• R: The poor participate in elections in large numbers.
• General aims of food security policies include reducing hunger, improving nutrition, stabilizing prices, and ensuring minimum consumption levels.

Concept / Approach:
Evaluate A and R independently for truth, then check whether R is the correct explanation of A. A true assertion does not necessarily imply that any true statement about the same domain is its cause; explanation requires policy objectives and institutional design to align with the stated reason.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Truth of A: Many governments operate food-security programs targeting poor households with subsidized staples; so A is true in substance.2) Truth of R: In many democracies, poorer citizens do participate robustly in voting; thus R can be true as an empirical tendency.3) Causal link test: The principal rationale for food subsidies is social protection and food security, not merely electoral turnout. Even if political factors influence policy, the stated policy logic (hunger alleviation, nutrition) is the proximate explanation. Hence R does not correctly explain A.

Verification / Alternative check:
Consider policy documents and program goals (food security, price stabilization, public health). These reasons suffice to justify A without invoking voter-turnout patterns.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
(a) wrongly treats electoral participation as the direct policy cause; (c) mislabels R as false; (d) contradicts A’s truth; “None” is unnecessary.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing political economy influences with official policy objectives; assuming correlation equals causation.

Final Answer:
Both A and R are true, but R is not the correct explanation of A.