Statement: The Government has instructed all private schools in the city to maintain the current fee levels for at least two more years. Assumptions: I. Private schools may not follow the instruction because they are not dependent on Government funds. II. Parents of students in private schools may still be eager to pay higher fees. Which of the above assumptions is implicit in the statement?

Introduction / Context:
Fee-freeze directives signal a policy objective to contain costs for families. To determine assumptions, we look for beliefs the Government must hold for issuing such an instruction to make sense—not speculative beliefs about noncompliance or parental willingness to pay more.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Action: The Government instructs private schools to maintain current fees for two years.
• Assumption I: Private schools may flout the instruction due to financial independence.
• Assumption II: Parents may be eager to pay higher fees anyway.

Concept / Approach:
Issuing an instruction requires authority and intent to regulate, not a belief about certain noncompliance (I) or parental enthusiasm for higher fees (II). The policy can aim at affordability regardless of parent willingness; and compliance mechanisms may exist regardless of schools’ funding sources.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

Common Pitfalls:
Equating motivations (protecting parents) with an assumption that parents want higher fees. Also, assuming Government must believe noncompliance to regulate; rather, it regulates to set norms.

Final Answer:
Neither Assumption I nor II is implicit.