Question 1

Who was the first Chairperson of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) in India?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The National Green Tribunal, or NGT, is a specialised judicial body in India that deals with environmental disputes and issues related to environmental protection. Knowing who served as its first Chairperson helps you connect institutional history with environmental law. This question tests awareness of the founding leadership of the NGT and distinguishes Lokeshwar Singh Panta from other prominent legal figures. Given Data / Assumptions: The institution mentioned is the National Green Tribunal (NGT). The question asks for the first Chairperson of the NGT. The options list different legal personalities. We assume familiarity with the NGT as a key environmental adjudicatory body in India. Concept / Approach: The NGT was established to provide speedy and specialised decisions on environmental matters. Its first Chairperson was Justice Lokeshwar Singh Panta, a former judge of the Supreme Court of India. Other names listed in the options are respected figures, but they did not serve as the first Chairperson of the NGT. Identifying the first head is often a standard exam question in the area of environment and polity. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that the NGT is a relatively new body created to deal with environmental disputes in a focused and efficient way. Step 2: Remember that Justice Lokeshwar Singh Panta was appointed as the first Chairperson when the tribunal became functional. Step 3: Examine the options and identify Lokeshwar Singh Panta among them. Step 4: Recognise that other names such as Jagdish Singh Khehar are associated with different judicial roles but not with being the first Chairperson of the NGT. Step 5: Therefore, select Lokeshwar Singh Panta as the correct answer. Verification / Alternative check: One way to verify is to connect the creation of the NGT with the need for specialised environmental adjudication and to remember that a retired Supreme Court judge is usually appointed as Chairperson. Study materials and standard question banks often mention Justice Lokeshwar Singh Panta as the first head of the NGT, which confirms the answer. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Jagdish Singh Khehar served as Chief Justice of India but was not the first Chairperson of the NGT. Dinesh Saxena is not known as the founding Chairperson of the NGT in standard references. Jasmine Sharma is also not recorded as the first Chairperson of the NGT. Common Pitfalls: Students may confuse the NGT Chairperson with other environmental or judicial positions, especially when many names sound similar. Another pitfall is to mix up the sequence of appointments and remember someone who was Chairperson later as the first appointee. A simple way to avoid errors is to make a short list of firsts in environment related institutions, such as first NGT Chairperson, first environment minister, and first major environmental act, and revise them regularly. Final Answer: The first Chairperson of the National Green Tribunal was Lokeshwar Singh Panta.

Question 2

India signed a Memorandum of Understanding to strengthen cooperation in the field of tourism with which of the following countries?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: India often signs Memoranda of Understanding, or MoUs, with other countries to promote cooperation in sectors like tourism, health, culture, and trade. This question refers to an MoU aimed at strengthening cooperation in the field of tourism. It checks whether you know that, in this context, India signed such an MoU with Uzbekistan, one of the Central Asian republics with which India is deepening ties. Given Data / Assumptions: The subject is an MoU signed by India on tourism cooperation. The options are four Central Asian countries: Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Kyrgyzstan. We assume some awareness of current affairs and India's outreach to Central Asia. The task is to identify the correct partner country from the options. Concept / Approach: Tourism MoUs aim to promote mutual visits, easier travel, joint marketing, and cultural exchanges. Uzbekistan is known for historic Silk Road cities such as Samarkand and Bukhara, which have strong tourism potential. India and Uzbekistan have signed several agreements, including one to strengthen cooperation in tourism. To answer correctly, it is necessary to recall this specific pairing rather than simply guessing a Central Asian state. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recognise that all four options are Central Asian countries with which India has diplomatic relations. Step 2: Recall that news reports about tourism cooperation highlighted an MoU between India and Uzbekistan. Step 3: Confirm mentally that other recent MoUs with Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Kyrgyzstan often related to areas like energy, defence, or science but that the tourism MoU in the question refers to Uzbekistan. Step 4: Therefore, select Uzbekistan as the correct option. Verification / Alternative check: You can verify by remembering that India and Uzbekistan have also discussed promoting Buddhist tourism and connecting historical sites important to Indian visitors. For many competitive exams, standard current affairs material lists this specific MoU as India Uzbekistan in the tourism sector. Cross checking with such notes confirms that Uzbekistan is the correct answer among the four Central Asian choices. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Tajikistan has cooperation with India in areas like security and defence but is not the country named in this specific tourism MoU question. Turkmenistan is known for energy cooperation, especially gas pipelines, but it is not the correct answer here. Kyrgyzstan also has links with India in education and defence but does not match the tourism MoU mentioned in the question. Common Pitfalls: Because all the options are geographically close and sometimes appear together in current affairs questions, students may simply guess. A better strategy is to create short notes that pair each country with a distinctive recent agreement or summit. For example, linking Uzbekistan with tourism cooperation helps you recall the correct answer quickly during an exam without confusing it with nearby countries. Final Answer: India signed the tourism cooperation MoU with Uzbekistan.

Question 3

Under the Constitution of India, for what formal term of office is a State Governor appointed, subject to holding office at the pleasure of the President?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The Governor is the constitutional head of a State in India, just as the President is the head of the Union. Although a Governor holds office at the pleasure of the President, the Constitution also provides a formal term of office. This question tests whether you know that the term is five years, which is a common exam point in Indian polity. Given Data / Assumptions: The office discussed is that of a State Governor in India. The question asks for the formal term of office mentioned in the Constitution. The options list four possible term lengths: three, four, five, and six years. We assume knowledge that actual tenure can end earlier because the Governor holds office at the pleasure of the President. Concept / Approach: Article 156 of the Constitution of India states that the Governor shall hold office during the pleasure of the President, but also that the Governor shall hold office for a term of five years from the date on which he or she enters office. This means the normal term is five years, although the President can remove or transfer the Governor earlier. Therefore, the correct answer is the option that states a five year term. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall the exact wording of Article 156, which mentions a term of five years for a Governor. Step 2: Recognise that the phrase pleasure of the President does not remove the five year term; it simply means the term can be cut short. Step 3: Examine the options and identify five years as option B. Step 4: Check that no other option matches the constitutional term. Step 5: Therefore, select five years as the correct answer. Verification / Alternative check: To verify, remember that both the President of India and State Governors have a five year term, although they may serve longer if successors have not taken office or may leave earlier. Many standard polity textbooks highlight this parallel. Revising such tables where offices and their terms are grouped together is a useful way to confirm the five year term for Governors. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Four years is not prescribed by the Constitution for Governors; it is associated with some other offices in different systems but not here. Six years is often associated with Rajya Sabha membership or certain constitutional posts, not the office of Governor. Three years is not a standard constitutional term for major offices in India and does not appear in Article 156. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes confuse the term of a Governor with the term of a Rajya Sabha member or the term of a President. Because many numbers appear in polity, mixing them is easy. A simple memory aid is to note that the President and Governors both have five year terms, Lok Sabha has a normal five year term, and Rajya Sabha members have a six year term with one third members retiring every two years. Final Answer: A State Governor is formally appointed for a five year term, subject to holding office at the pleasure of the President.

Question 4

Which Chief Minister of Telangana received the Global Agricultural Leadership Award in 2017 for initiatives in agriculture and rural development?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Agricultural leadership awards recognise political leaders who have taken significant steps to improve farming, irrigation, and rural livelihoods. In 2017, the Global Agricultural Leadership Award was conferred on the Chief Minister of Telangana for major agricultural initiatives. This question checks whether you can correctly identify K. Chandra Shekhar Rao, commonly known as KCR, as the awardee, and distinguish him from other leaders listed in the options. Given Data / Assumptions: The award mentioned is the Global Agricultural Leadership Award 2017. The political position is Chief Minister of Telangana. The options list several leaders from different states, including Telangana and neighbouring regions. We assume familiarity with the names of key regional leaders in southern India. Concept / Approach: Telangana was formed as a separate state in 2014, with K. Chandra Shekhar Rao as its first Chief Minister. His government launched schemes for irrigation, crop support, and farmer welfare. For these initiatives, he was honoured with the Global Agricultural Leadership Award. Other names in the options, such as Siddaramaiah or N. Chandrababu Naidu, are associated with Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh and did not receive this specific award as Chief Ministers of Telangana. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the state in question: Telangana. Step 2: Recall that the first and prominent Chief Minister of Telangana after its formation was K. Chandra Shekhar Rao. Step 3: Connect the award year 2017 with news reports mentioning agricultural reforms and an award given to the Telangana Chief Minister. Step 4: Examine the options and note that Siddaramaiah has been associated with Karnataka, while N. Chandrababu Naidu has been associated with Andhra Pradesh. Step 5: Recognise that K. T. Rama Rao is a senior leader and minister in Telangana but not the Chief Minister in 2017. Step 6: Therefore, the correct answer is K. Chandra Shekhar Rao. Verification / Alternative check: You can verify by pairing each leader with a state and major office. K. Chandra Shekhar Rao is strongly tied to the Telangana statehood movement and its chief ministership. His government's large irrigation and farmer support projects are often highlighted in articles about agricultural policy. Such associations confirm that he is the correct choice for this award related question. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Siddaramaiah was the Chief Minister of Karnataka, not Telangana, and is not linked to this particular Global Agricultural Leadership Award for Telangana. K. T. Rama Rao is an important minister in Telangana but not the Chief Minister who received this award. N. Chandrababu Naidu was Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh and is associated with that state, not with this specific Telangana award in 2017. Common Pitfalls: A frequent pitfall is mixing up southern regional leaders and states, especially Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, due to their shared history. Another mistake is confusing K. T. Rama Rao with K. Chandra Shekhar Rao because of similar initials and family ties. To avoid confusion, always link each leader to a specific state and landmark event in your revision notes. Final Answer: The Chief Minister of Telangana who received the Global Agricultural Leadership Award in 2017 was K. Chandra Shekhar Rao.

Question 5

Who was sworn in as the Chief Minister of Manipur in 2017 after the state assembly elections?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Manipur, a state in north eastern India, saw a significant political change after the 2017 assembly elections. A new Chief Minister was sworn in, marking a shift in party rule in the state. This question tests whether you can correctly recall that N. Biren Singh became the Chief Minister of Manipur in 2017, and not confuse him with leaders from earlier periods. Given Data / Assumptions: The state is Manipur. The year is 2017, following the state assembly elections. The options list names of political leaders associated with Manipur politics. We assume awareness of recent political changes in north eastern states. Concept / Approach: After the 2017 assembly elections in Manipur, N. Biren Singh was sworn in as Chief Minister. He became the first Chief Minister from the Bharatiya Janata Party in the state. Other names listed, such as M. Koireng Singh or M. Alimuddin Singh, are associated with earlier political eras. Recognising the timeline and party context helps identify the correct answer. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Focus on the year 2017 and the state of Manipur. Step 2: Recall that in this period, N. Biren Singh emerged as the Chief Minister after coalition arrangements. Step 3: Examine the options and identify N. Biren Singh by name. Step 4: Recognise that other leaders mentioned served as Chief Ministers at different times or held different roles. Step 5: Therefore, the correct answer is N. Biren Singh. Verification / Alternative check: A quick cross check is to associate N. Biren Singh with news about a new government in Manipur supported by a national party. Later policy stories and news about development and law and order in Manipur often mention N. Biren Singh as Chief Minister. This continuity from 2017 onwards confirms that he is the leader referred to in the question. Why Other Options Are Wrong: M. Koireng Singh was an earlier Chief Minister of Manipur in the twentieth century and is not linked to the 2017 change. Longjam Thambou is not the leader who assumed office as Chief Minister in 2017. M. Alimuddin Singh is associated with past political phases and not with the 2017 formation of government. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes mix up older and newer Chief Ministers, especially when multiple names end with Singh. A good strategy is to organise your polity notes by state and decade, listing major political shifts and Chief Ministers. For Manipur, mark 2017 as the year when N. Biren Singh became Chief Minister so that you can recall it quickly in examinations. Final Answer: In 2017, N. Biren Singh was sworn in as the Chief Minister of Manipur.

Question 6

As of August 2018, which portfolio was held by Union Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad in the Government of India?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Union ministers in India often handle important portfolios that influence law, technology, education, or economic sectors. Ravi Shankar Prasad has served in several key roles. Around August 2018, he was known for holding portfolios connected to law and information technology or communications. This question checks whether you can correctly associate him with the law and telecommunications area at that time rather than mistakenly linking him with unrelated ministries. Given Data / Assumptions: The timeframe is August 2018. The person is Union Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad. The options list ministries such as Human Resource Development, Petroleum, Law and Telecommunications, and Coal. We assume familiarity with major ministerial allocations during that period. Concept / Approach: Ravi Shankar Prasad has been associated with legal and technology related portfolios, including Law and Justice, and Electronics and Information Technology or Communications. The option that combines law and telecommunications best represents his responsibilities during this period. The other ministries listed are handled by different ministers and sectors, not primarily linked to his public profile in 2018. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that Ravi Shankar Prasad is a senior leader who has served as Minister for Law and Justice and for information technology or communications. Step 2: Examine option C, which states Law and Telecommunications, capturing his combined legal and technology role. Step 3: Recognise that Human Resource Development, Petroleum, and Coal have been handled by other ministers in recent years. Step 4: Given the time frame and his known portfolios, Law and Telecommunications is the best match. Step 5: Therefore, the correct answer is Law and Telecommunications. Verification / Alternative check: To verify, think of major policy announcements around that time, such as digital initiatives, telecom regulation, and legal reforms. Media coverage frequently mentioned Ravi Shankar Prasad as the face of legal and digital governance issues, not as a minister of petroleum or coal. This consistent association with law and technology confirms the answer. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Human Resource Development is usually linked with education and has been managed by different ministers. Petroleum is part of the energy sector and is not the prominent portfolio connected to Ravi Shankar Prasad during the given period. Coal is an energy and resource portfolio, and again is not his known assignment at that time. Common Pitfalls: A common mistake is to rely only on very recent cabinet changes and forget what portfolios particular ministers held in earlier years. Another pitfall is confusing ministers who handle infrastructure or energy with those focused on law and technology. To avoid this, maintain updated notes that link each prominent minister with one or two key portfolios and update them as changes occur. Final Answer: As of August 2018, Ravi Shankar Prasad held the portfolio related to Law and Telecommunications in the Union Government.

Question 7

In which year was the Environment Protection Act enacted by the Parliament of India to provide a comprehensive framework for environmental protection?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The Environment Protection Act is one of the most important environmental laws in India. It provides a general framework for the protection and improvement of the environment and empowers the central government to take measures for pollution control. Knowing the year in which this Act was passed is a common requirement in competitive exams related to environment, general awareness, and Indian polity. Given Data / Assumptions: The Act in question is the Environment Protection Act of India. The question asks for the year in which it was enacted. The options are 1997, 1986, 2004, and 2012. We assume familiarity with major environmental milestones in India. Concept / Approach: The Environment Protection Act was enacted in 1986, soon after the Bhopal gas tragedy of 1984, which highlighted serious gaps in industrial and environmental regulation. This Act gave broad powers to the central government to set standards, regulate emissions, and protect sensitive regions. The other years in the options correspond to other events and laws but not to this specific Act. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that the Bhopal gas tragedy occurred in 1984 and created an urgent need for stronger environmental laws. Step 2: Remember that the Environment Protection Act was passed in 1986 as a response to these concerns. Step 3: Examine the options. Among them, 1986 is the only year that matches this historical timeline. Step 4: Recognise that 1997, 2004, and 2012 are associated with other environmental policies and agreements but not with the enactment of this Act. Step 5: Therefore, select 1986 as the correct answer. Verification / Alternative check: A simple verification trick is to pair 1984 with 1986: major industrial disaster in 1984, followed by comprehensive environmental legislation in 1986. Many textbooks explicitly mention this connection. You can also recall that earlier environment related laws, such as the Water Act and Air Act, came in the 1970s and early 1980s, but the general Environment Protection Act is specifically dated 1986. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 1997 is too late for the original Environment Protection Act and may relate to later protocols or environmental decisions, not to this statute. 2004 and 2012 are far beyond the mid 1980s and correspond to other policy developments, not to the enactment of this foundational Act. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes confuse the year of the Environment Protection Act with years of other environmental conferences, such as the Rio Earth Summit or later climate agreements. To avoid this, create a short chronological list of major Indian environment laws: for example, Wildlife Protection Act 1972, Water Act 1974, Air Act 1981, and Environment Protection Act 1986. This sequence helps fix the dates clearly in memory. Final Answer: The Environment Protection Act was enacted in 1986.

Question 8

According to the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Act 2008, the Supreme Court of India consists of a Chief Justice of India and not more than how many other judges?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The strength of the Supreme Court of India, meaning how many judges it can have, is fixed by law. Over time, Parliament has amended this number to handle increasing case loads. The Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Act 2008 increased the number of judges. This question checks whether you know that, under that Amendment, the Supreme Court consists of the Chief Justice of India and not more than thirty other judges. Given Data / Assumptions: The law mentioned is the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Act 2008. The question asks how many other judges, in addition to the Chief Justice of India, can be appointed. The options offered are 40, 10, 20, and 30. We assume awareness that the total sanctioned strength at that time became thirty one judges including the Chief Justice. Concept / Approach: Before the 2008 Amendment, the Supreme Court had a smaller sanctioned strength. The 2008 law raised the number of judges to thirty inclusive of the Chief Justice or, in the later formulation, to the Chief Justice plus thirty other judges, giving a total of thirty one. Therefore, the number of other judges, apart from the Chief Justice, is thirty. The other options are either too low or too high compared to the statutory figure. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that the Amendment Act of 2008 increased the number of judges of the Supreme Court. Step 2: Remember the standard expression used: a Chief Justice of India and not more than thirty other judges. Step 3: Examine the options and locate the number thirty, which matches this formulation. Step 4: Recognise that ten or twenty are too small to match the known total strength. Step 5: Recognise that forty is larger than the number fixed by that Amendment. Step 6: Therefore, the correct answer is thirty. Verification / Alternative check: A quick way to verify is to remember that many sources refer to the Supreme Court as having a sanctioned strength of thirty one judges after the Amendment. If one of them is the Chief Justice, the remaining must be thirty other judges. Subtracting one from the total gives you the required figure of thirty, which matches option D. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Ten would give a total of only eleven judges, which is far below the actual sanctioned strength after the 2008 Amendment. Twenty would give a total of twenty one judges, again lower than the known strength. Forty would imply a much larger bench than that authorised by this particular Amendment Act. Common Pitfalls: A common mistake is to mix up the total number of judges with the number of other judges besides the Chief Justice. Another pitfall is to remember older numbers that applied before amendments. To avoid confusion, keep updated notes on the current sanctioned strength and clearly distinguish between the total number and the number of other judges besides the Chief Justice. Final Answer: Under the 2008 Amendment, the Supreme Court consists of the Chief Justice of India and not more than thirty other judges.

Question 9

Choose the most appropriate answer: which institution is the official think tank of the Government of India that replaced the Planning Commission on 1 January 2015?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The question checks awareness of contemporary institutional changes in Indian economic governance. Until 2014, the Planning Commission framed five year plans and played a central role in resource allocation. From 1 January 2015, the Government of India formally replaced it with a new body that serves as a policy think tank and advisory institution rather than a centralised planning authority. Knowing this change is important for general studies and current affairs based examinations. Given Data / Assumptions: The Planning Commission has been abolished. A new institution started functioning from 1 January 2015. This new body is described as the think tank of the Government of India. Four possible names using the acronym NITI are given in the options. Concept / Approach: The official replacement for the Planning Commission is the National Institution for Transforming India Aayog, popularly known as NITI Aayog. It provides directional and policy inputs to the Union and State Governments, focusing on cooperative federalism, long term strategies and evidence based policy making. The correct option must match the official name used in government notifications, budgets and policy documents, not a made up phrase that only resembles this name. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that the Planning Commission was replaced from 1 January 2015. Step 2: Remember that the new body is called the National Institution for Transforming India Aayog. Step 3: Observe that this full name is commonly shortened to NITI Aayog in all official and media references. Step 4: Compare each option and select the one that exactly matches this short official name. Step 5: Conclude that NITI Aayog is the correct answer and the other NITI names are distractors only. Verification / Alternative check: A simple way to verify is to recall that NITI expands to National Institution for Transforming India. None of the distractor options has any basis in government usage, while the term NITI Aayog appears frequently in Union Budget speeches, NITI discussion papers and official websites. Coaching material and standard polity books also clearly state that NITI Aayog replaced the Planning Commission from 2015, confirming this choice. Why Other Options Are Wrong: NITI Dharma has no existence as an institution of the Union Government and is created only as a confusing phrase. NITI Vakya is also a made up name that may sound Sanskrit but is not used officially. NITI Vajpayee appears to link the acronym to the name of a former Prime Minister but there is no such body. None of these three options is mentioned in any constitutional or statutory context. Common Pitfalls: A common mistake is to overthink the meaning of the acronym and choose an option that appears morally or culturally appealing, instead of recalling the official name. Another error is to confuse NITI Aayog with older bodies like the National Development Council or the Planning Commission itself. Students should also avoid spelling based errors where they misread Aayog as Ayog or some other form, even though that would still refer to the same institution in English usage. Final Answer: The think tank that replaced the Planning Commission on 1 January 2015 is NITI Aayog, which stands for the National Institution for Transforming India Aayog.

Question 10

In the context of the Constitution of India, the Attorney General of India is officially designated as the ______ of the Government of India.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests knowledge of important constitutional offices and their roles. The Attorney General of India is created under Article 76 of the Constitution and provides legal advice to the Union Government. Understanding the status and functions of this office helps aspirants differentiate between various advisory and audit institutions in Indian polity and avoid confusion with bodies like the Comptroller and Auditor General or the Election Commission. Given Data / Assumptions: The post is known as the Attorney General of India. The office relates to the Government of India at the Union level. The blank describes the official capacity in which this officer serves. Options mention law, accounts, elections and audit. Concept / Approach: Article 76 clearly states that the Attorney General gives advice to the Government of India upon such legal matters as may be referred and performs other legal duties assigned. This shows that it is a legal advisory post and not an accounting, electoral or audit post. The phrase used widely in books and documents is that the Attorney General is the chief law officer of the Government of India. Any other description would be incorrect in constitutional terms. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the domain of work for the Attorney General, which is law and legal advice. Step 2: Recall that this office appears in Part V of the Constitution dealing with the Union executive and not with audits or elections. Step 3: Compare each option with this role. Only one option uses the phrase law officer. Step 4: Reject options that talk about accounts, elections or audit because those are handled by other bodies. Step 5: Select Chief Law Officer as the correct description. Verification / Alternative check: Standard polity textbooks on the Constitution consistently describe the Attorney General as the highest law officer of the country who can appear in any court on behalf of the Union Government. Official websites of the Ministry of Law and Justice also refer to this office as the top legal advisor. None of the other phrases like chief account officer or chief election officer appears in constitutional discussions about the Attorney General, which confirms the chosen answer. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Chief Account Officer would relate to financial bookkeeping and accounting functions which are handled through the Ministry of Finance and other officials, not through the Attorney General. Chief Election Officer would suggest a role inside the Election Commission, which is an independent constitutional body separate from the executive. Chief Audit Officer would point toward the Comptroller and Auditor General of India who audits government accounts. These descriptions do not match the legal advisory nature of the Attorney General role. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes confuse the Attorney General with the Comptroller and Auditor General because both posts appear at the Union level and both have the word general. Another mistake is to assume that the Attorney General conducts elections because law and elections are both public matters. To avoid these errors, aspirants should link each office with its core function, such as legal advice, audit of accounts or conduct of elections, rather than focusing only on titles. Final Answer: The Attorney General of India is officially described as the Chief Law Officer of the Government of India.

Question 11

Under the Constitution of India, in which manner can the President assign any of the executive functions of the Union Government to a State Government?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question examines knowledge of Centre State relations and the distribution of executive powers under the Constitution of India. Article 258 provides a mechanism by which the President can entrust Union functions to State authorities. Understanding the exact requirement of consent in this provision is important for analysing how Indian federalism works in practice and how cooperation between the Union and the States is achieved. Given Data / Assumptions: The subject is assignment of Union executive functions to a State Government. The authority who can make such assignment is the President of India. The question asks about the manner or condition under which this assignment can be done. Options mention discretion and different forms of consultation. Concept / Approach: Article 258 states that the President may, with the consent of the Government of a State, entrust to that Government or its officers functions in relation to any matter to which the executive power of the Union extends. This shows two key ideas. First, the initiative comes from the Union through the President. Second, this cannot be imposed unilaterally and needs the agreement of the State executive, that is the Council of Ministers of that State through its Government. Therefore, the correct option must reflect consultation or consent of the State Government, not the Governor or judiciary and not unilateral discretion. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that Article 258 governs entrustment of Union functions to States. Step 2: Remember the phrase with the consent of the Government of the State, which appears in this Article. Step 3: Match this phrase with the options given, focusing on Government of the State rather than Governor. Step 4: Reject any option suggesting unfettered presidential discretion because the Constitution requires consent. Step 5: Select the option that states in consultation with the Government of the State as the closest expression of this requirement. Verification / Alternative check: A quick way to verify is to connect the word Government with the elected executive of the State, meaning the Council of Ministers headed by the Chief Minister. The Governor is a separate constitutional authority who acts on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers in most cases. Since Article 258 emphasises consent of the State Government, involvement of the judiciary or independent presidential discretion does not fit the constitutional design of cooperative federalism. Reading a standard commentary on Indian polity will confirm this interpretation. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Acting in consultation with the Chief Justice of India relates to judicial appointments and some special references to the Supreme Court, not to executive entrustment of functions. Consultation with the State Governor alone is misleading because the Governor usually acts on the advice of the Council of Ministers, and the Article speaks of the Government of the State. Acting purely in presidential discretion would undermine State autonomy and contradict the requirement of consent. Therefore, these options do not reflect the constitutional text correctly. Common Pitfalls: Candidates sometimes think that the President can act alone in matters related to Union powers and therefore choose the discretion option. Others confuse the Governor with the Government of the State and forget that the real executive power is exercised by the Council of Ministers. To avoid such mistakes, it is important to carefully read the exact wording of constitutional provisions and differentiate between formal heads and real executives at both Union and State levels. Final Answer: The President can assign Union executive functions to a State Government only in consultation with the Government of the State, that is, with its consent under Article 258.

Question 12

In the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976, which single word was specifically added to the Preamble of the Constitution of India?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question focuses on the evolution of the Preamble to the Constitution of India. The 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976 brought major changes to several parts of the Constitution, including the Preamble. For examination purposes, it is important to know exactly which words were added by this amendment, because many questions ask about the original and amended forms of the Preamble and how these reflect the ideology of the Indian state. Given Data / Assumptions: The reference is to the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976. The amendment changed the wording of the Preamble. Four possible words are given as options. Only one of these is marked as the correct answer in this specific single choice format. Concept / Approach: Originally, the Preamble described India as a sovereign democratic republic. The 42nd Amendment inserted the words socialist and secular between sovereign and democratic and added the word integrity after unity, so that the phrase unity of the nation became unity and integrity of the nation. Many practice questions ask which new word was added and sometimes focus on only one of the two ideological terms. In this particular question format, standard key based material identifies secular as the correct answer option when only a single word is to be chosen from the given set. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall the main changes to the Preamble by the 42nd Amendment, namely the addition of socialist, secular and integrity. Step 2: Note that democratic and equality were already present in the original Preamble adopted in 1950. Step 3: Compare the four options with the list of words definitely added in 1976. Step 4: Identify secular as one of the ideological words newly inserted by the amendment. Step 5: Choose secular as the most appropriate answer in line with standard single correct question keys. Verification / Alternative check: Reading the original Preamble and the amended Preamble side by side makes the change very clear. The phrase sovereign democratic republic becomes sovereign socialist secular democratic republic after the 42nd Amendment. This confirms that secular is indeed a word inserted by this amendment. Equality, on the other hand, forms part of the justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity aims that were already present. Democratic was also part of the original description. Therefore, secular is the valid choice among the options provided. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Democratic was already included in the original Preamble and therefore cannot be said to have been added by the 42nd Amendment. Equality also appears as part of the original goals of the Constitution and is not a new term. Socialist was also added by the same amendment, but in this particular question the official key picks secular as the single answer, so socialist does not match the expected response even though it is also a word added in 1976. Only one option is accepted as correct in this format and here that option is secular. Common Pitfalls: A common confusion is between secular and socialist because both of them were inserted at the same time. Students who try to memorise only one of these may pick the wrong one when the options are mixed. Others mistakenly believe that equality was added later because they do not recall the exact original text. To avoid such errors, aspirants should read the full Preamble in both its original and amended forms and remember that socialist, secular and integrity were the three additional words brought in by the 42nd Amendment. Final Answer: The word specifically picked in this single answer format is Secular, which was among the new words inserted into the Preamble by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976.

Question 13

The Union Ministry of Human Resource Development released the All India Survey on Higher Education (AISHE) Report 2016 to 2017. According to this report, which Indian state topped the country in terms of Gross Enrolment Ratio in higher education?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question checks knowledge of recent data related to higher education in India. The All India Survey on Higher Education, often abbreviated as AISHE, is an annual exercise that compiles statistics on enrolment, institutions and teachers. Gross Enrolment Ratio in higher education is a key indicator used to measure how many young people in the relevant age group actually enter higher education. Being aware of which state leads on this indicator is important for exams that combine static polity with dynamic educational statistics. Given Data / Assumptions: The report in question is AISHE for the year 2016 to 2017. The indicator being asked about is Gross Enrolment Ratio in higher education. The options are four large Indian states, not union territories. Only one of these is known to consistently record the highest GER in this period. Concept / Approach: Gross Enrolment Ratio in higher education is calculated as the total enrolment in higher education, regardless of age, expressed as a percentage of the population in the 18 to 23 years age group. States with better access, more colleges and stronger demand for higher studies tend to perform better. Over several years of AISHE data, Tamil Nadu has frequently featured at the top or near the top in GER among the larger states. Therefore, when a question ties GER leadership to AISHE 2016 to 2017, Tamil Nadu is the state to be selected. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall what AISHE stands for and that it measures many parameters of higher education. Step 2: Focus on the parameter mentioned in the question, namely Gross Enrolment Ratio in higher education. Step 3: Think of which Indian state is widely known for having a very high GER around 2016 to 2017. Step 4: Compare this memory with the four given options Kerala, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu. Step 5: Identify Tamil Nadu as the state that topped GER in this period and mark it as the correct answer. Verification / Alternative check: One alternative check is to recall common education related facts used repeatedly in competitive exam material. Many coaching notes and government releases highlight that Tamil Nadu has a very high proportion of youth in higher education compared to the national average. In contrast, Rajasthan and Maharashtra have lower GERs, and while Kerala performs well on literacy and school education indicators, its higher education GER does not surpass that of Tamil Nadu in AISHE 2016 to 2017. This comparative understanding confirms Tamil Nadu as the correct choice. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Kerala is known for high literacy and strong school education outcomes, but its higher education GER was not at the very top of the AISHE 2016 to 2017 rankings among large states. Maharashtra has a large number of institutions and students but, due to its huge population, its GER is closer to the national average rather than the highest. Rajasthan has historically lagged in higher education access compared to the best performing southern states. Therefore, none of these three states matches the specific leadership position indicated in the question. Common Pitfalls: A frequent mistake is to assume that the state with the highest literacy must also have the highest GER in higher education and therefore to choose Kerala automatically. Another pitfall is guessing based on size or economic strength, which may lead to picking Maharashtra. Candidates sometimes also confuse different years of AISHE data. To avoid errors, aspirants should periodically revise key figures for one or two important survey years and associate Tamil Nadu with the highest GER in higher education for this particular period. Final Answer: According to AISHE 2016 to 2017, the state that topped in Gross Enrolment Ratio in higher education is Tamil Nadu.

Question 14

In relation to banking reforms in India, who heads the cabinet level committee of the Union Government that examines and approves proposals for the merger of public sector banks?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question relates to the structure of decision making on public sector bank consolidation in India. In order to handle proposals for merger and amalgamation of public sector banks, the Union Government set up a cabinet level committee, often referred to as an alternative mechanism. Knowing who heads this committee helps candidates connect banking reforms with political leadership and cabinet responsibility at that time. Given Data / Assumptions: The context is the merger of public sector banks in India. The body mentioned is a cabinet level committee formed by the Union Government. The question asks specifically about the head of this committee. Options include the Prime Minister, the then Finance Minister, the Home Minister and the central bank Governor. Concept / Approach: The government created a ministerial panel to consider proposals for consolidation among public sector banks. This panel was chaired by the Union Finance Minister, who at that relevant time was Arun Jaitley. As Finance Minister, he was naturally positioned to lead decisions on bank recapitalisation and merger proposals. The Reserve Bank Governor does not head cabinet committees. The Prime Minister chairs many key groups but this specific mechanism was entrusted to the Finance Minister. Therefore, Arun Jaitley is the correct answer. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Identify the time period as the phase when the Union Government actively pursued consolidation of public sector banks. Step 2: Recall that an alternative mechanism at cabinet level was formed to examine merger proposals. Step 3: Remember that the Finance Minister is usually central to policy decisions on banks and financial sector reforms. Step 4: Among the options, note that Arun Jaitley was the Union Finance Minister during this period. Step 5: Select Arun Jaitley as the head of the committee for public sector bank mergers. Verification / Alternative check: Press releases and media reports of that time clearly stated that the committee to oversee merger proposals of public sector banks would be chaired by the Finance Minister. Since Arun Jaitley was holding this portfolio, his name appears as the head in those reports. The Prime Minister continues to oversee broad economic policy through the cabinet but this specific mechanism was delegated to the Finance Minister, which confirms that Arun Jaitley is the appropriate choice among the given options. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Narendra Modi, as the Prime Minister, leads the Union Council of Ministers but does not head every specialised cabinet level committee. Rajnath Singh was associated with portfolios such as Home Affairs and later Defence, not finance sector consolidation. Urjit Patel served as Governor of the Reserve Bank of India, a statutory post that is not part of the cabinet and therefore would not lead a cabinet committee. These roles do not align with the specific responsibility of chairing the ministerial panel on bank mergers. Common Pitfalls: A typical error is to assume that the Prime Minister automatically heads all important committees, which is not accurate because cabinet work is often delegated to specialised groups. Another mistake is to confuse the role of the central bank Governor with that of elected ministers, and assume that the Reserve Bank would lead merger decisions directly. Aspirants should remember that while regulatory input is crucial, formal decisions on restructuring public sector banks are made through political executive channels led by the Finance Minister. Final Answer: The cabinet level committee that examined merger proposals of public sector banks was headed by Arun Jaitley, the then Union Finance Minister of India.

Question 15

Under the Kisan Vikas Patra small savings scheme in India, which of the following denominations is not available for the purchase of certificates?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question belongs to the area of Indian economy and small savings schemes. Kisan Vikas Patra, often abbreviated as KVP, is a government backed savings instrument available through post offices and some banks. It offers fixed interest and doubles the invested amount in a specified period. For exam purposes, it is important to know the available denominations in which certificates can be purchased, because this has been a direct question in many competitive tests. Given Data / Assumptions: The instrument discussed is Kisan Vikas Patra. The focus is on the face value denominations of KVP certificates. Four numerical options are given rupee values of 1000, 5000, 10000 and 500000. Only one of these is not an authorised denomination in the notified list. Concept / Approach: The government notifies standard denominations for small savings certificates to make them accessible while keeping handling manageable. Typical KVP denominations include values such as 1000, 5000, 10000 and 50000 or in some periods 100000, but not extremely large figures in a single certificate. Therefore a value as high as 500000 rupees per certificate would not usually appear in the standard KVP list. By recalling the approximate upper bound of KVP certificate values, one can eliminate the unrealistic option. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that Kisan Vikas Patra is targeted at small and medium investors, mainly in rural and semi urban areas. Step 2: Remember that typical denominations are in the range of a few thousand to perhaps fifty thousand or slightly more. Step 3: Examine each option. Values of 1000, 5000 and 10000 clearly fall in the normal range of small savings certificates. Step 4: Notice that 500000 rupees per certificate is extremely high for a standard small savings denomination. Step 5: Conclude that 500000 is not an available denomination for Kisan Vikas Patra certificates. Verification / Alternative check: An alternative check is to think about practical investing behaviour. Investors who want to put in such a large amount can simply buy several certificates rather than one huge certificate, which preserves flexibility. Also, many preparation books list KVP denominations, often mentioning 1000, 5000, 10000 and 50000 as examples. These lists never include 500000 as a standard face value, confirming that this is the odd one out. Therefore the safest answer in an exam environment is the largest value among the four options. Why Other Options Are Wrong: The values 1000, 5000 and 10000 rupees are consistent with the small investor focus of Kisan Vikas Patra and similar government savings schemes. These amounts allow individuals with modest incomes to participate and build savings gradually. Since they match the pattern of officially notified denominations, these options cannot be considered incorrect in the context of this question, which asks about a denomination that is not available. Common Pitfalls: A common error is to assume that the smallest denomination must be incorrect because some schemes have minimum investment limits above 1000. Another mistake is to overthink and believe that the government might want very high value certificates for wealthy investors, leading candidates to avoid selecting the largest amount. In reality, small savings schemes are designed to encourage broad participation, so extreme denominations are unlikely. The safe strategy is to eliminate values that break the usual pattern seen in other certificate type schemes. Final Answer: The denomination that is not available for Kisan Vikas Patra certificates is 500000 rupees.

Question 16

Which of the following Acts was specifically enacted in India to facilitate banks in the recovery of bad loans and non performing assets?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests understanding of specialised financial sector legislation in India. In order to strengthen the ability of banks and financial institutions to recover bad loans, the government enacted a law that allows them to enforce security interests and manage non performing assets more effectively. Identifying this law is essential for candidates studying banking awareness, Indian economy and regulatory framework related to credit and recovery mechanisms. Given Data / Assumptions: The focus is on recovery of bad loans by banks. The question asks which Act was specially launched for this purpose. Options include the Reserve Bank of India Act, the Companies Act, the Income Tax Act and one long named Act related to securitisation and enforcement of security interest. Only one of these is directly aimed at facilitating recovery of stressed assets. Concept / Approach: The key law in this domain is the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, commonly known as the SARFAESI Act. It empowers banks and financial institutions to seize and sell secured assets of borrowers who default, without the need for lengthy court procedures, subject to safeguards. The other Acts listed in the options have broader domains, such as monetary authority, corporate regulation or taxation, and are not primarily designed for bad loan recovery. Therefore, the long name Act dealing with securitisation and enforcement of security interests is the correct choice. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Focus on the phrase specially launched to facilitate banks in recovery of bad loans. Step 2: Recall that SARFAESI Act was introduced to deal with non performing assets and to allow quicker enforcement of collateral. Step 3: Look through the options to find the one that clearly corresponds to the SARFAESI law. Step 4: Observe that the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act matches this description exactly. Step 5: Select this option and reject the more general Acts that do not directly address loan recovery mechanisms. Verification / Alternative check: Another way to verify is to recall abbreviations. Students often learn that SARFAESI stands for Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest and that it gives powers like taking possession of secured assets, taking over management and appointing managers. None of the other listed Acts carry such associations. The Reserve Bank of India Act focuses on creating and empowering the central bank. The Companies Act governs incorporation and regulation of companies. The Income Tax Act deals with direct tax collection. Only SARFAESI directly targets non performing asset recovery. Why Other Options Are Wrong: The Reserve Bank of India Act provides the legal basis for the central bank but does not by itself provide operational tools for banks to seize collateral from defaulting borrowers. The Companies Act lays down rules for corporate governance, share capital and winding up of companies, which is a different area. The Income Tax Act empowers authorities to collect taxes and deal with evasion, not to recover bank loans. These Acts may indirectly affect financial stability but they are not specific instruments for bad loan recovery. Common Pitfalls: Some candidates may pick the Reserve Bank of India Act simply because they associate any banking related question with the central bank. Others may be unsure due to the long and complex name of the SARFAESI law and avoid it, thinking it is a trap. To overcome this, aspirants should memorise a few key sectoral laws along with their short forms and main purposes, such as SARFAESI for loan recovery, RDB Act for debt recovery tribunals and Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code for comprehensive insolvency resolution. Final Answer: The Act specially enacted to help banks in recovering bad loans and non performing assets is the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, commonly called the SARFAESI Act.

Question 17

During Mahatma Gandhi stay in South Africa, which one of the following periodicals was published by him in order to spread awareness and support the Indian community there?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question belongs to modern Indian history and the life of Mahatma Gandhi. Before leading the freedom movement in India, Gandhi worked as a lawyer and community leader in South Africa. During that phase he experimented with satyagraha and used printed media to mobilise and educate the Indian diaspora. Knowing the names of publications associated with him in South Africa versus those associated with his later work in India is a frequently tested factual point. Given Data / Assumptions: The setting is Mahatma Gandhi time in South Africa, not in India. The question asks which periodical was published by him during that stay. Options include Young India, Nav Jivan, Indian Opinion and None of these. Only one of these was actually launched in South Africa. Concept / Approach: Gandhi started the newspaper Indian Opinion in South Africa in 1903 to highlight issues faced by the Indian community and to argue against racial discrimination. After returning to India, he later edited and published Young India and Navajivan as influential journals of public opinion. Therefore, the correct answer for his South African period is Indian Opinion. The other titles are connected with his Indian phase and must not be confused with the earlier publication started abroad. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Separate Gandhi life into the South African phase and the Indian phase. Step 2: Recall that in South Africa he started a newspaper aimed at representing the voice of Indians under discriminatory laws. Step 3: Remember the name of this paper as Indian Opinion. Step 4: Recognise that Young India and Nav Jivan are associated with his later Indian public work and campaigns. Step 5: Choose Indian Opinion as the correct option for the South African context. Verification / Alternative check: Standard history textbooks and biographies of Gandhi mention that he founded Indian Opinion in Durban to support satyagraha campaigns against unjust laws. They also separately describe Young India as a weekly journal he edited after moving to India, used to express views on national issues and non cooperation. Navajivan similarly appears in accounts of his Indian activities. Since the question clearly anchors the time period in South Africa, only Indian Opinion fits the description of a periodical started there. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Young India was a journal Gandhi edited in India to communicate with educated readers and activists during the national movement. Nav Jivan or Navajivan was another Indian publication started later, focusing on constructive programmes and moral issues. None of these were launched during his South African years. Choosing None of these would ignore the well documented existence of Indian Opinion, so that option is also incorrect. Common Pitfalls: A common mistake is to recognise Young India as a familiar Gandhian journal and select it without reading the phrase in South Africa carefully. Another error is to think that all three names refer to Indian phase publications only and therefore mistakenly opt for None of these. To avoid confusion, students should link Indian Opinion with South Africa and Young India plus Navajivan with the Indian freedom struggle period, forming a simple memory association based on geography and chronology. Final Answer: During his stay in South Africa, Mahatma Gandhi published the periodical Indian Opinion to support and organise the Indian community.

Question 18

In the Indian constitutional framework, which one of the following bodies is a constitutional body created directly by the Constitution of India?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question asks about the distinction between constitutional, statutory and extra constitutional bodies in India. Constitutional bodies are those that are directly mentioned and empowered by provisions of the Constitution itself. Statutory bodies are created by Acts of Parliament, while some others are created by executive resolutions. Examinations often test whether candidates can correctly classify key institutions into these categories. Given Data / Assumptions: Four institutions are listed as options. The task is to identify which one is a constitutional body. NITI Aayog, the National Human Rights Commission and the Central Vigilance Commission are included along with the Finance Commission. Only one of these has its existence mandated by a specific Article of the Constitution. Concept / Approach: Article 280 of the Constitution provides for a Finance Commission to be constituted by the President every five years or earlier as needed. This clearly makes the Finance Commission a constitutional body. In contrast, the Central Vigilance Commission was originally created by a resolution and later given statutory status through an Act. The National Human Rights Commission is also a statutory body, established under the Protection of Human Rights Act. NITI Aayog was formed by executive resolution to replace the Planning Commission and does not appear by name in the Constitution. Therefore, among the given options, the Finance Commission alone is constitutional. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall which bodies are explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, such as Finance Commission, Election Commission, Union Public Service Commission and others. Step 2: Look for these names among the options. Finance Commission appears and is known to be based on Article 280. Step 3: Recognise that National Human Rights Commission and Central Vigilance Commission are products of specific Acts and resolutions. Step 4: Note that NITI Aayog is a recent policy think tank not embedded in the constitutional text. Step 5: Select Finance Commission as the correct constitutional body. Verification / Alternative check: An alternative check is to consider how the chairperson of each body is appointed and whether the Constitution lays down that procedure. Article 280 clearly states that the President shall constitute a Finance Commission, giving this body a constitutional base. For NHRC and CVC, one must instead refer to Acts of Parliament that define their composition and powers. For NITI Aayog, the relevant documents are cabinet resolutions and government notifications. Since the question specifically asks for a constitutional body, only the Finance Commission matches this requirement fully. Why Other Options Are Wrong: The Central Vigilance Commission is a statutory body that advises on vigilance matters but was not created by any constitutional article. The National Human Rights Commission is similarly created under the Protection of Human Rights Act and is not part of the original Constitution text. NITI Aayog is an executive think tank formed to replace the Planning Commission and is neither statutory nor constitutional. These institutions are important but do not qualify as constitutional bodies in a strict legal sense. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes assume that newer and more discussed bodies like NITI Aayog or NHRC must be constitutional due to their prominence in news. Another common mistake is to think that any body with national in its name is constitutional. To avoid these errors, aspirants should memorise a short list of constitutional bodies and always check whether a specific Article number exists for that institution. This habit will help in quickly eliminating distractor options in examination settings. Final Answer: Among the given options, the only constitutional body is the Finance Commission of India, established under Article 280 of the Constitution.

Question 19

On 10 April 2017, the Lok Sabha passed the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Bill 2016. This Bill seeks to amend which existing Motor Vehicles Act in India?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question relates to transport law and recent legislative developments. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is the primary central law governing road transport, vehicle registration, licensing and traffic offences in India. Over time, the Union Government has tried to modernise this law through amendments. The Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Bill 2016 is one such major effort. Knowing which parent Act an amendment Bill seeks to modify is a common examination question type. Given Data / Assumptions: The Bill is named the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Bill, 2016. The Lok Sabha passed it on 10 April 2017. The question asks which Act it proposes to amend. Options list four different years for a Motor Vehicles Act. Concept / Approach: Amendment Bills usually keep the same subject title but add the word Amendment and specify the year of introduction. They modify an existing principal Act that continues to carry its original year. In the case of road transport, the foundational law has been the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. There is no central Motor Vehicles Act 1998, 2005 or 2010. Therefore, when asked which Act the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Bill 2016 seeks to change, the correct answer is the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall the main Motor Vehicles Act currently in force, which is from the year 1988. Step 2: Understand that the 2016 Bill is an amendment and not a brand new principal Act. Step 3: Compare the years in the options with the known year of the existing law. Step 4: Recognise that Acts labelled 1998, 2005 and 2010 do not match the title of the actual Motor Vehicles Act. Step 5: Select Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 as the Act that the amendment Bill seeks to modify. Verification / Alternative check: Information given in government releases and exam preparation books clearly states that the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Bill 2016 amends the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Provisions such as increased penalties, protection for good samaritans and regulations for aggregators are all described as changes to sections of the 1988 Act. Since no other year is associated with the main Motor Vehicles law, this confirmatory reading supports the selection of 1988 as the correct answer. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Motor Vehicles Act, 1998 is not the name of any principal central Act in this field and appears only as a distractor. Similarly, Motor Vehicles Act, 2005 and Motor Vehicles Act, 2010 have no statutory basis and are not recognised law titles. These years are included in options to mislead candidates who may not recall the exact year of the original Act. Because none of them corresponds to the principal statute on motor vehicles, they must be rejected. Common Pitfalls: One common error is to assume that a more recent year must be the correct one, leading candidates to select 2005 or 2010 due to recency bias. Another mistake is to confuse the year of the amendment Bill with the year of the original Act, thinking that 2016 implies a principal Act created at the same time. To avoid such pitfalls, aspirants should remember that the main Motor Vehicles law dates back to 1988 and that later Bills modify this base legislation rather than replace it entirely. Final Answer: The Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Bill 2016 seeks to amend the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

Question 20

As on 1 March 2018, who was serving as the Chief Minister of the Indian state of Punjab?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question tests factual knowledge of state level political leadership in India with a specific date reference. Chief Ministers change over time, so exams sometimes anchor the question to a particular date or year. Punjab saw a change in government after the 2017 Assembly elections, and the question asks about who held the Chief Minister office on 1 March 2018, which is within that term. Given Data / Assumptions: The state concerned is Punjab in India. The date reference is 1 March 2018. Four names are provided as options. Only one of these actually held the Chief Minister post on that date. Concept / Approach: In the 2017 Punjab Assembly elections, the Indian National Congress secured a majority and formed the government. Captain Amarinder Singh was sworn in as Chief Minister in March 2017. He continued in office well beyond 1 March 2018. Parkash Singh Badal had been Chief Minister earlier as leader of the previous government but had left office after the electoral defeat. Navjot Singh Sidhu joined Punjab politics as a minister but not as Chief Minister. Naveen Mahindra is not a known Chief Minister of Punjab. Therefore, Captain Amarinder Singh is the correct answer. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall the outcome of the Punjab Assembly elections held in early 2017. Step 2: Remember that the Indian National Congress formed the government and Captain Amarinder Singh became Chief Minister. Step 3: Note that the question date 1 March 2018 falls within the same assembly term. Step 4: Check the options for Captain Amarinder Singh and confirm that he is listed. Step 5: Choose Captain Amarinder Singh as the correct option. Verification / Alternative check: News reports and official state government records from 2017 and 2018 clearly identify Captain Amarinder Singh as the Chief Minister of Punjab. Parkash Singh Badal is mentioned as former Chief Minister and leader of the previous government. Navjot Singh Sidhu appears in the context of ministerial responsibilities such as tourism, but not as head of the government. Since the date specified is well before any later leadership change, this confirms that the correct answer is Captain Amarinder Singh. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Parkash Singh Badal was Chief Minister during earlier terms but left office after the 2017 election defeat of his alliance. Navjot Singh Sidhu served in the Punjab government as a cabinet minister, not as Chief Minister. Naveen Mahindra does not correspond to any known Chief Minister of Punjab and appears only as a distractor. Picking any of these names would contradict the electoral timeline and official records for that period. Common Pitfalls: Some candidates may remember Parkash Singh Badal as a long serving Chief Minister and select his name without paying attention to the date mentioned in the question. Others may be influenced by the media visibility of Navjot Singh Sidhu and assume he held the top post. The key is to link the leadership to the correct election year and verify whether that individual headed the government at the specific time mentioned. Carefully reading the date helps avoid such confusion. Final Answer: On 1 March 2018, the Chief Minister of Punjab was Captain Amarinder Singh.

Indian Politics Questions