Which one of the following statements about the Justice Party in colonial India is not correct?

Introduction / Context:
This question examines knowledge of the Justice Party, an important Non Brahmin political organization in the Madras Presidency during the colonial period. The Party played a key role in the politics of representation, communal reservations, and provincial government. Understanding which statement about its activities is not correct requires awareness of both its social base and its stance toward the Indian National Congress, especially during the Non Cooperation Movement and the elections of the early nineteen twenties.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• The Justice Party was a Non Brahmin organization that emerged in the Madras region.
• The statements mention its demand for separate communal representation, its social support base, its success in obtaining reserved seats, and its position on the 1920 elections.
• The question asks specifically which statement is not correct.
• We assume standard historical accounts of the Party's activities and ideology.

Concept / Approach:
The Justice Party was formed by Non Brahmin elites who felt disadvantaged under Brahmin dominance in administration and politics. It indeed demanded communal representation for Non Brahmins similar to the separate representation concept used for Muslims. Its social base consisted largely of richer landowners and urban middle class Non Brahmins. The Montagu Chelmsford Reforms and the subsequent Government of India Act helped institutionalize reservations, which the Party supported. However, when the Indian National Congress decided to boycott the 1920 elections as part of the Non Cooperation Movement, the Justice Party chose to contest those elections and form a government in Madras. Therefore, the statement that it supported the Congress boycott is not correct.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Confirm that the Justice Party did seek communal representation for Non Brahmins similar to what Muslims had received earlier, which matches option A. Step 2: Recognize that the Party drew much of its support from wealthier landowning and urban Non Brahmin groups, making option B correct. Step 3: Note that provisions for reserved seats for Non Brahmins in the new constitutional arrangements were one of the achievements that favoured the Party's agenda, so option C is substantially correct. Step 4: Recall that the Justice Party contested the 1920 elections when the Congress boycotted them and subsequently formed the government in Madras, meaning it did not support the boycott; thus option D is incorrect.

Verification / Alternative check:
Histories of the Madras Presidency and studies of the Non Brahmin movement describe the Justice Party as contesting the 1920 elections, winning a majority, and forming the first ministry under the dyarchy system. These accounts clearly contrast its approach with that of the Congress, which stayed away from the elections. The same sources also discuss its communal representation demands and its elite Non Brahmin base. This confirms that option D is the only statement that does not align with established historical facts.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option A correctly describes the Party's demand for communal representation, mirroring the earlier concessions granted to Muslims. Option B accurately captures the social groups supporting the Party. Option C reflects the Party's success in influencing the pattern of reserved seats in the reformed constitutional framework. These three statements are in harmony with standard historical narratives, so they cannot be the incorrect one requested by the question.

Common Pitfalls:
A frequent mistake is to assume that all anti colonial political forces acted in the same way as the Congress, leading to the wrong guess that the Justice Party also boycotted elections. Another pitfall is overlooking regional movements and assuming that only national level parties mattered. Careful study of provincial politics shows that some groups chose to work within the constitutional framework offered by the British rather than join mass civil disobedience campaigns.

Final Answer:
The incorrect statement is that the Justice Party supported the Congress call to boycott the elections in 1920; in reality, it contested those elections.