Statement–Courses of Action (banking regulation): Exporters allege that commercial banks in the capital are violating an RBI directive to offer post-shipment export credit in foreign currency at international rates from January; which actions should follow—(I) suspend the officers concerned in the commercial banks, and (II) ask the RBI to stop issuing such directives to commercial banks?

Given data

• There is an allegation (not yet proven) of banks violating an RBI directive.
• Proposed actions: suspend officers immediately; stop RBI from issuing directives.

Concept/Approach (proportionality and due process)
Allegations require verification and investigation. Punitive action without inquiry and halting regulation altogether are both illogical responses to an unverified claim.

Step 1: Assess Action I
Immediate suspension presumes guilt without establishing facts; due process is missing.

Step 2: Assess Action II
Stopping the RBI from issuing directives undermines regulation; the problem alleged is non-compliance, not the existence of directives.

Step 3: Conclusion
Hence, neither action logically follows from a mere allegation; investigation would be the reasonable first step (not offered among options).

Common pitfalls
Confusing allegation with proof; attacking regulation rather than addressing compliance.

Final Answer
Neither I nor II follows.