Decision making — cyclone damage in hill areas and fiscal burden Statement: More than 200 villages in a hill area of Uttar Pradesh have been severely damaged by a cyclone, imposing an extra burden of ₹200 crore on the State Government for relief and rehabilitation. Which courses of action are appropriate? I. Shift people in the hill area to safer locations. II. The State Government should seek additional financial support from the Central Government. III. Levy a special “relief tax” on the corporate sector to ease the additional burden.

Introduction / Context:
The scenario is a disaster-management and public-finance problem. We assess which actions are immediate, humane, and administratively reasonable given extensive cyclone damage in many villages and a large relief bill for the State Government.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Severe cyclone damage across 200+ villages in a hill region.
• Relief and rehabilitation cost estimated at ₹200 crore over normal budgets.
• State and Central Governments share disaster responsibilities; evacuation saves lives.

Concept / Approach:
In public emergencies, prioritize life safety and continuity of essential services, then funding. Evaluate each proposed action for immediacy, legality, proportionality, and broader impact on the economy and stakeholders.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• None follows: incorrect because I and II are sound.
• Only II and III / Only I and III: wrongly include the relief tax while omitting evacuation or central support.
• None of these: not applicable since I and II are correct.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing long-term fiscal measures with urgent lifesaving steps. Policy instruments that are slow or contentious are generally not “immediate courses of action.”

Final Answer:
Only I and II follow