Statement: “Providing cooked meals to all primary-school students in State X is not a proper or judicious step.” — a criticism Assumptions I & II: I. Students may hesitate to eat the cooked meal provided by the Government. II. The cooked meal served to students may be hazardous to their health. Choose the option that correctly identifies the implicit assumption(s).

Introduction / Context:
The critic calls the policy of providing cooked meals to all primary students “not proper/judicious.” We must determine which background concerns are minimally necessary for that negative evaluation to make sense.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• I. Students might refuse or hesitate to eat the meal (acceptance/uptake risk).
• II. The meal might be hazardous for health (safety/quality risk).

Concept / Approach:
A policy can be labeled “not proper” for multiple independent reasons. In this stem, two plausible lines of criticism are suggested: (a) acceptance/feasibility, and (b) safety/quality. The statement needs at least one such policy-relevant concern to justify the negative judgment, but not necessarily both.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) If students hesitate to eat (I), the policy may waste resources or fail targets—sufficient grounds for calling it improper.2) If meals may be hazardous (II), health risk alone justifies the criticism.3) The criticism does not require that both non-acceptance and hazard be presumed simultaneously; either concern can independently support the conclusion.4) Therefore, at least one of I or II must be implicit; thus “Either I or II is implicit.”

Verification / Alternative check:
Other unstated grounds (cost, logistics) could also motivate criticism, but the stem itself points toward acceptance or safety. Because either ground suffices, the minimal necessary assumption is a disjunction.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only I or only II: each can be sufficient, but the stem does not force us to pick exactly one. Both I and II: stronger than necessary. Neither: leaves the criticism baseless.

Common Pitfalls:
Treating suggested reasons as jointly necessary; the test of implicitness seeks what must hold minimally for the evaluative claim to make sense.

Final Answer:
Either I or II is implicit.