Statement — Millions of pilgrims are expected to take a dip in the Ganga at the holy place during the next fortnight. Courses of Action — I. Restrict the number of pilgrims who can take a dip each day during the fortnight. II. Deploy an adequate number of security and support personnel to maintain law and order and manage crowds during the period.

Introduction / Context:Large religious gatherings demand safety, order, health, and logistics management. A valid course of action must mitigate risk while respecting the event’s nature and practical feasibility indicated by the statement (millions expected).

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Forecast: very high footfall over two weeks.
• COA I: numeric caps on daily dips.
• COA II: adequate deployment of security and crowd-management personnel.

Concept / Approach:COA II is directly relevant and feasible: it enables queue systems, barricading, flow segmentation, medical posts, lost-and-found, and emergency response. COA I—blanket numerical caps—may be impractical for an event already attracting millions without a prior registration system; it could trigger disorder or unfairness. The statement does not imply the state plans to limit participation, only that it must manage it safely.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:Even where time-slotting exists, the baseline requirement remains robust deployment and crowd engineering; thus II follows irrespective of I.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

Common Pitfalls:Thinking caps alone solve surge management; without adequate personnel, caps are unenforceable.

Final Answer:Only II follows.