The following question consists of four labelled sentences P, Q, R and S about public sector banks and systemic reform. When arranged correctly, they form a coherent paragraph. Select the option that gives the best order.

Introduction / Context:
This para jumble concerns economic policy and the governance structure of public sector banks. The four sentences talk about the need for systemic reform, the basic reform required in holding structures, a possible holding company solution, and the limited role given to the Banks Board Bureau. Your task is to arrange them to form a logically consistent paragraph. Understanding the flow from general reform need to specific structural suggestions and critique of current arrangements is key to solving this question correctly.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Q states that public sector banks need systemic reform to overhaul their current decision making structure and culture.
• P says that the basic reform they need is to change their holding structure to give them autonomy and accountability, rather than just promising no government interference.
• R suggests that if the government does not want to free the banks from majority state ownership, it could create a holding company that would own equity, appoint boards and supervise functioning.
• S notes that it is surprising that after appointing the Banks Board Bureau, it has been given little role in reforming public sector banks.
• The paragraph must describe the need, the structural solution, and a related critique.

Concept / Approach:
In such policy based paragraphs, the author usually begins with a broad statement of the problem or reform need. Then come more detailed proposals that describe the basic reform and specific mechanisms to implement it. Finally, the author may comment on present instruments such as the Banks Board Bureau and their limitations. By following this structure, we can identify which sentence introduces the issue, which ones expand it, and which one provides a critical observation about actual practice.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Sentence Q is the natural starting point because it makes a general claim that public sector banks need systemic reform to change their decision making structure and culture. This sets the theme for the rest of the paragraph. Step 2: Sentence P follows logically, as it specifies what the basic reform should be. It states that the banks need a change in holding structure to gain autonomy and accountability instead of mere promises of no interference. Step 3: Sentence R then offers a concrete mechanism to achieve what P proposes. It suggests that if the government wishes to retain majority ownership, it can still create a holding company to hold equity, appoint boards and supervise functioning, keeping banks at arm's length. Step 4: Sentence S is best placed at the end because it comments on the Banks Board Bureau, which was meant to help in such reforms. The sentence criticises the fact that it has been given little role, implying a gap between the needed reform and current practice. Step 5: Putting the pieces together yields Q P R S, which corresponds to option QPRS.

Verification / Alternative check:
Reading QPRS as a single paragraph, it flows smoothly: it begins by identifying the need for systemic reform, then describes the basic change in holding structure, then suggests a practical holding company model, and finally points out that the existing Banks Board Bureau has not been empowered adequately. This order takes the reader from the problem through potential solutions to a criticism of existing arrangements, which is the natural course of an analytical argument about policy reform.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option PRQS opens with P, which dives into a particular reform about holding structure without first stating that broader systemic reform is required, making the context less clear. Option RQSP begins with R, which mentions the government and a holding company without explaining why such a change is even needed. Option RSPQ is even less coherent, as it puts the holding company proposal before the background and ends with P instead of the Banks Board Bureau critique, disrupting the argument's rhythm. These sequences fail to provide as clear a progression as QPRS.

Common Pitfalls:
Many examinees misplace sentences containing striking proposals at the beginning, ignoring the importance of a general statement of the problem. Others do not notice that critical comments regarding existing bodies such as the Banks Board Bureau naturally belong near the end of a paragraph. When dealing with policy arguments, always look for this pattern: statement of need, basic description of reform, specific structural proposal, and then commentary on current implementation gaps. Following this pattern will guide you to the correct ordering in similar questions.

Final Answer:
The most logical order of the sentences is QPRS, so the correct answer is option QPRS.