Statement–Argument (Temporary Ban on New Car Registrations in Metros): Statement: Should big Indian cities impose a complete ban on registering new cars for a few months? Arguments: I) Yes, it will significantly reduce vehicles on already overcrowded roads. II) Yes, current car owners will be happier with fewer peak-hour jams. III) No, it is discriminatory against those planning to buy now. Choose the strongest evaluation.

Introduction / Context:
Short-term registration moratoria are considered to manage congestion/air quality spikes. The policy must weigh public benefits against fairness and effectiveness.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Congestion is acute; road capacity is limited.
• Policy is time-bound.
• Distributional fairness to prospective buyers matters.

Concept / Approach:
Argument I targets the core objective (traffic relief) and is strong. Argument II prioritises existing owners’ comfort—an incidental, regressive rationale. Argument III raises proportionality/equity concerns—strong in assessing policy design (e.g., lotteries, quotas, pricing as alternatives).

Step-by-Step Solution:
I: Direct link to objective ⇒ strong.II: Benefitting incumbents is not a legitimate policy aim ⇒ weak.III: Highlights fairness and potential discrimination ⇒ strong.

Verification / Alternative check:
Less-restrictive measures (congestion pricing, scrappage, number-plate rationing) address III while retaining I’s goals.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Only I” ignores fairness; “Only III” ignores congestion gains; “All” or “Only II” mis-target objectives.

Common Pitfalls:
Valuing convenience of current owners over public interest.

Final Answer:
Only I and III are strong.