Statement:\nVehicular sources contribute 60% to Delhi’s total pollution level (as stated in the Rajya Sabha).\n\nWhich conclusion(s) logically follow(s)? Consider only I and II below.\nI. The court has ordered that the main source of pollution should be identified.\nII. The problem of pollution is top priority on the government’s work list.

Introduction / Context:
We are given a single data point (vehicular sources = 60% of pollution) and its venue (Rajya Sabha). We must test whether the offered conclusions necessarily follow.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Only the percentage contribution and where it was informed are known.
• No mention of court directives or government prioritisation.

Concept / Approach:
Logical follow = must be true from the statement alone. Additional facts (court orders, government priorities) would require separate evidence.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Legislative mention does not imply judicial orders or executive priorities.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

Common Pitfalls:
Reading policy intent into a data disclosure.

Final Answer:
If neither I nor II follows.