Question 1

Statement: Drinking-water supply to New Bombay has been suspended by the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board after the Patalganga River was polluted by effluents discharged from chemical industries.  Courses of Action: I. Order immediate shutdown of…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: When potable water is suspended due to industrial effluents, the response must combine enforcement, remediation, and ongoing compliance monitoring. Given Data / Assumptions: Confirmed pollution from chemical industries. Public water supply halted for safety. Regulatory authority (PCB) is active. Concept / Approach: Logical courses are: (I) stop continued discharge from violators; (II) remediate water before resuming supply; (III) institutionalize regular monitoring and compliance checks to prevent recurrence. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) I: Immediate shutdown or stoppage orders prevent ongoing contamination.2) II: Treatment (and alternative sourcing) is essential before resuming potable supply.3) III: Periodic audits and continuous monitoring are necessary for long-term protection.4) Therefore, all follow. Verification / Alternative check: Water safety protocols require source control, treatment, and surveillance. Why Other Options Are Wrong: • Any subset misses either enforcement, remediation, or prevention. Common Pitfalls: Resuming supply before verified potability; relying on one-time raids without ongoing checks. Final Answer: All follow.

Question 2

Statement: There was a spurt in criminal activities in the city during the recent festival season.  Courses of Action: I. The police should immediately investigate the causes of this increase. II. In future, adequate precautions should be taken duri…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Course-of-action questions require choosing steps that are logical, proportional, and grounded in the given facts. A temporary spike in crime during festivals suggests situational and operational causes (crowds, cash flow, distracted citizens), calling for diagnosis and targeted preventive planning. Given Data / Assumptions: Crime rose specifically during a festival window. No evidence is presented that any listed “known criminals” were planning crimes. Police can investigate, plan deployments, and issue public advisories. Concept / Approach: Prefer actions that (a) discover root causes and (b) reduce risk during similar future conditions without violating rights. Avoid blanket, rights-infringing steps without case-specific inputs. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) I (investigate causes): Logical first step to understand patterns, locations, and methods (e.g., pickpocketing hotspots, timing).2) II (adequate precautions): Data-driven deployment, CCTV focus, traffic flow control, awareness drives—directly addresses recurrence.3) III (arrest known criminals pre-emptively): Overbroad and not supported by the statement; detention requires legal grounds beyond being “known.”4) Therefore, Only I and II follow. Verification / Alternative check: Standard policing emphasizes problem-oriented policing: analyze, plan, deploy, and evaluate. Why Other Options Are Wrong: • None / Only one: misses necessary complementary measures.• All follow: includes unjustified pre-emptive arrests. Common Pitfalls: Confusing proactive policing with unlawful detention. Final Answer: Only I and II follow.

Course of Action Questions