Statements:\n1) Due to contamination of water, a large number of people were admitted to hospitals.\n2) The symptoms observed in these patients were of typhoid.\nConclusions:\nI. Contaminated water leads to typhoid.\nII. Typhoid is a contagious disease.

Introduction / Context:
This item tests whether given statements justify specific conclusions without importing extra assumptions. We are told that many people were hospitalized after water contamination and that their symptoms were consistent with typhoid. We must evaluate which conclusions necessarily follow from these statements alone.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• There was contamination of water.
• A large number of people were hospitalized.
• The symptoms manifested were of typhoid.
• No other independent cause or epidemiological data is provided.

Concept / Approach:
When two statements appear together (event and symptom complex), a direct causal link that the test-setter intends is usually the minimal one: contaminated water → typhoid-like illness. However, we must avoid adding claims not stated, such as general properties of the disease (e.g., contagion) unless the statements demand them.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) The pair of statements implies that the observed typhoid symptoms occurred in the context of the water contamination event affecting many people. Hence, concluding that contaminated water led to typhoid cases in this episode is consistent with and supported by the given data → Conclusion I follows.2) Whether typhoid is contagious in general is not stated. The episode could be a water-borne outbreak (enteric fever) without needing person-to-person transmission as the explanation. Therefore, Conclusion II does not necessarily follow.

Verification / Alternative check:
Even if typhoid may be contagious in some contexts, the test requires necessity from the given statements. The data do not require a contagion mechanism; a common water source is sufficient.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Both follow” adds an unstated epidemiological property; “Only II” contradicts the core linkage; “Neither” ignores the obvious outbreak inference from contaminated water and typhoid symptoms.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing cause-of-this-outbreak (contaminated water) with general properties of the disease (contagiousness).

Final Answer:
Only conclusion I follows