UPSC CISF-AC-EXE Archives

1. As per the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which one

As per the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which one of the following is *not* included in the term ‘wages’?

Dearness allowance

Any travelling allowance

Any bonus

The value of any house accommodation

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is C, as ‘any bonus’ is explicitly excluded from the definition of ‘wages’ under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Section 2(rr) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 defines “wages”. It includes various forms of remuneration and allowances but also lists specific exclusions.
A) Dearness allowance: Included in the definition [Section 2(rr)(i)].
B) Any travelling allowance: ‘Travelling concession’ is included [Section 2(rr)(iii)]. ‘Travelling allowance’ is generally considered a type of allowance and is typically included unless specifically excluded.
C) Any bonus: Explicitly excluded from the definition of wages [Section 2(rr)(a)].
D) The value of any house accommodation: Included in the definition [Section 2(rr)(ii)].
Therefore, among the given options, bonus is the item that is explicitly stated as *not* being included in the definition of ‘wages’ under the Act.

The definition of wages under the Industrial Disputes Act is specific to this Act and may differ from definitions in other labour laws (like the Payment of Wages Act, Minimum Wages Act, etc.). The exclusion of bonus from wages under the ID Act affects calculations related to concepts like lay-off compensation, which are based on wages.

2. As per the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, a dispute

As per the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, a dispute to be termed as ‘Industrial Dispute’ must be between

employers and employers

workmen and workmen

employers and workmen

All of the above

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is D. As per the definition in the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, an ‘Industrial Dispute’ must be between employers and employers, employers and workmen, or workmen and workmen.

Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 defines “industrial dispute” as “any dispute or difference between employers and employers, or between employers and workmen, or between workmen and workmen, which is connected with the employment or non-employment or the terms of employment or with the conditions of labour, of any person”.
Let’s examine the options:
A) employers and employers: Included in the definition.
B) workmen and workmen: Included in the definition.
C) employers and workmen: Included in the definition.
Since all three pairs are explicitly mentioned in the definition, a dispute between any of these parties can be termed an ‘Industrial Dispute’ if it meets the other criteria related to employment terms or labour conditions.

The broad definition of ‘industrial dispute’ in the Act is intended to cover a wide range of conflicts arising in industrial relations, allowing for their resolution through the mechanisms provided by the Act, such as conciliation, arbitration, and adjudication. The dispute must involve persons who fall within the definitions of ’employer’ or ‘workman’ under the Act.

3. As per the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which one of t

As per the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which one of the following types of questions is *not* lawful in cross-examination ?

Questions which shake the credibility of a witness

Questions about the general immoral character of a rape victim/prosecutrix

Questions to test the veracity of a witness

Questions related to the position of a witness in life

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is B, as questions about the general immoral character of a rape victim/prosecutrix are generally not lawful in cross-examination, especially in the context of sexual offence cases.

Section 146 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 permits certain questions in cross-examination to test the veracity of a witness, discover their position in life, and shake their credit by injuring their character. However, this general permission is subject to restrictions, particularly concerning victims of sexual offences. Following amendments (e.g., post Nirbhaya case) and judicial pronouncements, evidence or questions regarding the past sexual experience or general immoral character of the victim in sexual assault cases, including rape, are considered irrelevant and are generally not permissible to infer consent or affect the victim’s credibility regarding the incident itself.
A) Questions which shake the credibility of a witness are generally lawful under Section 146(3).
B) Questions about the general immoral character of a rape victim/prosecutrix are specifically restricted and often deemed unlawful, as they are irrelevant to the issue of consent or the credibility of the victim concerning the sexual assault incident itself.
C) Questions to test the veracity of a witness are lawful under Section 146(1).
D) Questions related to the position of a witness in life are lawful under Section 146(2).

The rationale behind restricting questions about the sexual history or character of a rape victim is to prevent re-victimization and ensure that the trial focuses on the conduct of the accused and the issue of consent related to the specific incident, rather than putting the victim’s life or character on trial. This is a crucial reform reflecting evolving understanding of sexual assault.

4. As per the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, secondary evid

As per the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, secondary evidence relating to a document *cannot* be given when the original

is of such a nature as not to be easily movable

is a private document

is destroyed or lost

consists of numerous accounts or other documents which cannot conveniently be examined in the Court

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is B. Secondary evidence relating to a document *cannot* be given merely because the original is a private document, unless other conditions specified in Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 are met.

Section 64 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that documents must be proved by primary evidence (the original document) except in the cases mentioned in Section 65. Section 65 lists the circumstances in which secondary evidence may be given.
A) If the original is of such a nature as not to be easily movable (Section 65(c)), secondary evidence *can* be given.
B) If the original is a private document, secondary evidence *can* only be given if one of the conditions under Section 65 (e.g., original lost, destroyed, in possession of the opponent, etc.) is satisfied. Merely being a private document does not *allow* secondary evidence; conversely, secondary evidence *cannot* be given *unless* one of the Section 65 conditions applies, even if it is a private document. This contrasts with options A, C, and D, which are specific conditions that *permit* secondary evidence.
C) If the original is destroyed or lost (Section 65(b)), secondary evidence *can* be given.
D) If the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents which cannot conveniently be examined in the Court (Section 65(f)), secondary evidence *can* be given.
The question asks when secondary evidence *cannot* be given. Options A, C, and D are situations where it *can* be given. Being a private document (B) is not, by itself, a reason to allow secondary evidence; primary evidence is mandatory unless a specific exception (like those in A, C, D, or others in 65) applies. Therefore, secondary evidence *cannot* be given simply because it’s a private document; it requires an additional condition from Section 65 to be met.

The general rule under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is that the best evidence available must be produced, which for documents is the primary evidence (the original). Secondary evidence is only admitted as an exception under specified circumstances detailed in Section 65. The distinction between public and private documents is relevant in Section 65(d) and (e), where certified copies of public documents are admissible as secondary evidence, and special provisions apply to documents of which certified copies are permitted by law.

5. Which of the following are required in making an Improvised Explosive

Which of the following are required in making an Improvised Explosive Device (IED)?

1. Detonator
2. Explosive
3. Battery

Select the correct answer using the code given below :

1 and 2 only

2 and 3 only

1 and 3 only

1, 2 and 3

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is D, as detonator, explosive, and battery are typically required in making an Improvised Explosive Device (IED), especially those using electrical initiation which is common.

An Improvised Explosive Device (IED) is a bomb constructed using unconventional means. The fundamental components generally required for a functional IED are:
1. **Explosive:** This is the main charge that produces the explosion.
2. **Detonator/Initiator:** This is a smaller charge or mechanism used to trigger the main explosive charge.
3. **Initiating System:** This system activates the detonator. It often includes a power source (like a battery), a switch, and wiring for electrical detonation, which is very common in modern IEDs due to its versatility (e.g., timer, remote control). While non-electric initiation systems exist (like fuses), a battery is a common and necessary component for electrically initiated IEDs.
Given the options, all three listed items are standard components for a widely used type of IED construction.

IEDs can vary greatly in complexity and components, utilizing various types of explosives, initiators, containers, and triggering mechanisms. The initiating system is crucial for controlling when the device detonates. Batteries provide the necessary electrical energy to activate many types of detonators or timing devices used in IEDs.

6. Which one of the following is not a duty of CISF personnel when depu

Which one of the following is *not* a duty of CISF personnel when deputed at a polling booth during election?

Maintaining peace at the polling booth

Providing security to polling personnel

Securing EVMs

Ensuring security of the candidates

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is D, as ensuring security of candidates is generally not a duty of CISF personnel deputed specifically at a polling booth.

When deployed at a polling booth during elections, the primary duties of security personnel like CISF are centered around maintaining peace and order within and around the booth, ensuring the safety and security of polling staff, and protecting election materials and equipment such as Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs).
A) Maintaining peace at the polling booth is a core duty.
B) Providing security to polling personnel is essential for the conduct of elections.
C) Securing EVMs is crucial for the integrity of the election process.
D) Ensuring security of the candidates is typically handled separately. While security forces ensure general law and order which benefits everyone, including candidates who might visit the booth, the specific personal security detail for candidates, especially those with high-security needs, is a different task usually assigned to dedicated security personnel or agencies, not the general duty personnel stationed at a polling booth.

Election security involves layers of security arrangements, from local police to central forces. The deployment at polling booths focuses on the immediate environment of voting to ensure it is free, fair, and peaceful. Personal security for candidates is usually based on threat assessment and provided on a case-by-case basis, involving different protocols and personnel.

7. Which of the following statements about CISF is/are correct ? 1. CIS

Which of the following statements about CISF is/are correct ?

1. CISF is the only Central Armed Police Force in India having a full-fledged fire service wing.
2. CISF offer security consultancy services only to the Government establishments.

Select the correct answer using the code given below :

1 only

2 only

Both 1 and 2

Neither 1 nor 2

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is A, as statement 1 is correct and statement 2 is incorrect.

Statement 1: The Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) has a specialized and well-developed Fire Wing, providing services to industrial establishments, airports, and other vital installations. While other Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) may have fire fighting capabilities, CISF is often recognized for having the most comprehensive and full-fledged fire service wing among them. Thus, statement 1 is correct.
Statement 2: CISF does offer security consultancy services. However, these services are not limited *only* to Government establishments. Following amendments to the CISF Act, 1968 (especially in 2009), CISF can be deployed to provide security to joint ventures and private sector establishments on a payment basis. Accordingly, their consultancy services are also available to private entities. Therefore, statement 2 is incorrect.

The CISF was established in 1969 under the CISF Act, 1968. Its primary role is to provide security cover to sensitive Government buildings, public sector undertakings, airports, seaports, and other critical infrastructure. The 2009 amendment broadened its mandate to include security for private sector units and joint ventures. The Fire Wing is a crucial component of CISF, specializing in industrial fire safety and response.

8. Which of the following statements is/are correct ? 1. The orders iss

Which of the following statements is/are correct ?

1. The orders issued by the Central Government from time to time as regards reservation, relaxation of the age limit and other concessions for the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes, Ex-servicemen and other special categories of persons are not applicable to the Central Industrial Security Force.
2. The Director General may give relaxation in the eligibility criteria for recruitment to the post of Constable at the time of direct recruitment.
3. No relaxation can be made by the Director General in the medical criterion for recruitment even if it is in the interest of the Force and is considered not to be detrimental to the functioning of the Force.

Select the correct answer using the code given below :

2 and 3 only

1, 2 and 3

1 and 2 only

3 only

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

Checking each statement against the CISF Rules, 2001:
1. Rule 9(1)(c) explicitly states that recruitment shall be made “subject to the orders issued by the Central Government from time to time regarding reservation, relaxation of age limits and other concessions for the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes, Ex-servicemen and other special categories of persons.” This means these orders *are applicable* to the CISF, not “are not applicable” as stated in Statement 1. So, Statement 1 is incorrect.
2. Rule 15 of the CISF Rules, 2001 vests the power of relaxation of any provision of the rules with the *Central Government*. While specific recruitment notifications might delegate limited powers (e.g., for physical standards for certain areas), the general power to relax eligibility criteria is not with the Director General. Statement 2 is likely incorrect.
3. As general relaxation power rests with the Central Government (Rule 15, Rule 9(1)(d)), it is consistent with the rules that the Director General *cannot* independently make relaxation in the medical criterion for recruitment. Statement 3 is likely correct.
Based on the analysis, only statement 3 is correct.

– Central Government reservation and relaxation policies apply to CISF.
– Power to relax rules generally rests with the Central Government.
– Specific criteria like medical standards are typically subject to strict adherence or relaxation only as per Central Government orders.

– Statement 2 is likely incorrect because the primary power to relax rules is with the Central Government. While the DG implements recruitment, the authority for significant relaxations typically requires higher approval.
– Statement 3 is likely correct because medical standards are critical for uniformed forces, and independent relaxation by the DG is generally not provided for in the rules, aligning with the Central Government’s power over relaxation.

9. Which one of the following statements with regard to the CISF Rules, 2

Which one of the following statements with regard to the CISF Rules, 2001, is correct ?
A) The cases of termination of the services of a probationer can be reopened by the appointing authority on his/her own motion.
B) The cases of termination of the services of a probationer can be reopened only by the Central Government on appeal by the probationer whose services have been terminated.
C) Wherever permissible, the cases of termination of the services of a probationer can normally be reopened only within three months of the termination, unless there are special circumstances to warrant reopening of the case after this period.
D) If a probationer is reinstated on reopening of the case, no pay and allowances are payable from the date of termination to the date of reinstatement.

The cases of termination of the services of a probationer can be reopened by the appointing authority on his/her own motion.

The cases of termination of the services of a probationer can be reopened only by the Central Government on appeal by the probationer whose services have been terminated.

Wherever permissible, the cases of termination of the services of a probationer can normally be reopened only within three months of the termination, unless there are special circumstances to warrant reopening of the case after this period.

If a probationer is reinstated on reopening of the case, no pay and allowances are payable from the date of termination to the date of reinstatement.

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

Rule 11(2) of the CISF Rules, 2001 states: “The cases of termination of services of a probationer or a temporary member of the Force under this rule may be reopened by the appointing authority or any authority superior to the appointing authority *suo motu* or otherwise…” Statement A accurately reflects that the appointing authority can reopen the case on his/her own motion (suo motu).

– Rule 11 of CISF Rules, 2001 deals with termination of probationers/temporary members.
– Rule 11(2) provides the power and procedure for reopening such terminated cases.
– The power to reopen rests with the appointing authority or any superior authority, and can be exercised suo motu (on their own motion).

– Statement B is incorrect as reopening is not restricted to the Central Government on appeal.
– Statement C reflects the normal timeframe for reopening (within three months) mentioned in Rule 11(2), but it includes the phrase “Wherever permissible” which is not explicitly in the rule text and may introduce ambiguity. Statement A is a more direct and fundamental statement about the authority’s power granted by the rule.
– Statement D is incorrect as Rule 11(3) provides for payment of pay and allowances upon reinstatement unless the reopening order specifies otherwise.

10. Which one of the following statements is not correct ? A) In the absen

Which one of the following statements is not correct ?
A) In the absence of a specific order of confirmation or a declaration of satisfactory completion of probation, a member of the Central Industrial Security Force is deemed to be on probation.
B) A member of the Central Industrial Security Force is deemed to have successfully completed his probation, if it is not extended before the completion of the probation period specified in the relevant rules.
C) No member of the Force shall ordinarily be kept on probation for more than twice the period prescribed in the relevant rules.
D) Members of the Force appointed on deputation/absorption need not be kept on probation.

In the absence of a specific order of confirmation or a declaration of satisfactory completion of probation, a member of the Central Industrial Security Force is deemed to be on probation.

A member of the Central Industrial Security Force is deemed to have successfully completed his probation, if it is not extended before the completion of the probation period specified in the relevant rules.

No member of the Force shall ordinarily be kept on probation for more than twice the period prescribed in the relevant rules.

Members of the Force appointed on deputation/absorption need not be kept on probation.

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

Rule 10(1) of the CISF Rules, 2001 states that a member shall be on probation. The second proviso to Rule 10(1) states that “in the absence of any specific order of confirmation or a declaration that the probation has been satisfactorily completed, the member shall be deemed to be on probation.” Statement A is consistent with this proviso. Statement B claims that a member is *deemed to have successfully completed* probation if it is not extended before the completion of the period. This directly contradicts the rule, which states they are *deemed to be on probation* in such a scenario (unless confirmed). Statement B is therefore not correct. Statements C and D are correct as per Rule 10(2) and Rule 10(5) respectively.

– Rule 10 of CISF Rules, 2001 governs probation.
– Probation period and possible extensions are defined.
– Deemed status during probation is specifically regulated.
– Members appointed on deputation/absorption have different probation requirements.

– Successful completion of probation typically requires a formal order of confirmation or a declaration to that effect. Merely not extending the probation period does not automatically lead to deemed successful completion or confirmation under these rules; it leads to the member continuing to be on probation until an order is issued.