UPSC IAS Archives

31. Which one of the following best defines the term ‘State’?

Which one of the following best defines the term ‘State’?

[amp_mcq option1=”A community of persons permanently occupying a definite territory independent of external control and possessing an organized government.” option2=”A politically organized people of a definite territory and possessing an authority to govern them, maintain law and order, protect their natural rights and safeguard their means of sustenance.” option3=”A number of persons who have been living in a definite territory for a very long time with their own culture, tradition and government” option4=”A society permanently living in a definite territory with a central authority, an executive responsible to the central authority and an independent judiciary.” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct answer is A) A community of persons permanently occupying a definite territory independent of external control and possessing an organized government.

– This definition includes the four essential elements that constitute a ‘State’ in political science: a permanent population (community of persons), a defined territory, a government (organized government), and sovereignty (independent of external control).

– Option B describes functions of a state rather than its defining components.
– Option C focuses on cultural and historical aspects (culture, tradition, long residence) more akin to a nation or community than the political entity of a State.
– Option D describes specific governmental structures (central authority, executive responsibility, independent judiciary) and lacks the crucial element of sovereignty.

32. Which one of the following in Indian polity is an essential feature th

Which one of the following in Indian polity is an essential feature that indicates that it is federal in character?

[amp_mcq option1=”The independence of judiciary is safeguarded.” option2=”The Union Legislature has elected representatives from constituent units.” option3=”The Union Cabinet can have elected representatives from regional parties.” option4=”The Fundamental Rights are enforceable by Courts of Law.” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct answer is A) The independence of judiciary is safeguarded.

– An independent judiciary is a vital feature of a federal system. It acts as the interpreter and guardian of the constitution and resolves disputes between the Union and the states, ensuring that each level of government operates within its constitutionally defined sphere. This independent role in upholding the division of powers is a key indicator of a federal structure.

– Option B (Union Legislature has elected representatives from constituent units) refers to bicameralism with representation for states (like the Rajya Sabha), which is also a feature found in federations, but the independence of the judiciary is often considered the most critical safeguard for the federal division of powers.
– Option C (Union Cabinet can have elected representatives from regional parties) describes a political outcome based on elections and coalition politics, not an essential structural feature of the federal system itself.
– Option D (Fundamental Rights are enforceable by Courts of Law) relates to the protection of individual liberties and the rule of law in a democratic state, which is present in many types of states (federal or unitary), and is not exclusively indicative of federalism.

33. A legislation which confers on the executive or administrative authori

A legislation which confers on the executive or administrative authority an unguided and uncontrolled discretionary power in the matter of application of law violates which one of the following Articles of the Constitution of India?

[amp_mcq option1=”Article 14″ option2=”Article 28″ option3=”Article 32″ option4=”Article 44″ correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

A legislation that confers unguided and uncontrolled discretionary power on executive or administrative authority in the application of law violates the principle of equality before the law and equal protection of the laws guaranteed by Article 14 of the Constitution of India. If discretion is unguided, it can be exercised arbitrarily, leading to discriminatory treatment among individuals similarly situated, which offends the rule of law and equality. Indian courts have repeatedly held that administrative discretion must be guided by principles or standards, although the guidelines need not be explicitly stated in the statute itself and can be inferred from the policy and object of the Act.

– Article 14 guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws.
– Unguided discretionary power can lead to arbitrary and discriminatory actions.
– Arbitrary action is the antithesis of equality.

The Supreme Court of India has emphasized that discretion should not be “untrammeled and absolute” but must be guided. While some degree of discretion is necessary for administration, it must be capable of being exercised reasonably and not arbitrarily.

34. At the national level, which ministry is the nodal agency to ensure ef

At the national level, which ministry is the nodal agency to ensure effective implementation of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006?

[amp_mcq option1=”Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change” option2=”Ministry of Panchayati Raj” option3=”Ministry of Rural Development” option4=”Ministry of Tribal Affairs” correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (FRA) is a legislation aimed at recognizing the rights of forest-dwelling communities. Given that the Act primarily deals with the rights and welfare of Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers, the nodal agency for its implementation at the national level is the Ministry of Tribal Affairs.

– The Forest Rights Act, 2006 concerns the rights of Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers.
– The Ministry of Tribal Affairs is the central ministry responsible for the welfare and development of Scheduled Tribes.

While the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change is responsible for forests and wildlife, the core subject of the FRA is the recognition of rights related to the people dwelling in these forests, making the Ministry of Tribal Affairs the appropriate nodal ministry. Gram Sabhas play a critical role in the process of recognizing and verifying forest rights under the Act.

35. With reference to India, consider the following statements : 1. When

With reference to India, consider the following statements :

1. When a prisoner makes out a sufficient case, parole cannot be denied to such prisoner because it becomes a matter of his/her right.
2. State Governments have their own Prisoners Release on Parole Rules.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

[amp_mcq option1=”1 only” option2=”2 only” option3=”Both 1 and 2″ option4=”Neither 1 nor 2″ correct=”option2″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

The question asks for the correct statements regarding parole in India.
Statement 1: Parole is a discretionary power of the executive and is granted for specific reasons (like family emergencies). It is a conditional release and is *not* considered an absolute right of the prisoner, even if they make out a seemingly sufficient case. The authorities have the discretion to grant or deny it based on various factors, including security considerations, prisoner’s conduct, and potential impact on society. Thus, Statement 1 is not correct.
Statement 2: Prison administration, including matters like parole and furlough, falls under the State List (List II of the Seventh Schedule) of the Constitution of India. Therefore, each State Government has the authority to frame its own rules and guidelines for the release of prisoners on parole and furlough. Thus, Statement 2 is correct.
Based on the analysis, only statement 2 is correct. Therefore, the correct option is B.

– Parole is a conditional, discretionary release, not a fundamental right of the prisoner.
– Prison administration is a state subject, and State Governments frame their own rules regarding parole.

Parole is granted for short periods and typically requires the prisoner to return to custody. Furlough is another type of short-term release granted periodically to prisoners serving long sentences, often without a specific reason being required, as a break from prison life. Both are governed by state rules.

36. With reference to India, consider the following statements : 1. Judi

With reference to India, consider the following statements :

1. Judicial custody means an accused is in the custody of the concerned magistrate and such accused is locked up in police station, not in jail.
2. During judicial custody, the police officer in charge of the case is not allowed to interrogate the suspect without the approval of the court.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

[amp_mcq option1=”1 only” option2=”2 only” option3=”Both 1 and 2″ option4=”Neither 1 nor 2″ correct=”option2″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

The question asks for the correct statements regarding judicial custody in India.
Statement 1: Judicial custody means that the accused is in the custody of the concerned magistrate (judicial authority), but they are locked up in a *jail*, not a police station. Custody in a police station lock-up is termed police custody. Thus, Statement 1 is not correct.
Statement 2: During judicial custody, the police investigating the case are not allowed to interrogate the suspect without first obtaining permission from the court (Magistrate). This is a safeguard against potential coercion and ensures judicial oversight. Thus, Statement 2 is correct.
Based on the analysis, only statement 2 is correct. Therefore, the correct option is B.

– Judicial custody implies custody under the court and detention in jail.
– Police custody implies custody under the police and detention in a police lock-up.
– Interrogation during judicial custody requires court permission.

The maximum period for police custody is typically 15 days from the date of arrest. After this, the accused must be remanded to judicial custody if investigations are ongoing, or released. The status of custody affects rights and procedures, such as the right to meet a lawyer and conditions of interrogation.

37. Consider the following statements : 1. ‘Right to the City’ is an agr

Consider the following statements :

1. ‘Right to the City’ is an agreed human right and the UN-Habitat monitors the commitments made by each country in this regard.
2. ‘Right to the City’ gives every occupant of the city the right to reclaim public spaces and public participation in the city.
3. ‘Right to the City’ means that the State cannot deny any public service or facility to the unauthorized colonies in the city.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

[amp_mcq option1=”1 only” option2=”3 only” option3=”1 and 2″ option4=”2 and 3″ correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

Let’s analyze the statements about the ‘Right to the City’.
Statement 1: While ‘Right to the City’ is not yet a universally codified international human right in the same vein as, say, the right to life or liberty, the concept is gaining traction and is incorporated in international documents like the New Urban Agenda adopted at Habitat III (2016). The New Urban Agenda mentions the ‘Right to the City’ and UN-Habitat is the custodian agency for monitoring progress towards the Agenda’s goals, which align with the principles of inclusive and equitable cities. Given this context, Statement 1 can be considered correct in the sense that it is a recognized concept promoted in UN forums, and UN-Habitat plays a role related to it.
Statement 2: A core aspect of the ‘Right to the City’, as conceptualized by thinkers like Henri Lefebvre and David Harvey, is the right of all urban inhabitants to use, occupy, and produce the city, emphasizing democratic control over urban space and resources, including the right to reclaim public spaces and participate in urban decision-making. Thus, Statement 2 is correct.
Statement 3: The ‘Right to the City’ concept promotes inclusion and equitable access to services for all inhabitants. However, stating that the State “cannot deny any public service or facility to the unauthorized colonies” is an oversimplification and not a universally accepted legal implication of the concept. Provision of services to unauthorized settlements is a complex legal and policy issue and the State’s capacity and obligation often depend on specific national laws and policies, which may distinguish between legal and unauthorized settlements. Thus, Statement 3 is not correct.
Based on the analysis, Statements 1 (interpreted generously in the context of international recognition and UN-Habitat’s role) and 2 are correct, while Statement 3 is incorrect. Therefore, the correct option is C.

– The ‘Right to the City’ is a conceptual framework emphasizing inclusion, participation, and equitable use of urban spaces.
– It advocates for the right of all inhabitants to shape the city and participate in its governance.
– While promoted in international forums like UN-Habitat, its status as a legally binding, universally agreed human right is debated.
– The concept does not automatically grant residents of unauthorized settlements an absolute right to demand all public services regardless of legal status.

The New Urban Agenda (2016) includes language that reflects the principles of the ‘Right to the City’, promoting cities for all and equitable access to urban services. Many civil society organizations and academics advocate for the formal recognition of the ‘Right to the City’ as a human right.

38. Consider the following statements in respect of the ICC World Test Cha

Consider the following statements in respect of the ICC World Test Championship :

The finalists were decided by the number of matches they won.
New Zealand was ranked ahead of England because it won more matches than England.

Which of the above statements is/are correct?

[amp_mcq option1=”1 only” option2=”2 only” option3=”Both 1 and 2″ option4=”Neither 1 nor 2″ correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

The question asks for the correct statements regarding the ICC World Test Championship (WTC).
Statement 1: The finalists for the inaugural WTC (2019-2021) were decided based on the percentage of points earned from matches played, not simply by the number of matches won. This system was implemented due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the schedule, where not all teams could play the same number of series or matches. Thus, Statement 1 is not correct.
Statement 2: New Zealand was ranked ahead of England in the 2019-2021 WTC cycle based on the percentage of points, not because they won more matches. In fact, England won 12 matches compared to New Zealand’s 7 matches in the cycle. New Zealand finished second with 70.0% points, while England finished fourth with 61.4%. Thus, Statement 2 is not correct.
Based on the analysis, neither statement 1 nor statement 2 is correct. Therefore, the correct option is D.

– The ICC World Test Championship standings were determined by the percentage of points earned per match contested, not total wins.
– New Zealand ranked higher than England in the 2019-2021 WTC cycle despite winning fewer matches.

The percentage of points system was adopted partway through the 2019-2021 WTC cycle to account for incomplete series and varying numbers of matches played by teams due to the pandemic. This ensured a fairer comparison between teams. India and New Zealand were the finalists for the 2019-2021 WTC final.

39. Consider the following statements in respect of the 32nd Summer Olympi

Consider the following statements in respect of the 32nd Summer Olympics :

The official motto for this Olympics is ‘A New World’.
Sport Climbing, Surfing, Skateboarding, Karate and Baseball are included in this Olympics.

Which of the above statements is/are correct?

[amp_mcq option1=”1 only” option2=”2 only” option3=”Both 1 and 2″ option4=”Neither 1 nor 2″ correct=”option2″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

The question asks for the correct statements regarding the 32nd Summer Olympics (Tokyo 2020, held in 2021).
Statement 1: The official motto for the Tokyo 2020 Olympics was “United by Emotion”. “A New World” was not the official motto. Thus, Statement 1 is not correct.
Statement 2: Sport Climbing, Surfing, Skateboarding, Karate, and Baseball (along with Softball) were indeed included as new sports in the program for the Tokyo 2020 Olympics, either making their debut or returning after previous exclusion. Thus, Statement 2 is correct.
Based on the analysis, only statement 2 is correct. Therefore, the correct option is B.

– The motto of the Tokyo 2020 Olympics was “United by Emotion”.
– Several new sports were added to the Olympic program for Tokyo 2020, including Sport Climbing, Surfing, Skateboarding, Karate, and Baseball/Softball.

The inclusion of these new sports was part of an effort to make the Olympics more appealing to a younger audience and reflect growing sports trends. These sports were proposed by the Tokyo Organising Committee and approved by the International Olympic Committee.

40. Consider the following statements in respect of the Laureus World Spor

Consider the following statements in respect of the Laureus World Sports Award which was instituted in the year 2000 :

American golfer Tiger Woods was the first winner of this award.
The award was received mostly by ‘Formula One’ players so far.
Roger Federer received this award maximum number of times compared to others.

Which of the above statements are correct?

[amp_mcq option1=”1 and 2 only” option2=”2 and 3 only” option3=”1 and 3 only” option4=”1, 2 and 3″ correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

The question asks for the correct statements regarding the Laureus World Sports Award, instituted in 2000.
Statement 1: American golfer Tiger Woods was indeed the first recipient of the Laureus World Sportsman of the Year award in 2000. Thus, Statement 1 is correct.
Statement 2: While Formula One drivers (like Michael Schumacher, Sebastian Vettel, Lewis Hamilton) have won the award, the award has been received by athletes from various sports, and it is not accurate to say it was received “mostly” by Formula One players. Athletes from tennis, football, athletics, and golf have won it frequently, and in some cases, more often than F1 drivers cumulatively. Thus, Statement 2 is not correct.
Statement 3: Roger Federer has won the Laureus World Sportsman of the Year award a record five times (2005-2008, 2018), which is more than any other individual. Thus, Statement 3 is correct.
Based on the analysis, statements 1 and 3 are correct. Therefore, the correct option is C.

– Tiger Woods was the inaugural winner of the Laureus World Sportsman of the Year award.
– The award winners represent a diverse range of sports, not predominantly Formula One.
– Roger Federer holds the record for the most wins of the Laureus World Sportsman of the Year award.

The Laureus World Sports Awards are presented annually to honour individuals and teams from the world of sports. The first awards ceremony was held in May 2000. Roger Federer’s five wins solidify his standing as the most awarded sportsman in this category.