Modern History of India Archives

111. The object of the Butler Committee of 1927 was to

The object of the Butler Committee of 1927 was to

[amp_mcq option1=”Define the jurisdiction of the Central and Provincial Governments.” option2=”Define the powers of the Secretary of State for India.” option3=”Impose censorship on national press.” option4=”Improve the relationship between the Government of India and the Indian States.” correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The Butler Committee, officially known as the Indian States Committee, was appointed in 1927 by the British government, headed by Sir Harcourt Butler. Its primary mandate was to examine the relationship between the Paramount Power (the British Crown) and the Indian Princely States, and to make recommendations for the satisfactory settlement of the financial and economic relations between British India and the States. The overarching objective was to improve and clarify the complex and often strained relationship between the government of British India and the numerous semi-autonomous princely states. Option D accurately reflects this main object.

– The Butler Committee was the Indian States Committee of 1927.
– Its focus was on the relationship between British India and the Princely States.

The Committee’s report (1929) asserted the paramountcy of the British Crown and stated that the states could not be transferred to a future self-governing British India without their agreement. This concept of paramountcy and the committee’s recommendations played a significant role in the discussions regarding the future integration of princely states into independent India.

112. Consider the following statements : 1. The Factories Act, 1881 was p

Consider the following statements :

1. The Factories Act, 1881 was passed with a view to fix the wages of industrial workers and to allow the workers to form trade unions.
2. N.M. Lokhande was a pioneer in organizing the labour movement in British India.

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 – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

Statement 1 is incorrect. The Factories Act, 1881, was the first major legislation in British India to regulate factory labour, but its scope was limited. It primarily focused on improving the working conditions of children (setting minimum age for employment, limiting working hours) and providing some basic provisions for health and safety (like fencing of machinery). It did *not* deal with fixing wages or recognize the right to form trade unions. Wage fixing was not a feature of early labour laws, and trade unions were legally recognized much later with the Indian Trade Unions Act, 1926.
Statement 2 is correct. Narayan Meghaji Lokhande (1848-1897) is widely regarded as a pioneer of the labour movement in India. He organized factory workers in Bombay in the late 19th century, advocated for better working conditions (including a weekly holiday), and founded the Bombay Mill Hands Association in 1890, which is considered one of the first labour organizations in India, although not a registered trade union in the modern sense.

– The Factories Act of 1881 was a nascent attempt to regulate factory conditions, mainly for children.
– N.M. Lokhande played a crucial early role in organizing Indian industrial workers.

Subsequent Factories Acts (e.g., 1891, 1911, 1922, 1934) gradually extended regulations to cover more factories, different age groups, and more aspects of working conditions. The labour movement in India grew significantly in the early 20th century, leading to the passage of the Trade Unions Act, 1926.

113. The Trade Disputes Act of 1929 provided for

The Trade Disputes Act of 1929 provided for

[amp_mcq option1=”the participation of workers in the management of industries.” option2=”arbitrary powers to the management to quell industrial disputes.” option3=”an intervention by the British Court in the event of a trade dispute.” option4=”a system of tribunals and a ban on strikes.” correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct answer is D, which states that the Trade Disputes Act of 1929 provided for a system of tribunals and a ban on strikes.

The Trade Disputes Act of 1929 was enacted by the British government in India primarily to suppress trade union activities and restrict the right to strike. It introduced a system of Courts of Inquiry and Boards of Conciliation (acting as tribunals) for settling disputes and made strikes illegal in public utility services unless a mandatory notice period was given. It also declared sympathetic strikes illegal.

Option A is incorrect as the Act was restrictive towards workers’ rights, not promoting participation in management. Option B is partially true in that it gave powers to intervene but ‘arbitrary powers to management’ is not the precise focus; it gave powers to the government and established mechanisms for dispute resolution and restriction. Option C is incorrect; while the British legal framework underpinned the Act, the primary mechanism was through designated boards/tribunals, not direct intervention by British Courts for every dispute. Option D best captures the essence of the Act’s provisions: creating tribunals for dispute resolution and imposing significant restrictions/bans on strikes.

114. Who among the following was/were associated with the introduction of R

Who among the following was/were associated with the introduction of Ryotwari Settlement in India during the British rule ?

Lord Cornwallis
Alexander Read
Thomas Munro

Select the correct answer using the code given below :

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

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct answer is C, which states that Alexander Read and Thomas Munro were associated with the Ryotwari Settlement.

The Ryotwari system was a land revenue system where the British government collected revenue directly from the cultivators (ryots). Alexander Read first experimented with this system in parts of Madras Presidency in the late 18th century, and Thomas Munro later significantly developed and implemented it widely across Madras Presidency and other parts of Southern India in the early 19th century.

Lord Cornwallis is associated with the Permanent Settlement (Zamindari system), which was introduced in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa, where revenue was collected from Zamindars who were recognized as owners of the land. He was not associated with the Ryotwari system.

115. The plan of Sir Stafford Cripps envisaged that after the Second World

The plan of Sir Stafford Cripps envisaged that after the Second World War

[amp_mcq option1=”India should be granted complete independence.” option2=”India should be partitioned into two before granting independence.” option3=”India should be made a republic with the condition that she will join the Commonwealth.” option4=”India should be given Dominion status.” correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2016

Download PDF Attempt Online

The Cripps Plan, proposed by Sir Stafford Cripps in 1942 during World War II, envisaged that after the war, India would be granted Dominion status.

The Cripps Mission aimed to secure India’s full cooperation in the war effort by promising constitutional reforms after the war. The main proposal was the creation of an Indian Union with Dominion status, free to decide its relations with the Commonwealth.

The plan also included provisions for a Constituent Assembly to frame a new constitution, and importantly, offered provinces the right to opt-out of the proposed Indian Union and form separate Dominions, or join a separate Dominion. This ‘opt-out’ clause was significant as it implicitly acknowledged the possibility of partition. However, the plan was rejected by both the Indian National Congress (seeking immediate independence and unsatisfied with Dominion status and the partition possibility) and the Muslim League (seeking a clear commitment to Pakistan).

116. What was the main reason for the split in the Indian National Congress

What was the main reason for the split in the Indian National Congress at Surat in 1907?

[amp_mcq option1=”Introduction of communalism into Indian politics by Lord Minto” option2=”Extremists’ lack of faith in the capacity of the moderates to negotiate with the British Government” option3=”Foundation of Muslim League” option4=”Aurobindo Ghosh’s inability to be elected as the President of the Indian National Congress” correct=”option2″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2016

Download PDF Attempt Online

The main reason for the split in the Indian National Congress at Surat in 1907 was the fundamental disagreement between the Moderate and Extremist factions over the methods of political struggle and the pace of reform. The Extremists had lost faith in the Moderates’ approach of constitutional petitions and negotiations with the British Government, viewing it as ineffective and too slow.

The Surat split occurred primarily due to ideological differences regarding strategy and goals between the Moderates (led by leaders like Gopal Krishna Gokhale) and the Extremists (led by leaders like Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Lala Lajpat Rai, and Bipin Chandra Pal – the ‘Lal Bal Pal’ trio).

Specific issues leading to the split included disagreements over the resolution on Swaraj (self-rule), Boycott, Swadeshi, and National Education adopted at the Calcutta session in 1906, and the election of the Congress President for the Surat session. The Extremists wanted Tilak or Lajpat Rai as president, while the Moderates managed to elect Rash Behari Ghosh. Lord Minto’s policies and the foundation of the Muslim League in 1906 were significant developments of the time but were not the direct main cause of the INC split itself, though the political climate influenced the growing divide.

118. The ‘Swadeshi’ and ‘Boycott’ were adopted as methods of struggle for t

The ‘Swadeshi’ and ‘Boycott’ were adopted as methods of struggle for the first time during the

[amp_mcq option1=”agitation against the Partition of Bengal” option2=”Home Rule Movement” option3=”Non-Cooperation Movement” option4=”visit of the Simon Commission to India” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2016

Download PDF Attempt Online

The ‘Swadeshi’ and ‘Boycott’ movements were adopted as methods of struggle for the first time on a significant scale during the agitation against the Partition of Bengal in 1905. The call for boycotting British goods and promoting Indian (Swadeshi) goods became a central strategy of this movement.

The Partition of Bengal (1905) sparked widespread protests and led to the adoption of Swadeshi and Boycott as major tactics to resist British rule.

While earlier instances of boycott might have occurred locally, the anti-Partition movement saw the first organized and widespread use of Swadeshi and Boycott as political tools across various sections of society, laying the groundwork for future national movements like the Non-Cooperation Movement, which also heavily relied on these methods.

119. Which one of the following movements has contributed to a split in the

Which one of the following movements has contributed to a split in the Indian National Congress resulting in the emergence of ‘moderates’ and ‘extremists’?

[amp_mcq option1=”Swadeshi Movement” option2=”Quit India Movement” option3=”Non-Cooperation Movement” option4=”Civil Disobedience Movement” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2015

Download PDF Attempt Online

The Swadeshi Movement (1905-1908), which emerged in response to the Partition of Bengal, intensified existing ideological differences within the Indian National Congress. The ‘Moderates’ preferred constitutional methods and dialogue, while the ‘Extremists’ advocated for passive resistance, boycott of foreign goods and institutions, and mass mobilisation. These differences culminated in the Surat Split of 1907, formally dividing the Congress into these two factions.

The Swadeshi Movement provided the context and immediate catalyst for the fundamental disagreements between the Moderate and Extremist wings of the Indian National Congress regarding the methods and goals of the national movement, ultimately leading to the split at the Surat session in 1907.

The Quit India Movement (1942), Non-Cooperation Movement (1920-1922), and Civil Disobedience Movement (1930-1934) were significant phases of the Indian independence struggle led by Mahatma Gandhi. While these movements also saw internal dynamics within the Congress, the primary split between Moderates and Extremists is historically associated with the period of the Swadeshi Movement and the Surat Split.

120. With reference to the Cabinet Mission, which of the following statemen

With reference to the Cabinet Mission, which of the following statements is/are correct?

1. It recommended a federal government.
2. It enlarged the powers of the Indian Courts.
3. It provided for more Indians in the ICS.

Select the correct answer using the code given below.

[amp_mcq option1=”1 only” option2=”2 and 3″ option3=”1 and 3″ option4=”None” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC IAS – 2015

Download PDF Attempt Online

Statement 1 is correct. The Cabinet Mission Plan (1946) recommended a Union of India which should be federal, consisting of British Indian Provinces and the Indian States, with the Union controlling only foreign affairs, defence, and communications, and having the necessary powers to raise the finances required for these subjects. This proposed structure was federal in nature, with a weak centre and significant autonomy for provinces and groups of provinces.
Statement 2 is incorrect. The Cabinet Mission Plan did not propose any measures to enlarge the powers of the Indian Courts. Its focus was on the political structure and the process of constitution-making.
Statement 3 is incorrect. The Cabinet Mission Plan was concerned with the constitutional future of India and the transfer of power. It did not deal with administrative matters like the composition or recruitment of the Indian Civil Service (ICS).
Therefore, only statement 1 is correct.

– The Cabinet Mission proposed a federal Union with limited central powers.
– It did not address the powers of Indian courts or the composition of the ICS.
– The plan aimed to set up a Constituent Assembly and an Interim Government.

The Cabinet Mission Plan’s proposal for grouping of provinces (Sections A, B, and C) was a key feature, aiming to accommodate the concerns of the Muslim League, although the interpretation of its mandatory nature became a point of contention.