Reading Comprehension 04
Reading Comprehension - 04 - Interactive Quiz
Take this interactive quiz with 15 questions. Topic: Reading Comprehension (English Language) Total Questions: 15 Total Marks : 15 Total Time : 12 Minutes Each question carries 1 mark. Negative Marking: -0.25…
Question 1: Based on the information presented in the passage, what can be true about the perception…
- Only II
- I and II
- II and III
- All I, II and III
- None I, II and III
Question 2: "However, the increased power of local elites and their capture of institutions, combined with the…
- The limited investment from higher levels of government has led to the increased power of local elites and their capture of institutions.
- The challenges in terms of accountability, transparency, and the delivery of basic services are due to the participation of women in local government.
- The decentralization process has been successful in delivering basic services to the local population.
- The capture of institutions by local elites has not led to any negative consequences in terms of accountability and transparency.
- Higher levels of government have fully supported the decentralization process and provided necessary investment.
Question 3: Which of the following statements can be concluded from the passage about the challenges faced…
- I and II
- II and III
- I and III
- All I, II and III
- None of I, II and III
Question 4: What is the tone of the author in the following paragraph? This year is the…
- Critical
- Optimistic
- Pessimistic
- Indifferent
- Sarcastic
Question 5: What is the meaning of the idiom 'double-edged sword' in the context of the passage?
- The positive and negative effects of technology are like a sharp and dangerous sword.
- The lack of clarity in municipal governance has made technology a risky tool to use.
- The use of technology in cities has been a joke due to the political economy of contracting.
- Technology has been both a tool for local development and a means of bypassing political control.
- The double-edged sword of technology has made collective deliberation a difficult task.
Question 6: What is the near synonym of the word 'salience' as used in the passage?
- Irrelevance
- Inconsequentiality
- Prominence
- Insignificance
- Triviality
Question 7: What is a near synonym for the word "obscene" as used in the passage?
- Vulgar
- Indecent
- Respectable
- Vile
- Raunchy
Question 8: What was the experience of people in Exmouth during the solar eclipse?
- They were disappointed due to cloudy weather
- They were able to see the total solar eclipse for about a minute
- They only saw a partial eclipse
- They were unable to view the eclipse due to equipment failure
- None of the above
Question 9: What can be inferred about the term "ring of fire" in the context of the…
- The total darkness during a solar eclipse
- The moment when the moon and sun are the exact same size in the sky
- The phenomenon when the moon blocks out some of the sun's light during an eclipse
- The moment when the moon is a little farther away and lets some of the sun's light peek out
- The bright halo-like ring around the moon during a solar eclipse
Question 10: Which of the following statements about the solar eclipse discussed in the passage is false?
- The solar eclipse occurred in Australia, Indonesia, and East Timor.
- The town of Exmouth was promoted as one of the best vantage points to see the eclipse in Australia.
- The solar eclipse can be tracked from both land and water.
- The last solar eclipse happened in 2013 and the next one will occur in 2031.
- Solar eclipses happen only when the sun and the moon are the exact same size in the sky.
Question 11: What can be inferred about the people who gathered in Exmouth to watch the total…
- Only I
- Only II
- Only I and II
- Only II and III
- All of the above
Question 12: What is the tone of the passage?
- Neutral
- Exciting
- Critical
- Indifferent
- None of the above
Question 13: Which organization filed a formal complaint with the Department of Consumers Affairs about the Bournvita…
- Mondelez India
- The Food Standards and Safety Authority of India (FSSAI)
- The Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution
- The Nutrition Advocacy in Public Interest — India (NAPi)
- None of the above
Question 14: What is the main issue highlighted in the passage?
- The controversy surrounding Cadbury Bournvita and an influencer's video
- The role of NAPi in promoting nutrition policy in India
- The misleading advertisements and product packaging of Bournvita
- The legal notice issued by Mondelez India to Revant Himatsingka
- The failure of FSSAI to regulate packaged and processed food
Question 15: What is the opposite of the word "massive" as used in the following sentence from…
- Tiny
- Heavy
- Large
- Huge
- Bulky
Reading Comprehension - 04
0 of 15 questions completed
Questions:
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
Information
Topic: Reading Comprehension (English Language)
Total Questions: 15
Total Marks : 15
Total Time : 12 Minutes
Each question carries 1 mark.
Negative Marking: -0.25 mark for each incorrect answer.
No negative marking for unanswered questions.
Submit the quiz before the timer ends.
Best of Luck!👍
Attempts used up
You have already completed the Test before. Hence you can not start it again.
Test is loading...
You have to finish following Test, to start this Test:
Question Navigator
-
Not categorized
Questions Attempted: 0Correct Answers: 0 (Score: 0)Incorrect Answers: 0 (Penalty: 0)
-
English
Questions Attempted: 0Correct Answers: 0 (Score: 0)Incorrect Answers: 0 (Penalty: 0)
-
From the given options, choose the one that gives the correct word that fits in the blank.
Answer Review for "Reading Comprehension - 04"
Question Navigator
English
Question 1
This year is the 30th anniversary of the passing of the 73rd and 74th Amendments. Indian governance was always overcentralised. But it is a sign of the times that even the modest steps these amendments took towards decentralisation now seem to belong to an alien intellectual and political world. In a moment of authoritarian centralisation, the idea of deepening democracy by creating structures of inclusive governance seems like a pipe dream.
Indian democracy since Independence never really had a commitment to decentralisation. Despite performative obeisance to the idea by the state, decentralisation has always been hostage to a number of contradictory impulses. Initially, there was the presumption that centralised power would be required to break the power of local elites, never mind the fact that there is little evidence that the outcomes of decentralisation would have been worse than what we eventually got. The existing tiers of government, both central and state, wanted to hoard most of the resources. India has the lowest spending on local government as a proportion of resources. And the ideology of Gandhian decentralisation, oddly enough, militated against genuine political decentralisation.
For, in this imagination, decentralisation was not a devolution of power and resources. It was the creation of an idealistic imagined space that would be above politics; that would free it from the usual give and take and contests of politics. Local government would be held to a higher standard than other tiers of governance. For example, we take partisanship and competition to be central to politics elsewhere. But somehow we expected panchayats to be this font of consensus (some states give incentives for election by consensus). And, it has to be said, there was no serious demand side push for decentralisation.
The 73rd and 74th amendments did achieve a lot. In some areas, they led to the state acquiring a distinct presence on the ground; they gave millions of citizens identities as representatives; they provided a conduit for sharing power; they created deliberative spaces, led to the creation of new norms, especially around the participation of women and a churn in local elites. They slowly built up local capacities, and led to a wide range of functions being devolved to local government.
Local government was often the object of condescension: The general story we ran was that the state at lower tiers of government is incompetent, while you get a better state at the higher level. It is often the reverse: The state at local levels is competent, it is just constantly being let down by lack of support and investment from the top. Fiscal resources that local governments managed went up considerably, in part paradoxically through central schemes like NREGA, and increased finance commission awards. In some, the very pathologies associated with local elections were also a tribute to its success. The fact that local political competition became intense in many states, and in some cases, political spending in local elections acquired obscene proportions, was a backhanded tribute to the stakes in local governance.
The experience of local governments varies across states; it is more deeply practised and institutionalised in states like Kerala. But, as articles in a recent symposium on decentralisation in the March issue of Seminar magazine point out, the glass of decentralisation still remains at best half full. The tension between thinking of local government as mere administrative conduits versus autonomous political actors, the constraints placed on them by a combination of bureaucratic control and deliberate underinvestment in capacity, and the lack of political pathways for successful panchayat performers to rise in their parties, limit their salience.
Technology has been a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it can create local capacity; on the other, it has been used to largely bypass political negotiation and control. The lack of clarity over municipal governance, and the hijacking of cities by the political economy of contracting, makes the idea of cities being governed by some sort of collective deliberation a bit of a joke.
Local government requires many technical, administrative and financial fixes. There is a case to be made that the distinction between the 73rd and 74th amendments is now obsolete. Jayalalithaa, when she was chief minister, had first made the case for a unified district-level local government rather than a distinction between urban and rural. Many of the decisions consequential for India's urbanisation, like land use change, for example, are being made in "panchayats"; there is arbitrage over how a settlement gets classified, and rural and urban is now, at best, a continuum. There are many such discussions to be had. For years, so many colleagues at the Centre for Policy Research were engaged with these matters. But these issues now seem to belong to another time, even another country.
Based on the information presented in the passage, what can be true about the perception of local government in India?
I. Local government is often viewed as incompetent and inefficient compared to higher tiers of government.
II. Decentralization has led to the creation of new norms, including the participation of women and a churn in local elites.
III. The lack of support and investment from higher levels of government has contributed to the limitations of local governments.
Correct! The correct answer is D: All I, II and III. The passage states that local government is often viewed as incompetent (I), decentralization led to norms including women’s participation (II), and lack of top-level support limits local governments (III).
Meanings of the options:
1. Only II: “only statement II is true” || “केवल II सत्य है”
2. I and II: “statements I and II are true” || “I और II सत्य हैं”
3. II and III: “statements II and III are true” || “II और III सत्य हैं”
4. All I, II and III: “all three statements are true” || “सभी तीन कथन सत्य हैं”
5. None I, II and III: “none of the statements are true” || “कोई भी कथन सत्य नहीं है”
Question 2
This year is the 30th anniversary of the passing of the 73rd and 74th Amendments. Indian governance was always overcentralised. But it is a sign of the times that even the modest steps these amendments took towards decentralisation now seem to belong to an alien intellectual and political world. In a moment of authoritarian centralisation, the idea of deepening democracy by creating structures of inclusive governance seems like a pipe dream.
Indian democracy since Independence never really had a commitment to decentralisation. Despite performative obeisance to the idea by the state, decentralisation has always been hostage to a number of contradictory impulses. Initially, there was the presumption that centralised power would be required to break the power of local elites, never mind the fact that there is little evidence that the outcomes of decentralisation would have been worse than what we eventually got. The existing tiers of government, both central and state, wanted to hoard most of the resources. India has the lowest spending on local government as a proportion of resources. And the ideology of Gandhian decentralisation, oddly enough, militated against genuine political decentralisation.
For, in this imagination, decentralisation was not a devolution of power and resources. It was the creation of an idealistic imagined space that would be above politics; that would free it from the usual give and take and contests of politics. Local government would be held to a higher standard than other tiers of governance. For example, we take partisanship and competition to be central to politics elsewhere. But somehow we expected panchayats to be this font of consensus (some states give incentives for election by consensus). And, it has to be said, there was no serious demand side push for decentralisation.
The 73rd and 74th amendments did achieve a lot. In some areas, they led to the state acquiring a distinct presence on the ground; they gave millions of citizens identities as representatives; they provided a conduit for sharing power; they created deliberative spaces, led to the creation of new norms, especially around the participation of women and a churn in local elites. They slowly built up local capacities, and led to a wide range of functions being devolved to local government.
Local government was often the object of condescension: The general story we ran was that the state at lower tiers of government is incompetent, while you get a better state at the higher level. It is often the reverse: The state at local levels is competent, it is just constantly being let down by lack of support and investment from the top. Fiscal resources that local governments managed went up considerably, in part paradoxically through central schemes like NREGA, and increased finance commission awards. In some, the very pathologies associated with local elections were also a tribute to its success. The fact that local political competition became intense in many states, and in some cases, political spending in local elections acquired obscene proportions, was a backhanded tribute to the stakes in local governance.
The experience of local governments varies across states; it is more deeply practised and institutionalised in states like Kerala. But, as articles in a recent symposium on decentralisation in the March issue of Seminar magazine point out, the glass of decentralisation still remains at best half full. The tension between thinking of local government as mere administrative conduits versus autonomous political actors, the constraints placed on them by a combination of bureaucratic control and deliberate underinvestment in capacity, and the lack of political pathways for successful panchayat performers to rise in their parties, limit their salience.
Technology has been a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it can create local capacity; on the other, it has been used to largely bypass political negotiation and control. The lack of clarity over municipal governance, and the hijacking of cities by the political economy of contracting, makes the idea of cities being governed by some sort of collective deliberation a bit of a joke.
Local government requires many technical, administrative and financial fixes. There is a case to be made that the distinction between the 73rd and 74th amendments is now obsolete. Jayalalithaa, when she was chief minister, had first made the case for a unified district-level local government rather than a distinction between urban and rural. Many of the decisions consequential for India's urbanisation, like land use change, for example, are being made in "panchayats"; there is arbitrage over how a settlement gets classified, and rural and urban is now, at best, a continuum. There are many such discussions to be had. For years, so many colleagues at the Centre for Policy Research were engaged with these matters. But these issues now seem to belong to another time, even another country.
“However, the increased power of local elites and their capture of institutions, combined with the limited investment from higher levels of government, has led to challenges in terms of accountability, transparency, and the delivery of basic services.” Which of the following inferences can be drawn from the above statement?
Correct! The correct answer is A: The limited investment from higher levels of government has led to the increased power of local elites and their capture of institutions. The statement directly links limited investment to increased power of local elites.
Meanings of the options:
1. The limited investment from higher levels of government has led to the increased power of local elites and their capture of institutions: “limited investment leads to elite capture” || “सीमित निवेश से स्थानीय अभिजात वर्ग की शक्ति बढ़ी”
2. The challenges in terms of accountability, transparency, and the delivery of basic services are due to the participation of women in local government: “challenges due to women’s participation” || “चुनौतियाँ महिलाओं की भागीदारी के कारण”
3. The decentralization process has been successful in delivering basic services to the local population: “decentralization successful in delivering services” || “विकेंद्रीकरण सेवाएँ देने में सफल रहा”
4. The capture of institutions by local elites has not led to any negative consequences in terms of accountability and transparency: “no negative consequences of elite capture” || “अभिजात वर्ग के कब्जे का कोई नकारात्मक परिणाम नहीं”
5. Higher levels of government have fully supported the decentralization process and provided necessary investment: “full support from higher government” || “उच्च सरकार का पूर्ण समर्थन”
Question 3
This year is the 30th anniversary of the passing of the 73rd and 74th Amendments. Indian governance was always overcentralised. But it is a sign of the times that even the modest steps these amendments took towards decentralisation now seem to belong to an alien intellectual and political world. In a moment of authoritarian centralisation, the idea of deepening democracy by creating structures of inclusive governance seems like a pipe dream.
Indian democracy since Independence never really had a commitment to decentralisation. Despite performative obeisance to the idea by the state, decentralisation has always been hostage to a number of contradictory impulses. Initially, there was the presumption that centralised power would be required to break the power of local elites, never mind the fact that there is little evidence that the outcomes of decentralisation would have been worse than what we eventually got. The existing tiers of government, both central and state, wanted to hoard most of the resources. India has the lowest spending on local government as a proportion of resources. And the ideology of Gandhian decentralisation, oddly enough, militated against genuine political decentralisation.
For, in this imagination, decentralisation was not a devolution of power and resources. It was the creation of an idealistic imagined space that would be above politics; that would free it from the usual give and take and contests of politics. Local government would be held to a higher standard than other tiers of governance. For example, we take partisanship and competition to be central to politics elsewhere. But somehow we expected panchayats to be this font of consensus (some states give incentives for election by consensus). And, it has to be said, there was no serious demand side push for decentralisation.
The 73rd and 74th amendments did achieve a lot. In some areas, they led to the state acquiring a distinct presence on the ground; they gave millions of citizens identities as representatives; they provided a conduit for sharing power; they created deliberative spaces, led to the creation of new norms, especially around the participation of women and a churn in local elites. They slowly built up local capacities, and led to a wide range of functions being devolved to local government.
Local government was often the object of condescension: The general story we ran was that the state at lower tiers of government is incompetent, while you get a better state at the higher level. It is often the reverse: The state at local levels is competent, it is just constantly being let down by lack of support and investment from the top. Fiscal resources that local governments managed went up considerably, in part paradoxically through central schemes like NREGA, and increased finance commission awards. In some, the very pathologies associated with local elections were also a tribute to its success. The fact that local political competition became intense in many states, and in some cases, political spending in local elections acquired obscene proportions, was a backhanded tribute to the stakes in local governance.
The experience of local governments varies across states; it is more deeply practised and institutionalised in states like Kerala. But, as articles in a recent symposium on decentralisation in the March issue of Seminar magazine point out, the glass of decentralisation still remains at best half full. The tension between thinking of local government as mere administrative conduits versus autonomous political actors, the constraints placed on them by a combination of bureaucratic control and deliberate underinvestment in capacity, and the lack of political pathways for successful panchayat performers to rise in their parties, limit their salience.
Technology has been a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it can create local capacity; on the other, it has been used to largely bypass political negotiation and control. The lack of clarity over municipal governance, and the hijacking of cities by the political economy of contracting, makes the idea of cities being governed by some sort of collective deliberation a bit of a joke.
Local government requires many technical, administrative and financial fixes. There is a case to be made that the distinction between the 73rd and 74th amendments is now obsolete. Jayalalithaa, when she was chief minister, had first made the case for a unified district-level local government rather than a distinction between urban and rural. Many of the decisions consequential for India's urbanisation, like land use change, for example, are being made in "panchayats"; there is arbitrage over how a settlement gets classified, and rural and urban is now, at best, a continuum. There are many such discussions to be had. For years, so many colleagues at the Centre for Policy Research were engaged with these matters. But these issues now seem to belong to another time, even another country.
Which of the following statements can be concluded from the passage about the challenges faced by local governments in India?
I. The glass of decentralisation is half full in India.
II. Local governments have limited autonomy, capacity and political representation.
III. Municipal governance is clear and effective in most Indian cities.
Correct! The correct answer is A: I and II. Statement I is true as the passage says the glass is half full. Statement II is true as local governments face limited autonomy and capacity. Statement III is false as municipal governance lacks clarity.
Meanings of the options:
1. I and II: “statements I and II can be concluded” || “I और II निष्कर्ष निकाले जा सकते हैं”
2. II and III: “statements II and III can be concluded” || “II और III निष्कर्ष निकाले जा सकते हैं”
3. I and III: “statements I and III can be concluded” || “I और III निष्कर्ष निकाले जा सकते हैं”
4. All I, II and III: “all three statements can be concluded” || “सभी तीन कथन निष्कर्ष निकाले जा सकते हैं”
5. None of I, II and III: “none of the statements can be concluded” || “कोई भी कथन निष्कर्ष नहीं निकाला जा सकता”
Question 4
This year is the 30th anniversary of the passing of the 73rd and 74th Amendments. Indian governance was always overcentralised. But it is a sign of the times that even the modest steps these amendments took towards decentralisation now seem to belong to an alien intellectual and political world. In a moment of authoritarian centralisation, the idea of deepening democracy by creating structures of inclusive governance seems like a pipe dream.
Indian democracy since Independence never really had a commitment to decentralisation. Despite performative obeisance to the idea by the state, decentralisation has always been hostage to a number of contradictory impulses. Initially, there was the presumption that centralised power would be required to break the power of local elites, never mind the fact that there is little evidence that the outcomes of decentralisation would have been worse than what we eventually got. The existing tiers of government, both central and state, wanted to hoard most of the resources. India has the lowest spending on local government as a proportion of resources. And the ideology of Gandhian decentralisation, oddly enough, militated against genuine political decentralisation.
For, in this imagination, decentralisation was not a devolution of power and resources. It was the creation of an idealistic imagined space that would be above politics; that would free it from the usual give and take and contests of politics. Local government would be held to a higher standard than other tiers of governance. For example, we take partisanship and competition to be central to politics elsewhere. But somehow we expected panchayats to be this font of consensus (some states give incentives for election by consensus). And, it has to be said, there was no serious demand side push for decentralisation.
The 73rd and 74th amendments did achieve a lot. In some areas, they led to the state acquiring a distinct presence on the ground; they gave millions of citizens identities as representatives; they provided a conduit for sharing power; they created deliberative spaces, led to the creation of new norms, especially around the participation of women and a churn in local elites. They slowly built up local capacities, and led to a wide range of functions being devolved to local government.
Local government was often the object of condescension: The general story we ran was that the state at lower tiers of government is incompetent, while you get a better state at the higher level. It is often the reverse: The state at local levels is competent, it is just constantly being let down by lack of support and investment from the top. Fiscal resources that local governments managed went up considerably, in part paradoxically through central schemes like NREGA, and increased finance commission awards. In some, the very pathologies associated with local elections were also a tribute to its success. The fact that local political competition became intense in many states, and in some cases, political spending in local elections acquired obscene proportions, was a backhanded tribute to the stakes in local governance.
The experience of local governments varies across states; it is more deeply practised and institutionalised in states like Kerala. But, as articles in a recent symposium on decentralisation in the March issue of Seminar magazine point out, the glass of decentralisation still remains at best half full. The tension between thinking of local government as mere administrative conduits versus autonomous political actors, the constraints placed on them by a combination of bureaucratic control and deliberate underinvestment in capacity, and the lack of political pathways for successful panchayat performers to rise in their parties, limit their salience.
Technology has been a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it can create local capacity; on the other, it has been used to largely bypass political negotiation and control. The lack of clarity over municipal governance, and the hijacking of cities by the political economy of contracting, makes the idea of cities being governed by some sort of collective deliberation a bit of a joke.
Local government requires many technical, administrative and financial fixes. There is a case to be made that the distinction between the 73rd and 74th amendments is now obsolete. Jayalalithaa, when she was chief minister, had first made the case for a unified district-level local government rather than a distinction between urban and rural. Many of the decisions consequential for India's urbanisation, like land use change, for example, are being made in "panchayats"; there is arbitrage over how a settlement gets classified, and rural and urban is now, at best, a continuum. There are many such discussions to be had. For years, so many colleagues at the Centre for Policy Research were engaged with these matters. But these issues now seem to belong to another time, even another country.
What is the tone of the author in the following paragraph?
This year is the 30th anniversary of the passing of the 73rd and 74th Amendments. Indian governance was always overcentralised. But it is a sign of the times that even the modest steps these amendments took towards decentralisation now seem to belong to an alien intellectual and political world. In a moment of authoritarian centralisation, the idea of deepening democracy by creating structures of inclusive governance seems like a pipe dream.
Correct! The correct answer is C: Pessimistic. The author expresses despair about decentralisation, calling it a “pipe dream,” indicating a pessimistic tone.
Meanings of the options:
1. Critical: “expressing disapproval” || “आलोचनात्मक”
2. Optimistic: “hopeful about the future” || “आशावादी”
3. Pessimistic: “expecting the worst” || “निराशावादी”
4. Indifferent: “having no interest or concern” || “उदासीन”
5. Sarcastic: “using irony to mock” || “व्यंग्यात्मक”
Question 5
This year is the 30th anniversary of the passing of the 73rd and 74th Amendments. Indian governance was always overcentralised. But it is a sign of the times that even the modest steps these amendments took towards decentralisation now seem to belong to an alien intellectual and political world. In a moment of authoritarian centralisation, the idea of deepening democracy by creating structures of inclusive governance seems like a pipe dream.
Indian democracy since Independence never really had a commitment to decentralisation. Despite performative obeisance to the idea by the state, decentralisation has always been hostage to a number of contradictory impulses. Initially, there was the presumption that centralised power would be required to break the power of local elites, never mind the fact that there is little evidence that the outcomes of decentralisation would have been worse than what we eventually got. The existing tiers of government, both central and state, wanted to hoard most of the resources. India has the lowest spending on local government as a proportion of resources. And the ideology of Gandhian decentralisation, oddly enough, militated against genuine political decentralisation.
For, in this imagination, decentralisation was not a devolution of power and resources. It was the creation of an idealistic imagined space that would be above politics; that would free it from the usual give and take and contests of politics. Local government would be held to a higher standard than other tiers of governance. For example, we take partisanship and competition to be central to politics elsewhere. But somehow we expected panchayats to be this font of consensus (some states give incentives for election by consensus). And, it has to be said, there was no serious demand side push for decentralisation.
The 73rd and 74th amendments did achieve a lot. In some areas, they led to the state acquiring a distinct presence on the ground; they gave millions of citizens identities as representatives; they provided a conduit for sharing power; they created deliberative spaces, led to the creation of new norms, especially around the participation of women and a churn in local elites. They slowly built up local capacities, and led to a wide range of functions being devolved to local government.
Local government was often the object of condescension: The general story we ran was that the state at lower tiers of government is incompetent, while you get a better state at the higher level. It is often the reverse: The state at local levels is competent, it is just constantly being let down by lack of support and investment from the top. Fiscal resources that local governments managed went up considerably, in part paradoxically through central schemes like NREGA, and increased finance commission awards. In some, the very pathologies associated with local elections were also a tribute to its success. The fact that local political competition became intense in many states, and in some cases, political spending in local elections acquired obscene proportions, was a backhanded tribute to the stakes in local governance.
The experience of local governments varies across states; it is more deeply practised and institutionalised in states like Kerala. But, as articles in a recent symposium on decentralisation in the March issue of Seminar magazine point out, the glass of decentralisation still remains at best half full. The tension between thinking of local government as mere administrative conduits versus autonomous political actors, the constraints placed on them by a combination of bureaucratic control and deliberate underinvestment in capacity, and the lack of political pathways for successful panchayat performers to rise in their parties, limit their salience.
Technology has been a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it can create local capacity; on the other, it has been used to largely bypass political negotiation and control. The lack of clarity over municipal governance, and the hijacking of cities by the political economy of contracting, makes the idea of cities being governed by some sort of collective deliberation a bit of a joke.
Local government requires many technical, administrative and financial fixes. There is a case to be made that the distinction between the 73rd and 74th amendments is now obsolete. Jayalalithaa, when she was chief minister, had first made the case for a unified district-level local government rather than a distinction between urban and rural. Many of the decisions consequential for India's urbanisation, like land use change, for example, are being made in "panchayats"; there is arbitrage over how a settlement gets classified, and rural and urban is now, at best, a continuum. There are many such discussions to be had. For years, so many colleagues at the Centre for Policy Research were engaged with these matters. But these issues now seem to belong to another time, even another country.
What is the meaning of the idiom ‘double-edged sword’ in the context of the passage?
Correct! The correct answer is D: Technology has been both a tool for local development and a means of bypassing political control. The idiom refers to technology having both positive and negative effects.
Meanings of the options:
1. The positive and negative effects of technology are like a sharp and dangerous sword: “technology has sharp and dangerous effects” || “तकनीक के तेज और खतरनाक प्रभाव”
2. The lack of clarity in municipal governance has made technology a risky tool to use: “technology is risky due to lack of clarity” || “स्पष्टता की कमी के कारण तकनीक जोखिम भरी है”
3. The use of technology in cities has been a joke due to the political economy of contracting: “technology use is a joke” || “तकनीक का उपयोग मजाक है”
4. Technology has been both a tool for local development and a means of bypassing political control: “technology helps development but bypasses political control” || “तकनीक विकास में सहायक है लेकिन राजनीतिक नियंत्रण को दरकिनार करती है”
5. The double-edged sword of technology has made collective deliberation a difficult task: “technology makes deliberation difficult” || “तकनीक सामूहिक विचार-विमर्श को कठिन बनाती है”
Question 6
This year is the 30th anniversary of the passing of the 73rd and 74th Amendments. Indian governance was always overcentralised. But it is a sign of the times that even the modest steps these amendments took towards decentralisation now seem to belong to an alien intellectual and political world. In a moment of authoritarian centralisation, the idea of deepening democracy by creating structures of inclusive governance seems like a pipe dream.
Indian democracy since Independence never really had a commitment to decentralisation. Despite performative obeisance to the idea by the state, decentralisation has always been hostage to a number of contradictory impulses. Initially, there was the presumption that centralised power would be required to break the power of local elites, never mind the fact that there is little evidence that the outcomes of decentralisation would have been worse than what we eventually got. The existing tiers of government, both central and state, wanted to hoard most of the resources. India has the lowest spending on local government as a proportion of resources. And the ideology of Gandhian decentralisation, oddly enough, militated against genuine political decentralisation.
For, in this imagination, decentralisation was not a devolution of power and resources. It was the creation of an idealistic imagined space that would be above politics; that would free it from the usual give and take and contests of politics. Local government would be held to a higher standard than other tiers of governance. For example, we take partisanship and competition to be central to politics elsewhere. But somehow we expected panchayats to be this font of consensus (some states give incentives for election by consensus). And, it has to be said, there was no serious demand side push for decentralisation.
The 73rd and 74th amendments did achieve a lot. In some areas, they led to the state acquiring a distinct presence on the ground; they gave millions of citizens identities as representatives; they provided a conduit for sharing power; they created deliberative spaces, led to the creation of new norms, especially around the participation of women and a churn in local elites. They slowly built up local capacities, and led to a wide range of functions being devolved to local government.
Local government was often the object of condescension: The general story we ran was that the state at lower tiers of government is incompetent, while you get a better state at the higher level. It is often the reverse: The state at local levels is competent, it is just constantly being let down by lack of support and investment from the top. Fiscal resources that local governments managed went up considerably, in part paradoxically through central schemes like NREGA, and increased finance commission awards. In some, the very pathologies associated with local elections were also a tribute to its success. The fact that local political competition became intense in many states, and in some cases, political spending in local elections acquired obscene proportions, was a backhanded tribute to the stakes in local governance.
The experience of local governments varies across states; it is more deeply practised and institutionalised in states like Kerala. But, as articles in a recent symposium on decentralisation in the March issue of Seminar magazine point out, the glass of decentralisation still remains at best half full. The tension between thinking of local government as mere administrative conduits versus autonomous political actors, the constraints placed on them by a combination of bureaucratic control and deliberate underinvestment in capacity, and the lack of political pathways for successful panchayat performers to rise in their parties, limit their salience.
Technology has been a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it can create local capacity; on the other, it has been used to largely bypass political negotiation and control. The lack of clarity over municipal governance, and the hijacking of cities by the political economy of contracting, makes the idea of cities being governed by some sort of collective deliberation a bit of a joke.
Local government requires many technical, administrative and financial fixes. There is a case to be made that the distinction between the 73rd and 74th amendments is now obsolete. Jayalalithaa, when she was chief minister, had first made the case for a unified district-level local government rather than a distinction between urban and rural. Many of the decisions consequential for India's urbanisation, like land use change, for example, are being made in "panchayats"; there is arbitrage over how a settlement gets classified, and rural and urban is now, at best, a continuum. There are many such discussions to be had. For years, so many colleagues at the Centre for Policy Research were engaged with these matters. But these issues now seem to belong to another time, even another country.
What is the near synonym of the word ‘salience’ as used in the passage?
Correct! The correct answer is C: Prominence. “Salience” means importance or prominence, and “prominence” is its near synonym.
Meanings of the options:
1. Irrelevance: “lack of importance” || “अप्रासंगिकता”
2. Inconsequentiality: “unimportance” || “तुच्छता”
3. Prominence: “importance or noticeability” || “प्रमुखता”
4. Insignificance: “unimportance” || “तुच्छता”
5. Triviality: “unimportance” || “तुच्छता”
Question 7
This year is the 30th anniversary of the passing of the 73rd and 74th Amendments. Indian governance was always overcentralised. But it is a sign of the times that even the modest steps these amendments took towards decentralisation now seem to belong to an alien intellectual and political world. In a moment of authoritarian centralisation, the idea of deepening democracy by creating structures of inclusive governance seems like a pipe dream.
Indian democracy since Independence never really had a commitment to decentralisation. Despite performative obeisance to the idea by the state, decentralisation has always been hostage to a number of contradictory impulses. Initially, there was the presumption that centralised power would be required to break the power of local elites, never mind the fact that there is little evidence that the outcomes of decentralisation would have been worse than what we eventually got. The existing tiers of government, both central and state, wanted to hoard most of the resources. India has the lowest spending on local government as a proportion of resources. And the ideology of Gandhian decentralisation, oddly enough, militated against genuine political decentralisation.
For, in this imagination, decentralisation was not a devolution of power and resources. It was the creation of an idealistic imagined space that would be above politics; that would free it from the usual give and take and contests of politics. Local government would be held to a higher standard than other tiers of governance. For example, we take partisanship and competition to be central to politics elsewhere. But somehow we expected panchayats to be this font of consensus (some states give incentives for election by consensus). And, it has to be said, there was no serious demand side push for decentralisation.
The 73rd and 74th amendments did achieve a lot. In some areas, they led to the state acquiring a distinct presence on the ground; they gave millions of citizens identities as representatives; they provided a conduit for sharing power; they created deliberative spaces, led to the creation of new norms, especially around the participation of women and a churn in local elites. They slowly built up local capacities, and led to a wide range of functions being devolved to local government.
Local government was often the object of condescension: The general story we ran was that the state at lower tiers of government is incompetent, while you get a better state at the higher level. It is often the reverse: The state at local levels is competent, it is just constantly being let down by lack of support and investment from the top. Fiscal resources that local governments managed went up considerably, in part paradoxically through central schemes like NREGA, and increased finance commission awards. In some, the very pathologies associated with local elections were also a tribute to its success. The fact that local political competition became intense in many states, and in some cases, political spending in local elections acquired obscene proportions, was a backhanded tribute to the stakes in local governance.
The experience of local governments varies across states; it is more deeply practised and institutionalised in states like Kerala. But, as articles in a recent symposium on decentralisation in the March issue of Seminar magazine point out, the glass of decentralisation still remains at best half full. The tension between thinking of local government as mere administrative conduits versus autonomous political actors, the constraints placed on them by a combination of bureaucratic control and deliberate underinvestment in capacity, and the lack of political pathways for successful panchayat performers to rise in their parties, limit their salience.
Technology has been a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it can create local capacity; on the other, it has been used to largely bypass political negotiation and control. The lack of clarity over municipal governance, and the hijacking of cities by the political economy of contracting, makes the idea of cities being governed by some sort of collective deliberation a bit of a joke.
Local government requires many technical, administrative and financial fixes. There is a case to be made that the distinction between the 73rd and 74th amendments is now obsolete. Jayalalithaa, when she was chief minister, had first made the case for a unified district-level local government rather than a distinction between urban and rural. Many of the decisions consequential for India's urbanisation, like land use change, for example, are being made in "panchayats"; there is arbitrage over how a settlement gets classified, and rural and urban is now, at best, a continuum. There are many such discussions to be had. For years, so many colleagues at the Centre for Policy Research were engaged with these matters. But these issues now seem to belong to another time, even another country.
What is a near synonym for the word “obscene” as used in the passage?
Correct! The correct answer is B: Indecent. “Obscene” in the context means unacceptable or inappropriate, and “indecent” is its near synonym.
Meanings of the options:
1. Vulgar: “lacking sophistication or good taste” || “आपत्तिजनक”
2. Indecent: “not proper or appropriate” || “अनुचित”
3. Respectable: “proper and appropriate” || “सम्माननीय”
4. Vile: “extremely unpleasant” || “घृणित”
5. Raunchy: “vulgar or sexually explicit” || “अश्लील”
Question 8
Around 20,000 eclipse chasers gathered under a cloudless sky in the northwest Australian coastal town of Exmouth to enjoy a rare total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
The remote tourist town with fewer than 3,000 residents was promoted as one of the best vantage points in Australia to see the eclipse that also crosses remote parts of Indonesia and East Timor.
An international crowd had been gathering at Exmouth for days, camping in tents and trailers on a red, dusty plain on the edge of town with cameras and other viewing equipment pointed skyward.
In Indonesia's capital, hundreds came to the Jakarta Planetarium to see the partial eclipse, obscured by clouds.
Azka Azzahra, 21, came with her sister and friends to get a closer look by using the telescopes with hundreds of other visitors. "I am still happy to come even though it is cloudy. It is happy to see how people with high enthusiasm come here to see the eclipse, because it is rare," Ms. Azzahra said.
The call to prayer resounded from the city's mosques when the eclipse phase began as Muslims said eclipse prayers as a reminder of God's greatness.
NASA astronomer Henry Throop was among those at Exmouth loudly cheering the eclipse in the darkness. "Isn't it incredible? This is so fantastic. It was mind-blowing. It was so sharp and it was so bright. You could see the corona around the sun there," the visibly excited Washington resident told Australian Broadcasting Corp.
"It's only a minute long, but it really felt like a long time. There's nothing else you can see which looks like that. It was just awesome. Spectacular. And then you could see Jupiter and Mercury and to be able to see those at the same time during the day — even seeing Mercury at all is pretty rare. So that was just awesome," Mr. Throop added.
The hybrid solar eclipse tracked from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and was mostly over water.
The lucky few people in its path either saw the darkness of a total eclipse or a "ring of fire" as the sun peeked from behind the new moon.
Such celestial events happen about once every decade: The last one was in 2013 and the next one isn't until 2031.
They occur when Earth is in the "sweet spot" so the new moon and the sun are almost the exact same size in the sky, said NASA solar expert Michael Kirk.
At some points, the moon is a little closer and blocks out the sun in a total eclipse. But when the moon is a little farther away, it lets some of the sun's light peek out in an annular eclipse.
"It's a crazy phenomenon," Mr. Kirk said. "You're actually watching the moon get larger in the sky."
Several other upcoming solar eclipses will be easier to catch. An annular eclipse in mid-October and a total eclipse next April will both cross over millions of people in the Americas.
What was the experience of people in Exmouth during the solar eclipse?
Correct! The correct answer is B: They were able to see the total solar eclipse for about a minute. The passage states that people gathered under a cloudless sky and enjoyed a total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
Meanings of the options:
1. They were disappointed due to cloudy weather: “disappointed because of clouds” || “बादलों के कारण निराश”
2. They were able to see the total solar eclipse for about a minute: “saw total eclipse for a minute” || “लगभग एक मिनट के लिए पूर्ण सूर्य ग्रहण देखा”
3. They only saw a partial eclipse: “only saw partial eclipse” || “केवल आंशिक ग्रहण देखा”
4. They were unable to view the eclipse due to equipment failure: “couldn’t view due to equipment failure” || “उपकरण विफलता के कारण देख नहीं सके”
5. None of the above: “not any of the above” || “उपरोक्त में से कोई नहीं”
Question 9
Around 20,000 eclipse chasers gathered under a cloudless sky in the northwest Australian coastal town of Exmouth to enjoy a rare total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
The remote tourist town with fewer than 3,000 residents was promoted as one of the best vantage points in Australia to see the eclipse that also crosses remote parts of Indonesia and East Timor.
An international crowd had been gathering at Exmouth for days, camping in tents and trailers on a red, dusty plain on the edge of town with cameras and other viewing equipment pointed skyward.
In Indonesia's capital, hundreds came to the Jakarta Planetarium to see the partial eclipse, obscured by clouds.
Azka Azzahra, 21, came with her sister and friends to get a closer look by using the telescopes with hundreds of other visitors. "I am still happy to come even though it is cloudy. It is happy to see how people with high enthusiasm come here to see the eclipse, because it is rare," Ms. Azzahra said.
The call to prayer resounded from the city's mosques when the eclipse phase began as Muslims said eclipse prayers as a reminder of God's greatness.
NASA astronomer Henry Throop was among those at Exmouth loudly cheering the eclipse in the darkness. "Isn't it incredible? This is so fantastic. It was mind-blowing. It was so sharp and it was so bright. You could see the corona around the sun there," the visibly excited Washington resident told Australian Broadcasting Corp.
"It's only a minute long, but it really felt like a long time. There's nothing else you can see which looks like that. It was just awesome. Spectacular. And then you could see Jupiter and Mercury and to be able to see those at the same time during the day — even seeing Mercury at all is pretty rare. So that was just awesome," Mr. Throop added.
The hybrid solar eclipse tracked from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and was mostly over water.
The lucky few people in its path either saw the darkness of a total eclipse or a "ring of fire" as the sun peeked from behind the new moon.
Such celestial events happen about once every decade: The last one was in 2013 and the next one isn't until 2031.
They occur when Earth is in the "sweet spot" so the new moon and the sun are almost the exact same size in the sky, said NASA solar expert Michael Kirk.
At some points, the moon is a little closer and blocks out the sun in a total eclipse. But when the moon is a little farther away, it lets some of the sun's light peek out in an annular eclipse.
"It's a crazy phenomenon," Mr. Kirk said. "You're actually watching the moon get larger in the sky."
Several other upcoming solar eclipses will be easier to catch. An annular eclipse in mid-October and a total eclipse next April will both cross over millions of people in the Americas.
What can be inferred about the term “ring of fire” in the context of the passage?
Correct! The correct answer is E: The bright halo-like ring around the moon during a solar eclipse. The passage describes a “ring of fire” as the sun peeked from behind the new moon, forming a bright halo-like ring.
Meanings of the options:
1. The total darkness during a solar eclipse: “total darkness” || “पूर्ण अंधकार”
2. The moment when the moon and sun are the exact same size in the sky: “moon and sun same size” || “चंद्रमा और सूर्य समान आकार”
3. The phenomenon when the moon blocks out some of the sun’s light during an eclipse: “moon blocks some sunlight” || “चंद्रमा कुछ सूर्य प्रकाश को रोकता है”
4. The moment when the moon is a little farther away and lets some of the sun’s light peek out: “moon farther away lets light peek” || “चंद्रमा दूर होने पर प्रकाश झलकता है”
5. The bright halo-like ring around the moon during a solar eclipse: “bright halo-like ring” || “चंद्रमा के चारों ओर चमकीला प्रभामंडल”
Question 10
Around 20,000 eclipse chasers gathered under a cloudless sky in the northwest Australian coastal town of Exmouth to enjoy a rare total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
The remote tourist town with fewer than 3,000 residents was promoted as one of the best vantage points in Australia to see the eclipse that also crosses remote parts of Indonesia and East Timor.
An international crowd had been gathering at Exmouth for days, camping in tents and trailers on a red, dusty plain on the edge of town with cameras and other viewing equipment pointed skyward.
In Indonesia's capital, hundreds came to the Jakarta Planetarium to see the partial eclipse, obscured by clouds.
Azka Azzahra, 21, came with her sister and friends to get a closer look by using the telescopes with hundreds of other visitors. "I am still happy to come even though it is cloudy. It is happy to see how people with high enthusiasm come here to see the eclipse, because it is rare," Ms. Azzahra said.
The call to prayer resounded from the city's mosques when the eclipse phase began as Muslims said eclipse prayers as a reminder of God's greatness.
NASA astronomer Henry Throop was among those at Exmouth loudly cheering the eclipse in the darkness. "Isn't it incredible? This is so fantastic. It was mind-blowing. It was so sharp and it was so bright. You could see the corona around the sun there," the visibly excited Washington resident told Australian Broadcasting Corp.
"It's only a minute long, but it really felt like a long time. There's nothing else you can see which looks like that. It was just awesome. Spectacular. And then you could see Jupiter and Mercury and to be able to see those at the same time during the day — even seeing Mercury at all is pretty rare. So that was just awesome," Mr. Throop added.
The hybrid solar eclipse tracked from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and was mostly over water.
The lucky few people in its path either saw the darkness of a total eclipse or a "ring of fire" as the sun peeked from behind the new moon.
Such celestial events happen about once every decade: The last one was in 2013 and the next one isn't until 2031.
They occur when Earth is in the "sweet spot" so the new moon and the sun are almost the exact same size in the sky, said NASA solar expert Michael Kirk.
At some points, the moon is a little closer and blocks out the sun in a total eclipse. But when the moon is a little farther away, it lets some of the sun's light peek out in an annular eclipse.
"It's a crazy phenomenon," Mr. Kirk said. "You're actually watching the moon get larger in the sky."
Several other upcoming solar eclipses will be easier to catch. An annular eclipse in mid-October and a total eclipse next April will both cross over millions of people in the Americas.
Which of the following statements about the solar eclipse discussed in the passage is false?
Correct! The correct answer is E: Solar eclipses happen only when the sun and the moon are the exact same size in the sky. The passage states they are “almost the exact same size,” not exactly the same, and eclipses can also be annular or partial.
Meanings of the options:
1. The solar eclipse occurred in Australia, Indonesia, and East Timor: “eclipse occurred in these countries” || “सूर्य ग्रहण इन देशों में हुआ”
2. The town of Exmouth was promoted as one of the best vantage points to see the eclipse in Australia: “Exmouth promoted as best vantage point” || “एक्समाउथ को सर्वोत्तम देखने का स्थान बताया गया”
3. The solar eclipse can be tracked from both land and water: “eclipse tracked from land and water” || “सूर्य ग्रहण को भूमि और जल दोनों से देखा जा सकता है”
4. The last solar eclipse happened in 2013 and the next one will occur in 2031: “last eclipse in 2013, next in 2031” || “अंतिम ग्रहण 2013 में, अगला 2031 में”
5. Solar eclipses happen only when the sun and the moon are the exact same size in the sky: “eclipses happen only when sun and moon are exact same size” || “सूर्य ग्रहण केवल तब होते हैं जब सूर्य और चंद्रमा आकार में बिल्कुल समान हों”
Question 11
Around 20,000 eclipse chasers gathered under a cloudless sky in the northwest Australian coastal town of Exmouth to enjoy a rare total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
The remote tourist town with fewer than 3,000 residents was promoted as one of the best vantage points in Australia to see the eclipse that also crosses remote parts of Indonesia and East Timor.
An international crowd had been gathering at Exmouth for days, camping in tents and trailers on a red, dusty plain on the edge of town with cameras and other viewing equipment pointed skyward.
In Indonesia's capital, hundreds came to the Jakarta Planetarium to see the partial eclipse, obscured by clouds.
Azka Azzahra, 21, came with her sister and friends to get a closer look by using the telescopes with hundreds of other visitors. "I am still happy to come even though it is cloudy. It is happy to see how people with high enthusiasm come here to see the eclipse, because it is rare," Ms. Azzahra said.
The call to prayer resounded from the city's mosques when the eclipse phase began as Muslims said eclipse prayers as a reminder of God's greatness.
NASA astronomer Henry Throop was among those at Exmouth loudly cheering the eclipse in the darkness. "Isn't it incredible? This is so fantastic. It was mind-blowing. It was so sharp and it was so bright. You could see the corona around the sun there," the visibly excited Washington resident told Australian Broadcasting Corp.
"It's only a minute long, but it really felt like a long time. There's nothing else you can see which looks like that. It was just awesome. Spectacular. And then you could see Jupiter and Mercury and to be able to see those at the same time during the day — even seeing Mercury at all is pretty rare. So that was just awesome," Mr. Throop added.
The hybrid solar eclipse tracked from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and was mostly over water.
The lucky few people in its path either saw the darkness of a total eclipse or a "ring of fire" as the sun peeked from behind the new moon.
Such celestial events happen about once every decade: The last one was in 2013 and the next one isn't until 2031.
They occur when Earth is in the "sweet spot" so the new moon and the sun are almost the exact same size in the sky, said NASA solar expert Michael Kirk.
At some points, the moon is a little closer and blocks out the sun in a total eclipse. But when the moon is a little farther away, it lets some of the sun's light peek out in an annular eclipse.
"It's a crazy phenomenon," Mr. Kirk said. "You're actually watching the moon get larger in the sky."
Several other upcoming solar eclipses will be easier to catch. An annular eclipse in mid-October and a total eclipse next April will both cross over millions of people in the Americas.
What can be inferred about the people who gathered in Exmouth to watch the total solar eclipse?
I. They were all from Australia
II. They had come prepared with viewing equipment
III. They were all Muslims observing eclipse prayers
Correct! The correct answer is B: Only II. The passage states the crowd was international (so I is false), and they had viewing equipment (II is true). III is false as not all were Muslims.
Meanings of the options:
1. Only I: “only statement I is true” || “केवल I सत्य है”
2. Only II: “only statement II is true” || “केवल II सत्य है”
3. Only I and II: “statements I and II are true” || “I और II सत्य हैं”
4. Only II and III: “statements II and III are true” || “II और III सत्य हैं”
5. All of the above: “all three statements are true” || “सभी तीन कथन सत्य हैं”
Question 12
Around 20,000 eclipse chasers gathered under a cloudless sky in the northwest Australian coastal town of Exmouth to enjoy a rare total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
The remote tourist town with fewer than 3,000 residents was promoted as one of the best vantage points in Australia to see the eclipse that also crosses remote parts of Indonesia and East Timor.
An international crowd had been gathering at Exmouth for days, camping in tents and trailers on a red, dusty plain on the edge of town with cameras and other viewing equipment pointed skyward.
In Indonesia's capital, hundreds came to the Jakarta Planetarium to see the partial eclipse, obscured by clouds.
Azka Azzahra, 21, came with her sister and friends to get a closer look by using the telescopes with hundreds of other visitors. "I am still happy to come even though it is cloudy. It is happy to see how people with high enthusiasm come here to see the eclipse, because it is rare," Ms. Azzahra said.
The call to prayer resounded from the city's mosques when the eclipse phase began as Muslims said eclipse prayers as a reminder of God's greatness.
NASA astronomer Henry Throop was among those at Exmouth loudly cheering the eclipse in the darkness. "Isn't it incredible? This is so fantastic. It was mind-blowing. It was so sharp and it was so bright. You could see the corona around the sun there," the visibly excited Washington resident told Australian Broadcasting Corp.
"It's only a minute long, but it really felt like a long time. There's nothing else you can see which looks like that. It was just awesome. Spectacular. And then you could see Jupiter and Mercury and to be able to see those at the same time during the day — even seeing Mercury at all is pretty rare. So that was just awesome," Mr. Throop added.
The hybrid solar eclipse tracked from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and was mostly over water.
The lucky few people in its path either saw the darkness of a total eclipse or a "ring of fire" as the sun peeked from behind the new moon.
Such celestial events happen about once every decade: The last one was in 2013 and the next one isn't until 2031.
They occur when Earth is in the "sweet spot" so the new moon and the sun are almost the exact same size in the sky, said NASA solar expert Michael Kirk.
At some points, the moon is a little closer and blocks out the sun in a total eclipse. But when the moon is a little farther away, it lets some of the sun's light peek out in an annular eclipse.
"It's a crazy phenomenon," Mr. Kirk said. "You're actually watching the moon get larger in the sky."
Several other upcoming solar eclipses will be easier to catch. An annular eclipse in mid-October and a total eclipse next April will both cross over millions of people in the Americas.
What is the tone of the passage?
Correct! The correct answer is B: Exciting. The passage uses words like “enjoy,” “mind-blowing,” “spectacular,” and “awesome,” showing an excited tone.
Meanings of the options:
1. Neutral: “unbiased or impartial” || “तटस्थ”
2. Exciting: “causing enthusiasm and eagerness” || “रोमांचक”
3. Critical: “expressing disapproval” || “आलोचनात्मक”
4. Indifferent: “having no interest” || “उदासीन”
5. None of the above: “not any of the above” || “उपरोक्त में से कोई नहीं”
Question 13
Around 20,000 eclipse chasers gathered under a cloudless sky in the northwest Australian coastal town of Exmouth to enjoy a rare total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
The remote tourist town with fewer than 3,000 residents was promoted as one of the best vantage points in Australia to see the eclipse that also crosses remote parts of Indonesia and East Timor.
An international crowd had been gathering at Exmouth for days, camping in tents and trailers on a red, dusty plain on the edge of town with cameras and other viewing equipment pointed skyward.
In Indonesia's capital, hundreds came to the Jakarta Planetarium to see the partial eclipse, obscured by clouds.
Azka Azzahra, 21, came with her sister and friends to get a closer look by using the telescopes with hundreds of other visitors. "I am still happy to come even though it is cloudy. It is happy to see how people with high enthusiasm come here to see the eclipse, because it is rare," Ms. Azzahra said.
The call to prayer resounded from the city's mosques when the eclipse phase began as Muslims said eclipse prayers as a reminder of God's greatness.
NASA astronomer Henry Throop was among those at Exmouth loudly cheering the eclipse in the darkness. "Isn't it incredible? This is so fantastic. It was mind-blowing. It was so sharp and it was so bright. You could see the corona around the sun there," the visibly excited Washington resident told Australian Broadcasting Corp.
"It's only a minute long, but it really felt like a long time. There's nothing else you can see which looks like that. It was just awesome. Spectacular. And then you could see Jupiter and Mercury and to be able to see those at the same time during the day — even seeing Mercury at all is pretty rare. So that was just awesome," Mr. Throop added.
The hybrid solar eclipse tracked from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and was mostly over water.
The lucky few people in its path either saw the darkness of a total eclipse or a "ring of fire" as the sun peeked from behind the new moon.
Such celestial events happen about once every decade: The last one was in 2013 and the next one isn't until 2031.
They occur when Earth is in the "sweet spot" so the new moon and the sun are almost the exact same size in the sky, said NASA solar expert Michael Kirk.
At some points, the moon is a little closer and blocks out the sun in a total eclipse. But when the moon is a little farther away, it lets some of the sun's light peek out in an annular eclipse.
"It's a crazy phenomenon," Mr. Kirk said. "You're actually watching the moon get larger in the sky."
Several other upcoming solar eclipses will be easier to catch. An annular eclipse in mid-October and a total eclipse next April will both cross over millions of people in the Americas.
Which organization filed a formal complaint with the Department of Consumers Affairs about the Bournvita advertisement and product packaging?
Correct! The correct answer is D: The Nutrition Advocacy in Public Interest — India (NAPi). The passage states that NAPi filed a formal complaint with the Department of Consumers Affairs about the Bournvita advertisement.
Meanings of the options:
1. Mondelez India: “the company that makes Bournvita” || “मोंडेलेज़ इंडिया”
2. The Food Standards and Safety Authority of India (FSSAI): “the food regulatory body” || “भारतीय खाद्य सुरक्षा और मानक प्राधिकरण”
3. The Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution: “the government ministry” || “उपभोक्ता मामलों का मंत्रालय”
4. The Nutrition Advocacy in Public Interest — India (NAPi): “the organization that filed the complaint” || “न्यूट्रिशन एडवोकेसी इन पब्लिक इंटरेस्ट — इंडिया”
5. None of the above: “not any of the above” || “उपरोक्त में से कोई नहीं”
Question 14
Around 20,000 eclipse chasers gathered under a cloudless sky in the northwest Australian coastal town of Exmouth to enjoy a rare total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
The remote tourist town with fewer than 3,000 residents was promoted as one of the best vantage points in Australia to see the eclipse that also crosses remote parts of Indonesia and East Timor.
An international crowd had been gathering at Exmouth for days, camping in tents and trailers on a red, dusty plain on the edge of town with cameras and other viewing equipment pointed skyward.
In Indonesia's capital, hundreds came to the Jakarta Planetarium to see the partial eclipse, obscured by clouds.
Azka Azzahra, 21, came with her sister and friends to get a closer look by using the telescopes with hundreds of other visitors. "I am still happy to come even though it is cloudy. It is happy to see how people with high enthusiasm come here to see the eclipse, because it is rare," Ms. Azzahra said.
The call to prayer resounded from the city's mosques when the eclipse phase began as Muslims said eclipse prayers as a reminder of God's greatness.
NASA astronomer Henry Throop was among those at Exmouth loudly cheering the eclipse in the darkness. "Isn't it incredible? This is so fantastic. It was mind-blowing. It was so sharp and it was so bright. You could see the corona around the sun there," the visibly excited Washington resident told Australian Broadcasting Corp.
"It's only a minute long, but it really felt like a long time. There's nothing else you can see which looks like that. It was just awesome. Spectacular. And then you could see Jupiter and Mercury and to be able to see those at the same time during the day — even seeing Mercury at all is pretty rare. So that was just awesome," Mr. Throop added.
The hybrid solar eclipse tracked from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and was mostly over water.
The lucky few people in its path either saw the darkness of a total eclipse or a "ring of fire" as the sun peeked from behind the new moon.
Such celestial events happen about once every decade: The last one was in 2013 and the next one isn't until 2031.
They occur when Earth is in the "sweet spot" so the new moon and the sun are almost the exact same size in the sky, said NASA solar expert Michael Kirk.
At some points, the moon is a little closer and blocks out the sun in a total eclipse. But when the moon is a little farther away, it lets some of the sun's light peek out in an annular eclipse.
"It's a crazy phenomenon," Mr. Kirk said. "You're actually watching the moon get larger in the sky."
Several other upcoming solar eclipses will be easier to catch. An annular eclipse in mid-October and a total eclipse next April will both cross over millions of people in the Americas.
What is the main issue highlighted in the passage?
Correct! The correct answer is E: The failure of FSSAI to regulate packaged and processed food. The passage states that the real issue is FSSAI dragging its feet over implementing guidelines to regulate packaged and processed food.
Meanings of the options:
1. The controversy surrounding Cadbury Bournvita and an influencer’s video: “controversy about Bournvita and influencer” || “बॉर्नविटा और इन्फ्लुएंसर का विवाद”
2. The role of NAPi in promoting nutrition policy in India: “NAPi’s role in nutrition policy” || “पोषण नीति में NAPi की भूमिका”
3. The misleading advertisements and product packaging of Bournvita: “misleading ads and packaging” || “भ्रामक विज्ञापन और पैकेजिंग”
4. The legal notice issued by Mondelez India to Revant Himatsingka: “legal notice to Revant” || “मोंडेलेज़ इंडिया द्वारा रेवंत को कानूनी नोटिस”
5. The failure of FSSAI to regulate packaged and processed food: “FSSAI’s failure to regulate” || “FSSAI का पैकेज्ड और प्रोसेस्ड भोजन को विनियमित करने में विफलता”
Question 15
Around 20,000 eclipse chasers gathered under a cloudless sky in the northwest Australian coastal town of Exmouth to enjoy a rare total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
The remote tourist town with fewer than 3,000 residents was promoted as one of the best vantage points in Australia to see the eclipse that also crosses remote parts of Indonesia and East Timor.
An international crowd had been gathering at Exmouth for days, camping in tents and trailers on a red, dusty plain on the edge of town with cameras and other viewing equipment pointed skyward.
In Indonesia's capital, hundreds came to the Jakarta Planetarium to see the partial eclipse, obscured by clouds.
Azka Azzahra, 21, came with her sister and friends to get a closer look by using the telescopes with hundreds of other visitors. "I am still happy to come even though it is cloudy. It is happy to see how people with high enthusiasm come here to see the eclipse, because it is rare," Ms. Azzahra said.
The call to prayer resounded from the city's mosques when the eclipse phase began as Muslims said eclipse prayers as a reminder of God's greatness.
NASA astronomer Henry Throop was among those at Exmouth loudly cheering the eclipse in the darkness. "Isn't it incredible? This is so fantastic. It was mind-blowing. It was so sharp and it was so bright. You could see the corona around the sun there," the visibly excited Washington resident told Australian Broadcasting Corp.
"It's only a minute long, but it really felt like a long time. There's nothing else you can see which looks like that. It was just awesome. Spectacular. And then you could see Jupiter and Mercury and to be able to see those at the same time during the day — even seeing Mercury at all is pretty rare. So that was just awesome," Mr. Throop added.
The hybrid solar eclipse tracked from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and was mostly over water.
The lucky few people in its path either saw the darkness of a total eclipse or a "ring of fire" as the sun peeked from behind the new moon.
Such celestial events happen about once every decade: The last one was in 2013 and the next one isn't until 2031.
They occur when Earth is in the "sweet spot" so the new moon and the sun are almost the exact same size in the sky, said NASA solar expert Michael Kirk.
At some points, the moon is a little closer and blocks out the sun in a total eclipse. But when the moon is a little farther away, it lets some of the sun's light peek out in an annular eclipse.
"It's a crazy phenomenon," Mr. Kirk said. "You're actually watching the moon get larger in the sky."
Several other upcoming solar eclipses will be easier to catch. An annular eclipse in mid-October and a total eclipse next April will both cross over millions of people in the Americas.
What is the opposite of the word “massive” as used in the following sentence from the given passage?
This, despite massive opposition from doctors and the government’s own bodies such as the Indian Council of Medical Research and National Institute of Nutrition.
Correct! The correct answer is A: Tiny. “Massive” means very large, and “tiny” means very small, making it the opposite.
Meanings of the options:
1. Tiny: “very small” || “बहुत छोटा”
2. Heavy: “of great weight” || “भारी”
3. Large: “of considerable size” || “बड़ा”
4. Huge: “extremely large” || “विशाल”
5. Bulky: “taking up much space” || “भारी-भरकम”
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Answered
- Review
-
Question 1 of 15Marks: +1 and -0.25
1. Question
Section: English00:00Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.
This year is the 30th anniversary of the passing of the 73rd and 74th Amendments. Indian governance was always overcentralised. But it is a sign of the times that even the modest steps these amendments took towards decentralisation now seem to belong to an alien intellectual and political world. In a moment of authoritarian centralisation, the idea of deepening democracy by creating structures of inclusive governance seems like a pipe dream.
Indian democracy since Independence never really had a commitment to decentralisation. Despite performative obeisance to the idea by the state, decentralisation has always been hostage to a number of contradictory impulses. Initially, there was the presumption that centralised power would be required to break the power of local elites, never mind the fact that there is little evidence that the outcomes of decentralisation would have been worse than what we eventually got. The existing tiers of government, both central and state, wanted to hoard most of the resources. India has the lowest spending on local government as a proportion of resources. And the ideology of Gandhian decentralisation, oddly enough, militated against genuine political decentralisation.
For, in this imagination, decentralisation was not a devolution of power and resources. It was the creation of an idealistic imagined space that would be above politics; that would free it from the usual give and take and contests of politics. Local government would be held to a higher standard than other tiers of governance. For example, we take partisanship and competition to be central to politics elsewhere. But somehow we expected panchayats to be this font of consensus (some states give incentives for election by consensus). And, it has to be said, there was no serious demand side push for decentralisation.
The 73rd and 74th amendments did achieve a lot. In some areas, they led to the state acquiring a distinct presence on the ground; they gave millions of citizens identities as representatives; they provided a conduit for sharing power; they created deliberative spaces, led to the creation of new norms, especially around the participation of women and a churn in local elites. They slowly built up local capacities, and led to a wide range of functions being devolved to local government.
Local government was often the object of condescension: The general story we ran was that the state at lower tiers of government is incompetent, while you get a better state at the higher level. It is often the reverse: The state at local levels is competent, it is just constantly being let down by lack of support and investment from the top. Fiscal resources that local governments managed went up considerably, in part paradoxically through central schemes like NREGA, and increased finance commission awards. In some, the very pathologies associated with local elections were also a tribute to its success. The fact that local political competition became intense in many states, and in some cases, political spending in local elections acquired obscene proportions, was a backhanded tribute to the stakes in local governance.
The experience of local governments varies across states; it is more deeply practised and institutionalised in states like Kerala. But, as articles in a recent symposium on decentralisation in the March issue of Seminar magazine point out, the glass of decentralisation still remains at best half full. The tension between thinking of local government as mere administrative conduits versus autonomous political actors, the constraints placed on them by a combination of bureaucratic control and deliberate underinvestment in capacity, and the lack of political pathways for successful panchayat performers to rise in their parties, limit their salience.
Technology has been a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it can create local capacity; on the other, it has been used to largely bypass political negotiation and control. The lack of clarity over municipal governance, and the hijacking of cities by the political economy of contracting, makes the idea of cities being governed by some sort of collective deliberation a bit of a joke.
Local government requires many technical, administrative and financial fixes. There is a case to be made that the distinction between the 73rd and 74th amendments is now obsolete. Jayalalithaa, when she was chief minister, had first made the case for a unified district-level local government rather than a distinction between urban and rural. Many of the decisions consequential for India's urbanisation, like land use change, for example, are being made in "panchayats"; there is arbitrage over how a settlement gets classified, and rural and urban is now, at best, a continuum. There are many such discussions to be had. For years, so many colleagues at the Centre for Policy Research were engaged with these matters. But these issues now seem to belong to another time, even another country.Based on the information presented in the passage, what can be true about the perception of local government in India?
I. Local government is often viewed as incompetent and inefficient compared to higher tiers of government.
II. Decentralization has led to the creation of new norms, including the participation of women and a churn in local elites.
III. The lack of support and investment from higher levels of government has contributed to the limitations of local governments.
Correct
Correct! The correct answer is D: All I, II and III. The passage states that local government is often viewed as incompetent (I), decentralization led to norms including women’s participation (II), and lack of top-level support limits local governments (III).
Meanings of the options:
1. Only II: “only statement II is true” || “केवल II सत्य है”
2. I and II: “statements I and II are true” || “I और II सत्य हैं”
3. II and III: “statements II and III are true” || “II और III सत्य हैं”
4. All I, II and III: “all three statements are true” || “सभी तीन कथन सत्य हैं”
5. None I, II and III: “none of the statements are true” || “कोई भी कथन सत्य नहीं है”
Incorrect
Incorrect! The correct answer is D: All I, II and III. The passage states that local government is often viewed as incompetent (I), decentralization led to norms including women’s participation (II), and lack of top-level support limits local governments (III).
Meanings of the options:
1. Only II: “only statement II is true” || “केवल II सत्य है”
2. I and II: “statements I and II are true” || “I और II सत्य हैं”
3. II and III: “statements II and III are true” || “II और III सत्य हैं”
4. All I, II and III: “all three statements are true” || “सभी तीन कथन सत्य हैं”
5. None I, II and III: “none of the statements are true” || “कोई भी कथन सत्य नहीं है”
Unattempted
Incorrect! The correct answer is D: All I, II and III. The passage states that local government is often viewed as incompetent (I), decentralization led to norms including women’s participation (II), and lack of top-level support limits local governments (III).
Meanings of the options:
1. Only II: “only statement II is true” || “केवल II सत्य है”
2. I and II: “statements I and II are true” || “I और II सत्य हैं”
3. II and III: “statements II and III are true” || “II और III सत्य हैं”
4. All I, II and III: “all three statements are true” || “सभी तीन कथन सत्य हैं”
5. None I, II and III: “none of the statements are true” || “कोई भी कथन सत्य नहीं है”
-
Question 2 of 15Marks: +1 and -0.25
2. Question
Section: English00:00Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.
This year is the 30th anniversary of the passing of the 73rd and 74th Amendments. Indian governance was always overcentralised. But it is a sign of the times that even the modest steps these amendments took towards decentralisation now seem to belong to an alien intellectual and political world. In a moment of authoritarian centralisation, the idea of deepening democracy by creating structures of inclusive governance seems like a pipe dream.
Indian democracy since Independence never really had a commitment to decentralisation. Despite performative obeisance to the idea by the state, decentralisation has always been hostage to a number of contradictory impulses. Initially, there was the presumption that centralised power would be required to break the power of local elites, never mind the fact that there is little evidence that the outcomes of decentralisation would have been worse than what we eventually got. The existing tiers of government, both central and state, wanted to hoard most of the resources. India has the lowest spending on local government as a proportion of resources. And the ideology of Gandhian decentralisation, oddly enough, militated against genuine political decentralisation.
For, in this imagination, decentralisation was not a devolution of power and resources. It was the creation of an idealistic imagined space that would be above politics; that would free it from the usual give and take and contests of politics. Local government would be held to a higher standard than other tiers of governance. For example, we take partisanship and competition to be central to politics elsewhere. But somehow we expected panchayats to be this font of consensus (some states give incentives for election by consensus). And, it has to be said, there was no serious demand side push for decentralisation.
The 73rd and 74th amendments did achieve a lot. In some areas, they led to the state acquiring a distinct presence on the ground; they gave millions of citizens identities as representatives; they provided a conduit for sharing power; they created deliberative spaces, led to the creation of new norms, especially around the participation of women and a churn in local elites. They slowly built up local capacities, and led to a wide range of functions being devolved to local government.
Local government was often the object of condescension: The general story we ran was that the state at lower tiers of government is incompetent, while you get a better state at the higher level. It is often the reverse: The state at local levels is competent, it is just constantly being let down by lack of support and investment from the top. Fiscal resources that local governments managed went up considerably, in part paradoxically through central schemes like NREGA, and increased finance commission awards. In some, the very pathologies associated with local elections were also a tribute to its success. The fact that local political competition became intense in many states, and in some cases, political spending in local elections acquired obscene proportions, was a backhanded tribute to the stakes in local governance.
The experience of local governments varies across states; it is more deeply practised and institutionalised in states like Kerala. But, as articles in a recent symposium on decentralisation in the March issue of Seminar magazine point out, the glass of decentralisation still remains at best half full. The tension between thinking of local government as mere administrative conduits versus autonomous political actors, the constraints placed on them by a combination of bureaucratic control and deliberate underinvestment in capacity, and the lack of political pathways for successful panchayat performers to rise in their parties, limit their salience.
Technology has been a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it can create local capacity; on the other, it has been used to largely bypass political negotiation and control. The lack of clarity over municipal governance, and the hijacking of cities by the political economy of contracting, makes the idea of cities being governed by some sort of collective deliberation a bit of a joke.
Local government requires many technical, administrative and financial fixes. There is a case to be made that the distinction between the 73rd and 74th amendments is now obsolete. Jayalalithaa, when she was chief minister, had first made the case for a unified district-level local government rather than a distinction between urban and rural. Many of the decisions consequential for India's urbanisation, like land use change, for example, are being made in "panchayats"; there is arbitrage over how a settlement gets classified, and rural and urban is now, at best, a continuum. There are many such discussions to be had. For years, so many colleagues at the Centre for Policy Research were engaged with these matters. But these issues now seem to belong to another time, even another country.“However, the increased power of local elites and their capture of institutions, combined with the limited investment from higher levels of government, has led to challenges in terms of accountability, transparency, and the delivery of basic services.” Which of the following inferences can be drawn from the above statement?
Correct
Correct! The correct answer is A: The limited investment from higher levels of government has led to the increased power of local elites and their capture of institutions. The statement directly links limited investment to increased power of local elites.
Meanings of the options:
1. The limited investment from higher levels of government has led to the increased power of local elites and their capture of institutions: “limited investment leads to elite capture” || “सीमित निवेश से स्थानीय अभिजात वर्ग की शक्ति बढ़ी”
2. The challenges in terms of accountability, transparency, and the delivery of basic services are due to the participation of women in local government: “challenges due to women’s participation” || “चुनौतियाँ महिलाओं की भागीदारी के कारण”
3. The decentralization process has been successful in delivering basic services to the local population: “decentralization successful in delivering services” || “विकेंद्रीकरण सेवाएँ देने में सफल रहा”
4. The capture of institutions by local elites has not led to any negative consequences in terms of accountability and transparency: “no negative consequences of elite capture” || “अभिजात वर्ग के कब्जे का कोई नकारात्मक परिणाम नहीं”
5. Higher levels of government have fully supported the decentralization process and provided necessary investment: “full support from higher government” || “उच्च सरकार का पूर्ण समर्थन”
Incorrect
Incorrect! The correct answer is A: The limited investment from higher levels of government has led to the increased power of local elites and their capture of institutions. The statement directly links limited investment to increased power of local elites.
Meanings of the options:
1. The limited investment from higher levels of government has led to the increased power of local elites and their capture of institutions: “limited investment leads to elite capture” || “सीमित निवेश से स्थानीय अभिजात वर्ग की शक्ति बढ़ी”
2. The challenges in terms of accountability, transparency, and the delivery of basic services are due to the participation of women in local government: “challenges due to women’s participation” || “चुनौतियाँ महिलाओं की भागीदारी के कारण”
3. The decentralization process has been successful in delivering basic services to the local population: “decentralization successful in delivering services” || “विकेंद्रीकरण सेवाएँ देने में सफल रहा”
4. The capture of institutions by local elites has not led to any negative consequences in terms of accountability and transparency: “no negative consequences of elite capture” || “अभिजात वर्ग के कब्जे का कोई नकारात्मक परिणाम नहीं”
5. Higher levels of government have fully supported the decentralization process and provided necessary investment: “full support from higher government” || “उच्च सरकार का पूर्ण समर्थन”
Unattempted
Incorrect! The correct answer is A: The limited investment from higher levels of government has led to the increased power of local elites and their capture of institutions. The statement directly links limited investment to increased power of local elites.
Meanings of the options:
1. The limited investment from higher levels of government has led to the increased power of local elites and their capture of institutions: “limited investment leads to elite capture” || “सीमित निवेश से स्थानीय अभिजात वर्ग की शक्ति बढ़ी”
2. The challenges in terms of accountability, transparency, and the delivery of basic services are due to the participation of women in local government: “challenges due to women’s participation” || “चुनौतियाँ महिलाओं की भागीदारी के कारण”
3. The decentralization process has been successful in delivering basic services to the local population: “decentralization successful in delivering services” || “विकेंद्रीकरण सेवाएँ देने में सफल रहा”
4. The capture of institutions by local elites has not led to any negative consequences in terms of accountability and transparency: “no negative consequences of elite capture” || “अभिजात वर्ग के कब्जे का कोई नकारात्मक परिणाम नहीं”
5. Higher levels of government have fully supported the decentralization process and provided necessary investment: “full support from higher government” || “उच्च सरकार का पूर्ण समर्थन”
-
Question 3 of 15Marks: +1 and -0.25
3. Question
Section: English00:00Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.
This year is the 30th anniversary of the passing of the 73rd and 74th Amendments. Indian governance was always overcentralised. But it is a sign of the times that even the modest steps these amendments took towards decentralisation now seem to belong to an alien intellectual and political world. In a moment of authoritarian centralisation, the idea of deepening democracy by creating structures of inclusive governance seems like a pipe dream.
Indian democracy since Independence never really had a commitment to decentralisation. Despite performative obeisance to the idea by the state, decentralisation has always been hostage to a number of contradictory impulses. Initially, there was the presumption that centralised power would be required to break the power of local elites, never mind the fact that there is little evidence that the outcomes of decentralisation would have been worse than what we eventually got. The existing tiers of government, both central and state, wanted to hoard most of the resources. India has the lowest spending on local government as a proportion of resources. And the ideology of Gandhian decentralisation, oddly enough, militated against genuine political decentralisation.
For, in this imagination, decentralisation was not a devolution of power and resources. It was the creation of an idealistic imagined space that would be above politics; that would free it from the usual give and take and contests of politics. Local government would be held to a higher standard than other tiers of governance. For example, we take partisanship and competition to be central to politics elsewhere. But somehow we expected panchayats to be this font of consensus (some states give incentives for election by consensus). And, it has to be said, there was no serious demand side push for decentralisation.
The 73rd and 74th amendments did achieve a lot. In some areas, they led to the state acquiring a distinct presence on the ground; they gave millions of citizens identities as representatives; they provided a conduit for sharing power; they created deliberative spaces, led to the creation of new norms, especially around the participation of women and a churn in local elites. They slowly built up local capacities, and led to a wide range of functions being devolved to local government.
Local government was often the object of condescension: The general story we ran was that the state at lower tiers of government is incompetent, while you get a better state at the higher level. It is often the reverse: The state at local levels is competent, it is just constantly being let down by lack of support and investment from the top. Fiscal resources that local governments managed went up considerably, in part paradoxically through central schemes like NREGA, and increased finance commission awards. In some, the very pathologies associated with local elections were also a tribute to its success. The fact that local political competition became intense in many states, and in some cases, political spending in local elections acquired obscene proportions, was a backhanded tribute to the stakes in local governance.
The experience of local governments varies across states; it is more deeply practised and institutionalised in states like Kerala. But, as articles in a recent symposium on decentralisation in the March issue of Seminar magazine point out, the glass of decentralisation still remains at best half full. The tension between thinking of local government as mere administrative conduits versus autonomous political actors, the constraints placed on them by a combination of bureaucratic control and deliberate underinvestment in capacity, and the lack of political pathways for successful panchayat performers to rise in their parties, limit their salience.
Technology has been a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it can create local capacity; on the other, it has been used to largely bypass political negotiation and control. The lack of clarity over municipal governance, and the hijacking of cities by the political economy of contracting, makes the idea of cities being governed by some sort of collective deliberation a bit of a joke.
Local government requires many technical, administrative and financial fixes. There is a case to be made that the distinction between the 73rd and 74th amendments is now obsolete. Jayalalithaa, when she was chief minister, had first made the case for a unified district-level local government rather than a distinction between urban and rural. Many of the decisions consequential for India's urbanisation, like land use change, for example, are being made in "panchayats"; there is arbitrage over how a settlement gets classified, and rural and urban is now, at best, a continuum. There are many such discussions to be had. For years, so many colleagues at the Centre for Policy Research were engaged with these matters. But these issues now seem to belong to another time, even another country.Which of the following statements can be concluded from the passage about the challenges faced by local governments in India?
I. The glass of decentralisation is half full in India.
II. Local governments have limited autonomy, capacity and political representation.
III. Municipal governance is clear and effective in most Indian cities.
Correct
Correct! The correct answer is A: I and II. Statement I is true as the passage says the glass is half full. Statement II is true as local governments face limited autonomy and capacity. Statement III is false as municipal governance lacks clarity.
Meanings of the options:
1. I and II: “statements I and II can be concluded” || “I और II निष्कर्ष निकाले जा सकते हैं”
2. II and III: “statements II and III can be concluded” || “II और III निष्कर्ष निकाले जा सकते हैं”
3. I and III: “statements I and III can be concluded” || “I और III निष्कर्ष निकाले जा सकते हैं”
4. All I, II and III: “all three statements can be concluded” || “सभी तीन कथन निष्कर्ष निकाले जा सकते हैं”
5. None of I, II and III: “none of the statements can be concluded” || “कोई भी कथन निष्कर्ष नहीं निकाला जा सकता”
Incorrect
Incorrect! The correct answer is A: I and II. Statement I is true as the passage says the glass is half full. Statement II is true as local governments face limited autonomy and capacity. Statement III is false as municipal governance lacks clarity.
Meanings of the options:
1. I and II: “statements I and II can be concluded” || “I और II निष्कर्ष निकाले जा सकते हैं”
2. II and III: “statements II and III can be concluded” || “II और III निष्कर्ष निकाले जा सकते हैं”
3. I and III: “statements I and III can be concluded” || “I और III निष्कर्ष निकाले जा सकते हैं”
4. All I, II and III: “all three statements can be concluded” || “सभी तीन कथन निष्कर्ष निकाले जा सकते हैं”
5. None of I, II and III: “none of the statements can be concluded” || “कोई भी कथन निष्कर्ष नहीं निकाला जा सकता”
Unattempted
Incorrect! The correct answer is A: I and II. Statement I is true as the passage says the glass is half full. Statement II is true as local governments face limited autonomy and capacity. Statement III is false as municipal governance lacks clarity.
Meanings of the options:
1. I and II: “statements I and II can be concluded” || “I और II निष्कर्ष निकाले जा सकते हैं”
2. II and III: “statements II and III can be concluded” || “II और III निष्कर्ष निकाले जा सकते हैं”
3. I and III: “statements I and III can be concluded” || “I और III निष्कर्ष निकाले जा सकते हैं”
4. All I, II and III: “all three statements can be concluded” || “सभी तीन कथन निष्कर्ष निकाले जा सकते हैं”
5. None of I, II and III: “none of the statements can be concluded” || “कोई भी कथन निष्कर्ष नहीं निकाला जा सकता”
-
Question 4 of 15Marks: +1 and -0.25
4. Question
Section: English00:00Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.
This year is the 30th anniversary of the passing of the 73rd and 74th Amendments. Indian governance was always overcentralised. But it is a sign of the times that even the modest steps these amendments took towards decentralisation now seem to belong to an alien intellectual and political world. In a moment of authoritarian centralisation, the idea of deepening democracy by creating structures of inclusive governance seems like a pipe dream.
Indian democracy since Independence never really had a commitment to decentralisation. Despite performative obeisance to the idea by the state, decentralisation has always been hostage to a number of contradictory impulses. Initially, there was the presumption that centralised power would be required to break the power of local elites, never mind the fact that there is little evidence that the outcomes of decentralisation would have been worse than what we eventually got. The existing tiers of government, both central and state, wanted to hoard most of the resources. India has the lowest spending on local government as a proportion of resources. And the ideology of Gandhian decentralisation, oddly enough, militated against genuine political decentralisation.
For, in this imagination, decentralisation was not a devolution of power and resources. It was the creation of an idealistic imagined space that would be above politics; that would free it from the usual give and take and contests of politics. Local government would be held to a higher standard than other tiers of governance. For example, we take partisanship and competition to be central to politics elsewhere. But somehow we expected panchayats to be this font of consensus (some states give incentives for election by consensus). And, it has to be said, there was no serious demand side push for decentralisation.
The 73rd and 74th amendments did achieve a lot. In some areas, they led to the state acquiring a distinct presence on the ground; they gave millions of citizens identities as representatives; they provided a conduit for sharing power; they created deliberative spaces, led to the creation of new norms, especially around the participation of women and a churn in local elites. They slowly built up local capacities, and led to a wide range of functions being devolved to local government.
Local government was often the object of condescension: The general story we ran was that the state at lower tiers of government is incompetent, while you get a better state at the higher level. It is often the reverse: The state at local levels is competent, it is just constantly being let down by lack of support and investment from the top. Fiscal resources that local governments managed went up considerably, in part paradoxically through central schemes like NREGA, and increased finance commission awards. In some, the very pathologies associated with local elections were also a tribute to its success. The fact that local political competition became intense in many states, and in some cases, political spending in local elections acquired obscene proportions, was a backhanded tribute to the stakes in local governance.
The experience of local governments varies across states; it is more deeply practised and institutionalised in states like Kerala. But, as articles in a recent symposium on decentralisation in the March issue of Seminar magazine point out, the glass of decentralisation still remains at best half full. The tension between thinking of local government as mere administrative conduits versus autonomous political actors, the constraints placed on them by a combination of bureaucratic control and deliberate underinvestment in capacity, and the lack of political pathways for successful panchayat performers to rise in their parties, limit their salience.
Technology has been a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it can create local capacity; on the other, it has been used to largely bypass political negotiation and control. The lack of clarity over municipal governance, and the hijacking of cities by the political economy of contracting, makes the idea of cities being governed by some sort of collective deliberation a bit of a joke.
Local government requires many technical, administrative and financial fixes. There is a case to be made that the distinction between the 73rd and 74th amendments is now obsolete. Jayalalithaa, when she was chief minister, had first made the case for a unified district-level local government rather than a distinction between urban and rural. Many of the decisions consequential for India's urbanisation, like land use change, for example, are being made in "panchayats"; there is arbitrage over how a settlement gets classified, and rural and urban is now, at best, a continuum. There are many such discussions to be had. For years, so many colleagues at the Centre for Policy Research were engaged with these matters. But these issues now seem to belong to another time, even another country.What is the tone of the author in the following paragraph?
This year is the 30th anniversary of the passing of the 73rd and 74th Amendments. Indian governance was always overcentralised. But it is a sign of the times that even the modest steps these amendments took towards decentralisation now seem to belong to an alien intellectual and political world. In a moment of authoritarian centralisation, the idea of deepening democracy by creating structures of inclusive governance seems like a pipe dream.
Correct
Correct! The correct answer is C: Pessimistic. The author expresses despair about decentralisation, calling it a “pipe dream,” indicating a pessimistic tone.
Meanings of the options:
1. Critical: “expressing disapproval” || “आलोचनात्मक”
2. Optimistic: “hopeful about the future” || “आशावादी”
3. Pessimistic: “expecting the worst” || “निराशावादी”
4. Indifferent: “having no interest or concern” || “उदासीन”
5. Sarcastic: “using irony to mock” || “व्यंग्यात्मक”
Incorrect
Incorrect! The correct answer is C: Pessimistic. The author expresses despair about decentralisation, calling it a “pipe dream,” indicating a pessimistic tone.
Meanings of the options:
1. Critical: “expressing disapproval” || “आलोचनात्मक”
2. Optimistic: “hopeful about the future” || “आशावादी”
3. Pessimistic: “expecting the worst” || “निराशावादी”
4. Indifferent: “having no interest or concern” || “उदासीन”
5. Sarcastic: “using irony to mock” || “व्यंग्यात्मक”
Unattempted
Incorrect! The correct answer is C: Pessimistic. The author expresses despair about decentralisation, calling it a “pipe dream,” indicating a pessimistic tone.
Meanings of the options:
1. Critical: “expressing disapproval” || “आलोचनात्मक”
2. Optimistic: “hopeful about the future” || “आशावादी”
3. Pessimistic: “expecting the worst” || “निराशावादी”
4. Indifferent: “having no interest or concern” || “उदासीन”
5. Sarcastic: “using irony to mock” || “व्यंग्यात्मक”
-
Question 5 of 15Marks: +1 and -0.25
5. Question
Section: English00:00Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.
This year is the 30th anniversary of the passing of the 73rd and 74th Amendments. Indian governance was always overcentralised. But it is a sign of the times that even the modest steps these amendments took towards decentralisation now seem to belong to an alien intellectual and political world. In a moment of authoritarian centralisation, the idea of deepening democracy by creating structures of inclusive governance seems like a pipe dream.
Indian democracy since Independence never really had a commitment to decentralisation. Despite performative obeisance to the idea by the state, decentralisation has always been hostage to a number of contradictory impulses. Initially, there was the presumption that centralised power would be required to break the power of local elites, never mind the fact that there is little evidence that the outcomes of decentralisation would have been worse than what we eventually got. The existing tiers of government, both central and state, wanted to hoard most of the resources. India has the lowest spending on local government as a proportion of resources. And the ideology of Gandhian decentralisation, oddly enough, militated against genuine political decentralisation.
For, in this imagination, decentralisation was not a devolution of power and resources. It was the creation of an idealistic imagined space that would be above politics; that would free it from the usual give and take and contests of politics. Local government would be held to a higher standard than other tiers of governance. For example, we take partisanship and competition to be central to politics elsewhere. But somehow we expected panchayats to be this font of consensus (some states give incentives for election by consensus). And, it has to be said, there was no serious demand side push for decentralisation.
The 73rd and 74th amendments did achieve a lot. In some areas, they led to the state acquiring a distinct presence on the ground; they gave millions of citizens identities as representatives; they provided a conduit for sharing power; they created deliberative spaces, led to the creation of new norms, especially around the participation of women and a churn in local elites. They slowly built up local capacities, and led to a wide range of functions being devolved to local government.
Local government was often the object of condescension: The general story we ran was that the state at lower tiers of government is incompetent, while you get a better state at the higher level. It is often the reverse: The state at local levels is competent, it is just constantly being let down by lack of support and investment from the top. Fiscal resources that local governments managed went up considerably, in part paradoxically through central schemes like NREGA, and increased finance commission awards. In some, the very pathologies associated with local elections were also a tribute to its success. The fact that local political competition became intense in many states, and in some cases, political spending in local elections acquired obscene proportions, was a backhanded tribute to the stakes in local governance.
The experience of local governments varies across states; it is more deeply practised and institutionalised in states like Kerala. But, as articles in a recent symposium on decentralisation in the March issue of Seminar magazine point out, the glass of decentralisation still remains at best half full. The tension between thinking of local government as mere administrative conduits versus autonomous political actors, the constraints placed on them by a combination of bureaucratic control and deliberate underinvestment in capacity, and the lack of political pathways for successful panchayat performers to rise in their parties, limit their salience.
Technology has been a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it can create local capacity; on the other, it has been used to largely bypass political negotiation and control. The lack of clarity over municipal governance, and the hijacking of cities by the political economy of contracting, makes the idea of cities being governed by some sort of collective deliberation a bit of a joke.
Local government requires many technical, administrative and financial fixes. There is a case to be made that the distinction between the 73rd and 74th amendments is now obsolete. Jayalalithaa, when she was chief minister, had first made the case for a unified district-level local government rather than a distinction between urban and rural. Many of the decisions consequential for India's urbanisation, like land use change, for example, are being made in "panchayats"; there is arbitrage over how a settlement gets classified, and rural and urban is now, at best, a continuum. There are many such discussions to be had. For years, so many colleagues at the Centre for Policy Research were engaged with these matters. But these issues now seem to belong to another time, even another country.What is the meaning of the idiom ‘double-edged sword’ in the context of the passage?
Correct
Correct! The correct answer is D: Technology has been both a tool for local development and a means of bypassing political control. The idiom refers to technology having both positive and negative effects.
Meanings of the options:
1. The positive and negative effects of technology are like a sharp and dangerous sword: “technology has sharp and dangerous effects” || “तकनीक के तेज और खतरनाक प्रभाव”
2. The lack of clarity in municipal governance has made technology a risky tool to use: “technology is risky due to lack of clarity” || “स्पष्टता की कमी के कारण तकनीक जोखिम भरी है”
3. The use of technology in cities has been a joke due to the political economy of contracting: “technology use is a joke” || “तकनीक का उपयोग मजाक है”
4. Technology has been both a tool for local development and a means of bypassing political control: “technology helps development but bypasses political control” || “तकनीक विकास में सहायक है लेकिन राजनीतिक नियंत्रण को दरकिनार करती है”
5. The double-edged sword of technology has made collective deliberation a difficult task: “technology makes deliberation difficult” || “तकनीक सामूहिक विचार-विमर्श को कठिन बनाती है”
Incorrect
Incorrect! The correct answer is D: Technology has been both a tool for local development and a means of bypassing political control. The idiom refers to technology having both positive and negative effects.
Meanings of the options:
1. The positive and negative effects of technology are like a sharp and dangerous sword: “technology has sharp and dangerous effects” || “तकनीक के तेज और खतरनाक प्रभाव”
2. The lack of clarity in municipal governance has made technology a risky tool to use: “technology is risky due to lack of clarity” || “स्पष्टता की कमी के कारण तकनीक जोखिम भरी है”
3. The use of technology in cities has been a joke due to the political economy of contracting: “technology use is a joke” || “तकनीक का उपयोग मजाक है”
4. Technology has been both a tool for local development and a means of bypassing political control: “technology helps development but bypasses political control” || “तकनीक विकास में सहायक है लेकिन राजनीतिक नियंत्रण को दरकिनार करती है”
5. The double-edged sword of technology has made collective deliberation a difficult task: “technology makes deliberation difficult” || “तकनीक सामूहिक विचार-विमर्श को कठिन बनाती है”
Unattempted
Incorrect! The correct answer is D: Technology has been both a tool for local development and a means of bypassing political control. The idiom refers to technology having both positive and negative effects.
Meanings of the options:
1. The positive and negative effects of technology are like a sharp and dangerous sword: “technology has sharp and dangerous effects” || “तकनीक के तेज और खतरनाक प्रभाव”
2. The lack of clarity in municipal governance has made technology a risky tool to use: “technology is risky due to lack of clarity” || “स्पष्टता की कमी के कारण तकनीक जोखिम भरी है”
3. The use of technology in cities has been a joke due to the political economy of contracting: “technology use is a joke” || “तकनीक का उपयोग मजाक है”
4. Technology has been both a tool for local development and a means of bypassing political control: “technology helps development but bypasses political control” || “तकनीक विकास में सहायक है लेकिन राजनीतिक नियंत्रण को दरकिनार करती है”
5. The double-edged sword of technology has made collective deliberation a difficult task: “technology makes deliberation difficult” || “तकनीक सामूहिक विचार-विमर्श को कठिन बनाती है”
-
Question 6 of 15Marks: +1 and -0.25
6. Question
Section: English00:00Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.
This year is the 30th anniversary of the passing of the 73rd and 74th Amendments. Indian governance was always overcentralised. But it is a sign of the times that even the modest steps these amendments took towards decentralisation now seem to belong to an alien intellectual and political world. In a moment of authoritarian centralisation, the idea of deepening democracy by creating structures of inclusive governance seems like a pipe dream.
Indian democracy since Independence never really had a commitment to decentralisation. Despite performative obeisance to the idea by the state, decentralisation has always been hostage to a number of contradictory impulses. Initially, there was the presumption that centralised power would be required to break the power of local elites, never mind the fact that there is little evidence that the outcomes of decentralisation would have been worse than what we eventually got. The existing tiers of government, both central and state, wanted to hoard most of the resources. India has the lowest spending on local government as a proportion of resources. And the ideology of Gandhian decentralisation, oddly enough, militated against genuine political decentralisation.
For, in this imagination, decentralisation was not a devolution of power and resources. It was the creation of an idealistic imagined space that would be above politics; that would free it from the usual give and take and contests of politics. Local government would be held to a higher standard than other tiers of governance. For example, we take partisanship and competition to be central to politics elsewhere. But somehow we expected panchayats to be this font of consensus (some states give incentives for election by consensus). And, it has to be said, there was no serious demand side push for decentralisation.
The 73rd and 74th amendments did achieve a lot. In some areas, they led to the state acquiring a distinct presence on the ground; they gave millions of citizens identities as representatives; they provided a conduit for sharing power; they created deliberative spaces, led to the creation of new norms, especially around the participation of women and a churn in local elites. They slowly built up local capacities, and led to a wide range of functions being devolved to local government.
Local government was often the object of condescension: The general story we ran was that the state at lower tiers of government is incompetent, while you get a better state at the higher level. It is often the reverse: The state at local levels is competent, it is just constantly being let down by lack of support and investment from the top. Fiscal resources that local governments managed went up considerably, in part paradoxically through central schemes like NREGA, and increased finance commission awards. In some, the very pathologies associated with local elections were also a tribute to its success. The fact that local political competition became intense in many states, and in some cases, political spending in local elections acquired obscene proportions, was a backhanded tribute to the stakes in local governance.
The experience of local governments varies across states; it is more deeply practised and institutionalised in states like Kerala. But, as articles in a recent symposium on decentralisation in the March issue of Seminar magazine point out, the glass of decentralisation still remains at best half full. The tension between thinking of local government as mere administrative conduits versus autonomous political actors, the constraints placed on them by a combination of bureaucratic control and deliberate underinvestment in capacity, and the lack of political pathways for successful panchayat performers to rise in their parties, limit their salience.
Technology has been a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it can create local capacity; on the other, it has been used to largely bypass political negotiation and control. The lack of clarity over municipal governance, and the hijacking of cities by the political economy of contracting, makes the idea of cities being governed by some sort of collective deliberation a bit of a joke.
Local government requires many technical, administrative and financial fixes. There is a case to be made that the distinction between the 73rd and 74th amendments is now obsolete. Jayalalithaa, when she was chief minister, had first made the case for a unified district-level local government rather than a distinction between urban and rural. Many of the decisions consequential for India's urbanisation, like land use change, for example, are being made in "panchayats"; there is arbitrage over how a settlement gets classified, and rural and urban is now, at best, a continuum. There are many such discussions to be had. For years, so many colleagues at the Centre for Policy Research were engaged with these matters. But these issues now seem to belong to another time, even another country.What is the near synonym of the word ‘salience’ as used in the passage?
Correct
Correct! The correct answer is C: Prominence. “Salience” means importance or prominence, and “prominence” is its near synonym.
Meanings of the options:
1. Irrelevance: “lack of importance” || “अप्रासंगिकता”
2. Inconsequentiality: “unimportance” || “तुच्छता”
3. Prominence: “importance or noticeability” || “प्रमुखता”
4. Insignificance: “unimportance” || “तुच्छता”
5. Triviality: “unimportance” || “तुच्छता”
Incorrect
Incorrect! The correct answer is C: Prominence. “Salience” means importance or prominence, and “prominence” is its near synonym.
Meanings of the options:
1. Irrelevance: “lack of importance” || “अप्रासंगिकता”
2. Inconsequentiality: “unimportance” || “तुच्छता”
3. Prominence: “importance or noticeability” || “प्रमुखता”
4. Insignificance: “unimportance” || “तुच्छता”
5. Triviality: “unimportance” || “तुच्छता”
Unattempted
Incorrect! The correct answer is C: Prominence. “Salience” means importance or prominence, and “prominence” is its near synonym.
Meanings of the options:
1. Irrelevance: “lack of importance” || “अप्रासंगिकता”
2. Inconsequentiality: “unimportance” || “तुच्छता”
3. Prominence: “importance or noticeability” || “प्रमुखता”
4. Insignificance: “unimportance” || “तुच्छता”
5. Triviality: “unimportance” || “तुच्छता”
-
Question 7 of 15Marks: +1 and -0.25
7. Question
Section: English00:00Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.
This year is the 30th anniversary of the passing of the 73rd and 74th Amendments. Indian governance was always overcentralised. But it is a sign of the times that even the modest steps these amendments took towards decentralisation now seem to belong to an alien intellectual and political world. In a moment of authoritarian centralisation, the idea of deepening democracy by creating structures of inclusive governance seems like a pipe dream.
Indian democracy since Independence never really had a commitment to decentralisation. Despite performative obeisance to the idea by the state, decentralisation has always been hostage to a number of contradictory impulses. Initially, there was the presumption that centralised power would be required to break the power of local elites, never mind the fact that there is little evidence that the outcomes of decentralisation would have been worse than what we eventually got. The existing tiers of government, both central and state, wanted to hoard most of the resources. India has the lowest spending on local government as a proportion of resources. And the ideology of Gandhian decentralisation, oddly enough, militated against genuine political decentralisation.
For, in this imagination, decentralisation was not a devolution of power and resources. It was the creation of an idealistic imagined space that would be above politics; that would free it from the usual give and take and contests of politics. Local government would be held to a higher standard than other tiers of governance. For example, we take partisanship and competition to be central to politics elsewhere. But somehow we expected panchayats to be this font of consensus (some states give incentives for election by consensus). And, it has to be said, there was no serious demand side push for decentralisation.
The 73rd and 74th amendments did achieve a lot. In some areas, they led to the state acquiring a distinct presence on the ground; they gave millions of citizens identities as representatives; they provided a conduit for sharing power; they created deliberative spaces, led to the creation of new norms, especially around the participation of women and a churn in local elites. They slowly built up local capacities, and led to a wide range of functions being devolved to local government.
Local government was often the object of condescension: The general story we ran was that the state at lower tiers of government is incompetent, while you get a better state at the higher level. It is often the reverse: The state at local levels is competent, it is just constantly being let down by lack of support and investment from the top. Fiscal resources that local governments managed went up considerably, in part paradoxically through central schemes like NREGA, and increased finance commission awards. In some, the very pathologies associated with local elections were also a tribute to its success. The fact that local political competition became intense in many states, and in some cases, political spending in local elections acquired obscene proportions, was a backhanded tribute to the stakes in local governance.
The experience of local governments varies across states; it is more deeply practised and institutionalised in states like Kerala. But, as articles in a recent symposium on decentralisation in the March issue of Seminar magazine point out, the glass of decentralisation still remains at best half full. The tension between thinking of local government as mere administrative conduits versus autonomous political actors, the constraints placed on them by a combination of bureaucratic control and deliberate underinvestment in capacity, and the lack of political pathways for successful panchayat performers to rise in their parties, limit their salience.
Technology has been a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it can create local capacity; on the other, it has been used to largely bypass political negotiation and control. The lack of clarity over municipal governance, and the hijacking of cities by the political economy of contracting, makes the idea of cities being governed by some sort of collective deliberation a bit of a joke.
Local government requires many technical, administrative and financial fixes. There is a case to be made that the distinction between the 73rd and 74th amendments is now obsolete. Jayalalithaa, when she was chief minister, had first made the case for a unified district-level local government rather than a distinction between urban and rural. Many of the decisions consequential for India's urbanisation, like land use change, for example, are being made in "panchayats"; there is arbitrage over how a settlement gets classified, and rural and urban is now, at best, a continuum. There are many such discussions to be had. For years, so many colleagues at the Centre for Policy Research were engaged with these matters. But these issues now seem to belong to another time, even another country.What is a near synonym for the word “obscene” as used in the passage?
Correct
Correct! The correct answer is B: Indecent. “Obscene” in the context means unacceptable or inappropriate, and “indecent” is its near synonym.
Meanings of the options:
1. Vulgar: “lacking sophistication or good taste” || “आपत्तिजनक”
2. Indecent: “not proper or appropriate” || “अनुचित”
3. Respectable: “proper and appropriate” || “सम्माननीय”
4. Vile: “extremely unpleasant” || “घृणित”
5. Raunchy: “vulgar or sexually explicit” || “अश्लील”
Incorrect
Incorrect! The correct answer is B: Indecent. “Obscene” in the context means unacceptable or inappropriate, and “indecent” is its near synonym.
Meanings of the options:
1. Vulgar: “lacking sophistication or good taste” || “अश्लील”
2. Indecent: “not proper or appropriate” || “अनुचित”
3. Respectable: “proper and appropriate” || “सम्माननीय”
4. Vile: “extremely unpleasant” || “घृणित”
5. Raunchy: “vulgar or sexually explicit” || “आपत्तिजनक”
Unattempted
Incorrect! The correct answer is B: Indecent. “Obscene” in the context means unacceptable or inappropriate, and “indecent” is its near synonym.
Meanings of the options:
1. Vulgar: “lacking sophistication or good taste” || “अश्लील”
2. Indecent: “not proper or appropriate” || “अनुचित”
3. Respectable: “proper and appropriate” || “सम्माननीय”
4. Vile: “extremely unpleasant” || “घृणित”
5. Raunchy: “vulgar or sexually explicit” || “आपत्तिजनक”
-
Question 8 of 15Marks: +1 and -0.25
8. Question
Section: English00:00Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.
Around 20,000 eclipse chasers gathered under a cloudless sky in the northwest Australian coastal town of Exmouth to enjoy a rare total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
The remote tourist town with fewer than 3,000 residents was promoted as one of the best vantage points in Australia to see the eclipse that also crosses remote parts of Indonesia and East Timor.
An international crowd had been gathering at Exmouth for days, camping in tents and trailers on a red, dusty plain on the edge of town with cameras and other viewing equipment pointed skyward.
In Indonesia's capital, hundreds came to the Jakarta Planetarium to see the partial eclipse, obscured by clouds.
Azka Azzahra, 21, came with her sister and friends to get a closer look by using the telescopes with hundreds of other visitors. "I am still happy to come even though it is cloudy. It is happy to see how people with high enthusiasm come here to see the eclipse, because it is rare," Ms. Azzahra said.
The call to prayer resounded from the city's mosques when the eclipse phase began as Muslims said eclipse prayers as a reminder of God's greatness.
NASA astronomer Henry Throop was among those at Exmouth loudly cheering the eclipse in the darkness. "Isn't it incredible? This is so fantastic. It was mind-blowing. It was so sharp and it was so bright. You could see the corona around the sun there," the visibly excited Washington resident told Australian Broadcasting Corp.
"It's only a minute long, but it really felt like a long time. There's nothing else you can see which looks like that. It was just awesome. Spectacular. And then you could see Jupiter and Mercury and to be able to see those at the same time during the day — even seeing Mercury at all is pretty rare. So that was just awesome," Mr. Throop added.
The hybrid solar eclipse tracked from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and was mostly over water.
The lucky few people in its path either saw the darkness of a total eclipse or a "ring of fire" as the sun peeked from behind the new moon.
Such celestial events happen about once every decade: The last one was in 2013 and the next one isn't until 2031.
They occur when Earth is in the "sweet spot" so the new moon and the sun are almost the exact same size in the sky, said NASA solar expert Michael Kirk.
At some points, the moon is a little closer and blocks out the sun in a total eclipse. But when the moon is a little farther away, it lets some of the sun's light peek out in an annular eclipse.
"It's a crazy phenomenon," Mr. Kirk said. "You're actually watching the moon get larger in the sky."
Several other upcoming solar eclipses will be easier to catch. An annular eclipse in mid-October and a total eclipse next April will both cross over millions of people in the Americas.What was the experience of people in Exmouth during the solar eclipse?
Correct
Correct! The correct answer is B: They were able to see the total solar eclipse for about a minute. The passage states that people gathered under a cloudless sky and enjoyed a total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
Meanings of the options:
1. They were disappointed due to cloudy weather: “disappointed because of clouds” || “बादलों के कारण निराश”
2. They were able to see the total solar eclipse for about a minute: “saw total eclipse for a minute” || “लगभग एक मिनट के लिए पूर्ण सूर्य ग्रहण देखा”
3. They only saw a partial eclipse: “only saw partial eclipse” || “केवल आंशिक ग्रहण देखा”
4. They were unable to view the eclipse due to equipment failure: “couldn’t view due to equipment failure” || “उपकरण विफलता के कारण देख नहीं सके”
5. None of the above: “not any of the above” || “उपरोक्त में से कोई नहीं”
Incorrect
Incorrect! The correct answer is B: They were able to see the total solar eclipse for about a minute. The passage states that people gathered under a cloudless sky and enjoyed a total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
Meanings of the options:
1. They were disappointed due to cloudy weather: “disappointed because of clouds” || “बादलों के कारण निराश”
2. They were able to see the total solar eclipse for about a minute: “saw total eclipse for a minute” || “लगभग एक मिनट के लिए पूर्ण सूर्य ग्रहण देखा”
3. They only saw a partial eclipse: “only saw partial eclipse” || “केवल आंशिक ग्रहण देखा”
4. They were unable to view the eclipse due to equipment failure: “couldn’t view due to equipment failure” || “उपकरण विफलता के कारण देख नहीं सके”
5. None of the above: “not any of the above” || “उपरोक्त में से कोई नहीं”
Unattempted
Incorrect! The correct answer is B: They were able to see the total solar eclipse for about a minute. The passage states that people gathered under a cloudless sky and enjoyed a total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
Meanings of the options:
1. They were disappointed due to cloudy weather: “disappointed because of clouds” || “बादलों के कारण निराश”
2. They were able to see the total solar eclipse for about a minute: “saw total eclipse for a minute” || “लगभग एक मिनट के लिए पूर्ण सूर्य ग्रहण देखा”
3. They only saw a partial eclipse: “only saw partial eclipse” || “केवल आंशिक ग्रहण देखा”
4. They were unable to view the eclipse due to equipment failure: “couldn’t view due to equipment failure” || “उपकरण विफलता के कारण देख नहीं सके”
5. None of the above: “not any of the above” || “उपरोक्त में से कोई नहीं”
-
Question 9 of 15Marks: +1 and -0.25
9. Question
Section: English00:00Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.
Around 20,000 eclipse chasers gathered under a cloudless sky in the northwest Australian coastal town of Exmouth to enjoy a rare total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
The remote tourist town with fewer than 3,000 residents was promoted as one of the best vantage points in Australia to see the eclipse that also crosses remote parts of Indonesia and East Timor.
An international crowd had been gathering at Exmouth for days, camping in tents and trailers on a red, dusty plain on the edge of town with cameras and other viewing equipment pointed skyward.
In Indonesia's capital, hundreds came to the Jakarta Planetarium to see the partial eclipse, obscured by clouds.
Azka Azzahra, 21, came with her sister and friends to get a closer look by using the telescopes with hundreds of other visitors. "I am still happy to come even though it is cloudy. It is happy to see how people with high enthusiasm come here to see the eclipse, because it is rare," Ms. Azzahra said.
The call to prayer resounded from the city's mosques when the eclipse phase began as Muslims said eclipse prayers as a reminder of God's greatness.
NASA astronomer Henry Throop was among those at Exmouth loudly cheering the eclipse in the darkness. "Isn't it incredible? This is so fantastic. It was mind-blowing. It was so sharp and it was so bright. You could see the corona around the sun there," the visibly excited Washington resident told Australian Broadcasting Corp.
"It's only a minute long, but it really felt like a long time. There's nothing else you can see which looks like that. It was just awesome. Spectacular. And then you could see Jupiter and Mercury and to be able to see those at the same time during the day — even seeing Mercury at all is pretty rare. So that was just awesome," Mr. Throop added.
The hybrid solar eclipse tracked from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and was mostly over water.
The lucky few people in its path either saw the darkness of a total eclipse or a "ring of fire" as the sun peeked from behind the new moon.
Such celestial events happen about once every decade: The last one was in 2013 and the next one isn't until 2031.
They occur when Earth is in the "sweet spot" so the new moon and the sun are almost the exact same size in the sky, said NASA solar expert Michael Kirk.
At some points, the moon is a little closer and blocks out the sun in a total eclipse. But when the moon is a little farther away, it lets some of the sun's light peek out in an annular eclipse.
"It's a crazy phenomenon," Mr. Kirk said. "You're actually watching the moon get larger in the sky."
Several other upcoming solar eclipses will be easier to catch. An annular eclipse in mid-October and a total eclipse next April will both cross over millions of people in the Americas.What can be inferred about the term “ring of fire” in the context of the passage?
Correct
Correct! The correct answer is E: The bright halo-like ring around the moon during a solar eclipse. The passage describes a “ring of fire” as the sun peeked from behind the new moon, forming a bright halo-like ring.
Meanings of the options:
1. The total darkness during a solar eclipse: “total darkness” || “पूर्ण अंधकार”
2. The moment when the moon and sun are the exact same size in the sky: “moon and sun same size” || “चंद्रमा और सूर्य समान आकार”
3. The phenomenon when the moon blocks out some of the sun’s light during an eclipse: “moon blocks some sunlight” || “चंद्रमा कुछ सूर्य प्रकाश को रोकता है”
4. The moment when the moon is a little farther away and lets some of the sun’s light peek out: “moon farther away lets light peek” || “चंद्रमा दूर होने पर प्रकाश झलकता है”
5. The bright halo-like ring around the moon during a solar eclipse: “bright halo-like ring” || “चंद्रमा के चारों ओर चमकीला प्रभामंडल”
Incorrect
Incorrect! The correct answer is E: The bright halo-like ring around the moon during a solar eclipse. The passage describes a “ring of fire” as the sun peeked from behind the new moon, forming a bright halo-like ring.
Meanings of the options:
1. The total darkness during a solar eclipse: “total darkness” || “पूर्ण अंधकार”
2. The moment when the moon and sun are the exact same size in the sky: “moon and sun same size” || “चंद्रमा और सूर्य समान आकार”
3. The phenomenon when the moon blocks out some of the sun’s light during an eclipse: “moon blocks some sunlight” || “चंद्रमा कुछ सूर्य प्रकाश को रोकता है”
4. The moment when the moon is a little farther away and lets some of the sun’s light peek out: “moon farther away lets light peek” || “चंद्रमा दूर होने पर प्रकाश झलकता है”
5. The bright halo-like ring around the moon during a solar eclipse: “bright halo-like ring” || “चंद्रमा के चारों ओर चमकीला प्रभामंडल”
Unattempted
Incorrect! The correct answer is E: The bright halo-like ring around the moon during a solar eclipse. The passage describes a “ring of fire” as the sun peeked from behind the new moon, forming a bright halo-like ring.
Meanings of the options:
1. The total darkness during a solar eclipse: “total darkness” || “पूर्ण अंधकार”
2. The moment when the moon and sun are the exact same size in the sky: “moon and sun same size” || “चंद्रमा और सूर्य समान आकार”
3. The phenomenon when the moon blocks out some of the sun’s light during an eclipse: “moon blocks some sunlight” || “चंद्रमा कुछ सूर्य प्रकाश को रोकता है”
4. The moment when the moon is a little farther away and lets some of the sun’s light peek out: “moon farther away lets light peek” || “चंद्रमा दूर होने पर प्रकाश झलकता है”
5. The bright halo-like ring around the moon during a solar eclipse: “bright halo-like ring” || “चंद्रमा के चारों ओर चमकीला प्रभामंडल”
-
Question 10 of 15Marks: +1 and -0.25
10. Question
Section: English00:00Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.
Around 20,000 eclipse chasers gathered under a cloudless sky in the northwest Australian coastal town of Exmouth to enjoy a rare total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
The remote tourist town with fewer than 3,000 residents was promoted as one of the best vantage points in Australia to see the eclipse that also crosses remote parts of Indonesia and East Timor.
An international crowd had been gathering at Exmouth for days, camping in tents and trailers on a red, dusty plain on the edge of town with cameras and other viewing equipment pointed skyward.
In Indonesia's capital, hundreds came to the Jakarta Planetarium to see the partial eclipse, obscured by clouds.
Azka Azzahra, 21, came with her sister and friends to get a closer look by using the telescopes with hundreds of other visitors. "I am still happy to come even though it is cloudy. It is happy to see how people with high enthusiasm come here to see the eclipse, because it is rare," Ms. Azzahra said.
The call to prayer resounded from the city's mosques when the eclipse phase began as Muslims said eclipse prayers as a reminder of God's greatness.
NASA astronomer Henry Throop was among those at Exmouth loudly cheering the eclipse in the darkness. "Isn't it incredible? This is so fantastic. It was mind-blowing. It was so sharp and it was so bright. You could see the corona around the sun there," the visibly excited Washington resident told Australian Broadcasting Corp.
"It's only a minute long, but it really felt like a long time. There's nothing else you can see which looks like that. It was just awesome. Spectacular. And then you could see Jupiter and Mercury and to be able to see those at the same time during the day — even seeing Mercury at all is pretty rare. So that was just awesome," Mr. Throop added.
The hybrid solar eclipse tracked from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and was mostly over water.
The lucky few people in its path either saw the darkness of a total eclipse or a "ring of fire" as the sun peeked from behind the new moon.
Such celestial events happen about once every decade: The last one was in 2013 and the next one isn't until 2031.
They occur when Earth is in the "sweet spot" so the new moon and the sun are almost the exact same size in the sky, said NASA solar expert Michael Kirk.
At some points, the moon is a little closer and blocks out the sun in a total eclipse. But when the moon is a little farther away, it lets some of the sun's light peek out in an annular eclipse.
"It's a crazy phenomenon," Mr. Kirk said. "You're actually watching the moon get larger in the sky."
Several other upcoming solar eclipses will be easier to catch. An annular eclipse in mid-October and a total eclipse next April will both cross over millions of people in the Americas.Which of the following statements about the solar eclipse discussed in the passage is false?
Correct
Correct! The correct answer is E: Solar eclipses happen only when the sun and the moon are the exact same size in the sky. The passage states they are “almost the exact same size,” not exactly the same, and eclipses can also be annular or partial.
Meanings of the options:
1. The solar eclipse occurred in Australia, Indonesia, and East Timor: “eclipse occurred in these countries” || “सूर्य ग्रहण इन देशों में हुआ”
2. The town of Exmouth was promoted as one of the best vantage points to see the eclipse in Australia: “Exmouth promoted as best vantage point” || “एक्समाउथ को सर्वोत्तम देखने का स्थान बताया गया”
3. The solar eclipse can be tracked from both land and water: “eclipse tracked from land and water” || “सूर्य ग्रहण को भूमि और जल दोनों से देखा जा सकता है”
4. The last solar eclipse happened in 2013 and the next one will occur in 2031: “last eclipse in 2013, next in 2031” || “अंतिम ग्रहण 2013 में, अगला 2031 में”
5. Solar eclipses happen only when the sun and the moon are the exact same size in the sky: “eclipses happen only when sun and moon are exact same size” || “सूर्य ग्रहण केवल तब होते हैं जब सूर्य और चंद्रमा आकार में बिल्कुल समान हों”
Incorrect
Incorrect! The correct answer is E: Solar eclipses happen only when the sun and the moon are the exact same size in the sky. The passage states they are “almost the exact same size,” not exactly the same, and eclipses can also be annular or partial.
Meanings of the options:
1. The solar eclipse occurred in Australia, Indonesia, and East Timor: “eclipse occurred in these countries” || “सूर्य ग्रहण इन देशों में हुआ”
2. The town of Exmouth was promoted as one of the best vantage points to see the eclipse in Australia: “Exmouth promoted as best vantage point” || “एक्समाउथ को सर्वोत्तम देखने का स्थान बताया गया”
3. The solar eclipse can be tracked from both land and water: “eclipse tracked from land and water” || “सूर्य ग्रहण को भूमि और जल दोनों से देखा जा सकता है”
4. The last solar eclipse happened in 2013 and the next one will occur in 2031: “last eclipse in 2013, next in 2031” || “अंतिम ग्रहण 2013 में, अगला 2031 में”
5. Solar eclipses happen only when the sun and the moon are the exact same size in the sky: “eclipses happen only when sun and moon are exact same size” || “सूर्य ग्रहण केवल तब होते हैं जब सूर्य और चंद्रमा आकार में बिल्कुल समान हों”
Unattempted
Incorrect! The correct answer is E: Solar eclipses happen only when the sun and the moon are the exact same size in the sky. The passage states they are “almost the exact same size,” not exactly the same, and eclipses can also be annular or partial.
Meanings of the options:
1. The solar eclipse occurred in Australia, Indonesia, and East Timor: “eclipse occurred in these countries” || “सूर्य ग्रहण इन देशों में हुआ”
2. The town of Exmouth was promoted as one of the best vantage points to see the eclipse in Australia: “Exmouth promoted as best vantage point” || “एक्समाउथ को सर्वोत्तम देखने का स्थान बताया गया”
3. The solar eclipse can be tracked from both land and water: “eclipse tracked from land and water” || “सूर्य ग्रहण को भूमि और जल दोनों से देखा जा सकता है”
4. The last solar eclipse happened in 2013 and the next one will occur in 2031: “last eclipse in 2013, next in 2031” || “अंतिम ग्रहण 2013 में, अगला 2031 में”
5. Solar eclipses happen only when the sun and the moon are the exact same size in the sky: “eclipses happen only when sun and moon are exact same size” || “सूर्य ग्रहण केवल तब होते हैं जब सूर्य और चंद्रमा आकार में बिल्कुल समान हों”
-
Question 11 of 15Marks: +1 and -0.25
11. Question
Section: English00:00Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.
Around 20,000 eclipse chasers gathered under a cloudless sky in the northwest Australian coastal town of Exmouth to enjoy a rare total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
The remote tourist town with fewer than 3,000 residents was promoted as one of the best vantage points in Australia to see the eclipse that also crosses remote parts of Indonesia and East Timor.
An international crowd had been gathering at Exmouth for days, camping in tents and trailers on a red, dusty plain on the edge of town with cameras and other viewing equipment pointed skyward.
In Indonesia's capital, hundreds came to the Jakarta Planetarium to see the partial eclipse, obscured by clouds.
Azka Azzahra, 21, came with her sister and friends to get a closer look by using the telescopes with hundreds of other visitors. "I am still happy to come even though it is cloudy. It is happy to see how people with high enthusiasm come here to see the eclipse, because it is rare," Ms. Azzahra said.
The call to prayer resounded from the city's mosques when the eclipse phase began as Muslims said eclipse prayers as a reminder of God's greatness.
NASA astronomer Henry Throop was among those at Exmouth loudly cheering the eclipse in the darkness. "Isn't it incredible? This is so fantastic. It was mind-blowing. It was so sharp and it was so bright. You could see the corona around the sun there," the visibly excited Washington resident told Australian Broadcasting Corp.
"It's only a minute long, but it really felt like a long time. There's nothing else you can see which looks like that. It was just awesome. Spectacular. And then you could see Jupiter and Mercury and to be able to see those at the same time during the day — even seeing Mercury at all is pretty rare. So that was just awesome," Mr. Throop added.
The hybrid solar eclipse tracked from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and was mostly over water.
The lucky few people in its path either saw the darkness of a total eclipse or a "ring of fire" as the sun peeked from behind the new moon.
Such celestial events happen about once every decade: The last one was in 2013 and the next one isn't until 2031.
They occur when Earth is in the "sweet spot" so the new moon and the sun are almost the exact same size in the sky, said NASA solar expert Michael Kirk.
At some points, the moon is a little closer and blocks out the sun in a total eclipse. But when the moon is a little farther away, it lets some of the sun's light peek out in an annular eclipse.
"It's a crazy phenomenon," Mr. Kirk said. "You're actually watching the moon get larger in the sky."
Several other upcoming solar eclipses will be easier to catch. An annular eclipse in mid-October and a total eclipse next April will both cross over millions of people in the Americas.What can be inferred about the people who gathered in Exmouth to watch the total solar eclipse?
I. They were all from Australia
II. They had come prepared with viewing equipment
III. They were all Muslims observing eclipse prayers
Correct
Correct! The correct answer is B: Only II. The passage states the crowd was international (so I is false), and they had viewing equipment (II is true). III is false as not all were Muslims.
Meanings of the options:
1. Only I: “only statement I is true” || “केवल I सत्य है”
2. Only II: “only statement II is true” || “केवल II सत्य है”
3. Only I and II: “statements I and II are true” || “I और II सत्य हैं”
4. Only II and III: “statements II and III are true” || “II और III सत्य हैं”
5. All of the above: “all three statements are true” || “सभी तीन कथन सत्य हैं”
Incorrect
Incorrect! The correct answer is B: Only II. The passage states the crowd was international (so I is false), and they had viewing equipment (II is true). III is false as not all were Muslims.
Meanings of the options:
1. Only I: “only statement I is true” || “केवल I सत्य है”
2. Only II: “only statement II is true” || “केवल II सत्य है”
3. Only I and II: “statements I and II are true” || “I और II सत्य हैं”
4. Only II and III: “statements II and III are true” || “II और III सत्य हैं”
5. All of the above: “all three statements are true” || “सभी तीन कथन सत्य हैं”
Unattempted
Incorrect! The correct answer is B: Only II. The passage states the crowd was international (so I is false), and they had viewing equipment (II is true). III is false as not all were Muslims.
Meanings of the options:
1. Only I: “only statement I is true” || “केवल I सत्य है”
2. Only II: “only statement II is true” || “केवल II सत्य है”
3. Only I and II: “statements I and II are true” || “I और II सत्य हैं”
4. Only II and III: “statements II and III are true” || “II और III सत्य हैं”
5. All of the above: “all three statements are true” || “सभी तीन कथन सत्य हैं”
-
Question 12 of 15Marks: +1 and -0.25
12. Question
Section: English00:00Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.
Around 20,000 eclipse chasers gathered under a cloudless sky in the northwest Australian coastal town of Exmouth to enjoy a rare total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
The remote tourist town with fewer than 3,000 residents was promoted as one of the best vantage points in Australia to see the eclipse that also crosses remote parts of Indonesia and East Timor.
An international crowd had been gathering at Exmouth for days, camping in tents and trailers on a red, dusty plain on the edge of town with cameras and other viewing equipment pointed skyward.
In Indonesia's capital, hundreds came to the Jakarta Planetarium to see the partial eclipse, obscured by clouds.
Azka Azzahra, 21, came with her sister and friends to get a closer look by using the telescopes with hundreds of other visitors. "I am still happy to come even though it is cloudy. It is happy to see how people with high enthusiasm come here to see the eclipse, because it is rare," Ms. Azzahra said.
The call to prayer resounded from the city's mosques when the eclipse phase began as Muslims said eclipse prayers as a reminder of God's greatness.
NASA astronomer Henry Throop was among those at Exmouth loudly cheering the eclipse in the darkness. "Isn't it incredible? This is so fantastic. It was mind-blowing. It was so sharp and it was so bright. You could see the corona around the sun there," the visibly excited Washington resident told Australian Broadcasting Corp.
"It's only a minute long, but it really felt like a long time. There's nothing else you can see which looks like that. It was just awesome. Spectacular. And then you could see Jupiter and Mercury and to be able to see those at the same time during the day — even seeing Mercury at all is pretty rare. So that was just awesome," Mr. Throop added.
The hybrid solar eclipse tracked from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and was mostly over water.
The lucky few people in its path either saw the darkness of a total eclipse or a "ring of fire" as the sun peeked from behind the new moon.
Such celestial events happen about once every decade: The last one was in 2013 and the next one isn't until 2031.
They occur when Earth is in the "sweet spot" so the new moon and the sun are almost the exact same size in the sky, said NASA solar expert Michael Kirk.
At some points, the moon is a little closer and blocks out the sun in a total eclipse. But when the moon is a little farther away, it lets some of the sun's light peek out in an annular eclipse.
"It's a crazy phenomenon," Mr. Kirk said. "You're actually watching the moon get larger in the sky."
Several other upcoming solar eclipses will be easier to catch. An annular eclipse in mid-October and a total eclipse next April will both cross over millions of people in the Americas.What is the tone of the passage?
Correct
Correct! The correct answer is B: Exciting. The passage uses words like “enjoy,” “mind-blowing,” “spectacular,” and “awesome,” showing an excited tone.
Meanings of the options:
1. Neutral: “unbiased or impartial” || “तटस्थ”
2. Exciting: “causing enthusiasm and eagerness” || “रोमांचक”
3. Critical: “expressing disapproval” || “आलोचनात्मक”
4. Indifferent: “having no interest” || “उदासीन”
5. None of the above: “not any of the above” || “उपरोक्त में से कोई नहीं”
Incorrect
Incorrect! The correct answer is B: Exciting. The passage uses words like “enjoy,” “mind-blowing,” “spectacular,” and “awesome,” showing an excited tone.
Meanings of the options:
1. Neutral: “unbiased or impartial” || “तटस्थ”
2. Exciting: “causing enthusiasm and eagerness” || “रोमांचक”
3. Critical: “expressing disapproval” || “आलोचनात्मक”
4. Indifferent: “having no interest” || “उदासीन”
5. None of the above: “not any of the above” || “उपरोक्त में से कोई नहीं”
Unattempted
Incorrect! The correct answer is B: Exciting. The passage uses words like “enjoy,” “mind-blowing,” “spectacular,” and “awesome,” showing an excited tone.
Meanings of the options:
1. Neutral: “unbiased or impartial” || “तटस्थ”
2. Exciting: “causing enthusiasm and eagerness” || “रोमांचक”
3. Critical: “expressing disapproval” || “आलोचनात्मक”
4. Indifferent: “having no interest” || “उदासीन”
5. None of the above: “not any of the above” || “उपरोक्त में से कोई नहीं”
-
Question 13 of 15Marks: +1 and -0.25
13. Question
Section: English00:00Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.
Around 20,000 eclipse chasers gathered under a cloudless sky in the northwest Australian coastal town of Exmouth to enjoy a rare total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
The remote tourist town with fewer than 3,000 residents was promoted as one of the best vantage points in Australia to see the eclipse that also crosses remote parts of Indonesia and East Timor.
An international crowd had been gathering at Exmouth for days, camping in tents and trailers on a red, dusty plain on the edge of town with cameras and other viewing equipment pointed skyward.
In Indonesia's capital, hundreds came to the Jakarta Planetarium to see the partial eclipse, obscured by clouds.
Azka Azzahra, 21, came with her sister and friends to get a closer look by using the telescopes with hundreds of other visitors. "I am still happy to come even though it is cloudy. It is happy to see how people with high enthusiasm come here to see the eclipse, because it is rare," Ms. Azzahra said.
The call to prayer resounded from the city's mosques when the eclipse phase began as Muslims said eclipse prayers as a reminder of God's greatness.
NASA astronomer Henry Throop was among those at Exmouth loudly cheering the eclipse in the darkness. "Isn't it incredible? This is so fantastic. It was mind-blowing. It was so sharp and it was so bright. You could see the corona around the sun there," the visibly excited Washington resident told Australian Broadcasting Corp.
"It's only a minute long, but it really felt like a long time. There's nothing else you can see which looks like that. It was just awesome. Spectacular. And then you could see Jupiter and Mercury and to be able to see those at the same time during the day — even seeing Mercury at all is pretty rare. So that was just awesome," Mr. Throop added.
The hybrid solar eclipse tracked from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and was mostly over water.
The lucky few people in its path either saw the darkness of a total eclipse or a "ring of fire" as the sun peeked from behind the new moon.
Such celestial events happen about once every decade: The last one was in 2013 and the next one isn't until 2031.
They occur when Earth is in the "sweet spot" so the new moon and the sun are almost the exact same size in the sky, said NASA solar expert Michael Kirk.
At some points, the moon is a little closer and blocks out the sun in a total eclipse. But when the moon is a little farther away, it lets some of the sun's light peek out in an annular eclipse.
"It's a crazy phenomenon," Mr. Kirk said. "You're actually watching the moon get larger in the sky."
Several other upcoming solar eclipses will be easier to catch. An annular eclipse in mid-October and a total eclipse next April will both cross over millions of people in the Americas.Which organization filed a formal complaint with the Department of Consumers Affairs about the Bournvita advertisement and product packaging?
Correct
Correct! The correct answer is D: The Nutrition Advocacy in Public Interest — India (NAPi). The passage states that NAPi filed a formal complaint with the Department of Consumers Affairs about the Bournvita advertisement.
Meanings of the options:
1. Mondelez India: “the company that makes Bournvita” || “मोंडेलेज़ इंडिया”
2. The Food Standards and Safety Authority of India (FSSAI): “the food regulatory body” || “भारतीय खाद्य सुरक्षा और मानक प्राधिकरण”
3. The Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution: “the government ministry” || “उपभोक्ता मामलों का मंत्रालय”
4. The Nutrition Advocacy in Public Interest — India (NAPi): “the organization that filed the complaint” || “न्यूट्रिशन एडवोकेसी इन पब्लिक इंटरेस्ट — इंडिया”
5. None of the above: “not any of the above” || “उपरोक्त में से कोई नहीं”
Incorrect
Incorrect! The correct answer is D: The Nutrition Advocacy in Public Interest — India (NAPi). The passage states that NAPi filed a formal complaint with the Department of Consumers Affairs about the Bournvita advertisement.
Meanings of the options:
1. Mondelez India: “the company that makes Bournvita” || “मोंडेलेज़ इंडिया”
2. The Food Standards and Safety Authority of India (FSSAI): “the food regulatory body” || “भारतीय खाद्य सुरक्षा और मानक प्राधिकरण”
3. The Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution: “the government ministry” || “उपभोक्ता मामलों का मंत्रालय”
4. The Nutrition Advocacy in Public Interest — India (NAPi): “the organization that filed the complaint” || “न्यूट्रिशन एडवोकेसी इन पब्लिक इंटरेस्ट — इंडिया”
5. None of the above: “not any of the above” || “उपरोक्त में से कोई नहीं”
Unattempted
Incorrect! The correct answer is D: The Nutrition Advocacy in Public Interest — India (NAPi). The passage states that NAPi filed a formal complaint with the Department of Consumers Affairs about the Bournvita advertisement.
Meanings of the options:
1. Mondelez India: “the company that makes Bournvita” || “मोंडेलेज़ इंडिया”
2. The Food Standards and Safety Authority of India (FSSAI): “the food regulatory body” || “भारतीय खाद्य सुरक्षा और मानक प्राधिकरण”
3. The Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution: “the government ministry” || “उपभोक्ता मामलों का मंत्रालय”
4. The Nutrition Advocacy in Public Interest — India (NAPi): “the organization that filed the complaint” || “न्यूट्रिशन एडवोकेसी इन पब्लिक इंटरेस्ट — इंडिया”
5. None of the above: “not any of the above” || “उपरोक्त में से कोई नहीं”
-
Question 14 of 15Marks: +1 and -0.25
14. Question
Section: English00:00Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.
Around 20,000 eclipse chasers gathered under a cloudless sky in the northwest Australian coastal town of Exmouth to enjoy a rare total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
The remote tourist town with fewer than 3,000 residents was promoted as one of the best vantage points in Australia to see the eclipse that also crosses remote parts of Indonesia and East Timor.
An international crowd had been gathering at Exmouth for days, camping in tents and trailers on a red, dusty plain on the edge of town with cameras and other viewing equipment pointed skyward.
In Indonesia's capital, hundreds came to the Jakarta Planetarium to see the partial eclipse, obscured by clouds.
Azka Azzahra, 21, came with her sister and friends to get a closer look by using the telescopes with hundreds of other visitors. "I am still happy to come even though it is cloudy. It is happy to see how people with high enthusiasm come here to see the eclipse, because it is rare," Ms. Azzahra said.
The call to prayer resounded from the city's mosques when the eclipse phase began as Muslims said eclipse prayers as a reminder of God's greatness.
NASA astronomer Henry Throop was among those at Exmouth loudly cheering the eclipse in the darkness. "Isn't it incredible? This is so fantastic. It was mind-blowing. It was so sharp and it was so bright. You could see the corona around the sun there," the visibly excited Washington resident told Australian Broadcasting Corp.
"It's only a minute long, but it really felt like a long time. There's nothing else you can see which looks like that. It was just awesome. Spectacular. And then you could see Jupiter and Mercury and to be able to see those at the same time during the day — even seeing Mercury at all is pretty rare. So that was just awesome," Mr. Throop added.
The hybrid solar eclipse tracked from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and was mostly over water.
The lucky few people in its path either saw the darkness of a total eclipse or a "ring of fire" as the sun peeked from behind the new moon.
Such celestial events happen about once every decade: The last one was in 2013 and the next one isn't until 2031.
They occur when Earth is in the "sweet spot" so the new moon and the sun are almost the exact same size in the sky, said NASA solar expert Michael Kirk.
At some points, the moon is a little closer and blocks out the sun in a total eclipse. But when the moon is a little farther away, it lets some of the sun's light peek out in an annular eclipse.
"It's a crazy phenomenon," Mr. Kirk said. "You're actually watching the moon get larger in the sky."
Several other upcoming solar eclipses will be easier to catch. An annular eclipse in mid-October and a total eclipse next April will both cross over millions of people in the Americas.What is the main issue highlighted in the passage?
Correct
Correct! The correct answer is E: The failure of FSSAI to regulate packaged and processed food. The passage states that the real issue is FSSAI dragging its feet over implementing guidelines to regulate packaged and processed food.
Meanings of the options:
1. The controversy surrounding Cadbury Bournvita and an influencer’s video: “controversy about Bournvita and influencer” || “बॉर्नविटा और इन्फ्लुएंसर का विवाद”
2. The role of NAPi in promoting nutrition policy in India: “NAPi’s role in nutrition policy” || “पोषण नीति में NAPi की भूमिका”
3. The misleading advertisements and product packaging of Bournvita: “misleading ads and packaging” || “भ्रामक विज्ञापन और पैकेजिंग”
4. The legal notice issued by Mondelez India to Revant Himatsingka: “legal notice to Revant” || “मोंडेलेज़ इंडिया द्वारा रेवंत को कानूनी नोटिस”
5. The failure of FSSAI to regulate packaged and processed food: “FSSAI’s failure to regulate” || “FSSAI का पैकेज्ड और प्रोसेस्ड भोजन को विनियमित करने में विफलता”
Incorrect
Incorrect! The correct answer is E: The failure of FSSAI to regulate packaged and processed food. The passage states that the real issue is FSSAI dragging its feet over implementing guidelines to regulate packaged and processed food.
Meanings of the options:
1. The controversy surrounding Cadbury Bournvita and an influencer’s video: “controversy about Bournvita and influencer” || “बॉर्नविटा और इन्फ्लुएंसर का विवाद”
2. The role of NAPi in promoting nutrition policy in India: “NAPi’s role in nutrition policy” || “पोषण नीति में NAPi की भूमिका”
3. The misleading advertisements and product packaging of Bournvita: “misleading ads and packaging” || “भ्रामक विज्ञापन और पैकेजिंग”
4. The legal notice issued by Mondelez India to Revant Himatsingka: “legal notice to Revant” || “मोंडेलेज़ इंडिया द्वारा रेवंत को कानूनी नोटिस”
5. The failure of FSSAI to regulate packaged and processed food: “FSSAI’s failure to regulate” || “FSSAI का पैकेज्ड और प्रोसेस्ड भोजन को विनियमित करने में विफलता”
Unattempted
Incorrect! The correct answer is E: The failure of FSSAI to regulate packaged and processed food. The passage states that the real issue is FSSAI dragging its feet over implementing guidelines to regulate packaged and processed food.
Meanings of the options:
1. The controversy surrounding Cadbury Bournvita and an influencer’s video: “controversy about Bournvita and influencer” || “बॉर्नविटा और इन्फ्लुएंसर का विवाद”
2. The role of NAPi in promoting nutrition policy in India: “NAPi’s role in nutrition policy” || “पोषण नीति में NAPi की भूमिका”
3. The misleading advertisements and product packaging of Bournvita: “misleading ads and packaging” || “भ्रामक विज्ञापन और पैकेजिंग”
4. The legal notice issued by Mondelez India to Revant Himatsingka: “legal notice to Revant” || “मोंडेलेज़ इंडिया द्वारा रेवंत को कानूनी नोटिस”
5. The failure of FSSAI to regulate packaged and processed food: “FSSAI’s failure to regulate” || “FSSAI का पैकेज्ड और प्रोसेस्ड भोजन को विनियमित करने में विफलता”
-
Question 15 of 15Marks: +1 and -0.25
15. Question
Section: English00:00Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.
Around 20,000 eclipse chasers gathered under a cloudless sky in the northwest Australian coastal town of Exmouth to enjoy a rare total solar eclipse that plunged the region into darkness for about a minute.
The remote tourist town with fewer than 3,000 residents was promoted as one of the best vantage points in Australia to see the eclipse that also crosses remote parts of Indonesia and East Timor.
An international crowd had been gathering at Exmouth for days, camping in tents and trailers on a red, dusty plain on the edge of town with cameras and other viewing equipment pointed skyward.
In Indonesia's capital, hundreds came to the Jakarta Planetarium to see the partial eclipse, obscured by clouds.
Azka Azzahra, 21, came with her sister and friends to get a closer look by using the telescopes with hundreds of other visitors. "I am still happy to come even though it is cloudy. It is happy to see how people with high enthusiasm come here to see the eclipse, because it is rare," Ms. Azzahra said.
The call to prayer resounded from the city's mosques when the eclipse phase began as Muslims said eclipse prayers as a reminder of God's greatness.
NASA astronomer Henry Throop was among those at Exmouth loudly cheering the eclipse in the darkness. "Isn't it incredible? This is so fantastic. It was mind-blowing. It was so sharp and it was so bright. You could see the corona around the sun there," the visibly excited Washington resident told Australian Broadcasting Corp.
"It's only a minute long, but it really felt like a long time. There's nothing else you can see which looks like that. It was just awesome. Spectacular. And then you could see Jupiter and Mercury and to be able to see those at the same time during the day — even seeing Mercury at all is pretty rare. So that was just awesome," Mr. Throop added.
The hybrid solar eclipse tracked from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and was mostly over water.
The lucky few people in its path either saw the darkness of a total eclipse or a "ring of fire" as the sun peeked from behind the new moon.
Such celestial events happen about once every decade: The last one was in 2013 and the next one isn't until 2031.
They occur when Earth is in the "sweet spot" so the new moon and the sun are almost the exact same size in the sky, said NASA solar expert Michael Kirk.
At some points, the moon is a little closer and blocks out the sun in a total eclipse. But when the moon is a little farther away, it lets some of the sun's light peek out in an annular eclipse.
"It's a crazy phenomenon," Mr. Kirk said. "You're actually watching the moon get larger in the sky."
Several other upcoming solar eclipses will be easier to catch. An annular eclipse in mid-October and a total eclipse next April will both cross over millions of people in the Americas.What is the opposite of the word “massive” as used in the following sentence from the given passage?
This, despite massive opposition from doctors and the government’s own bodies such as the Indian Council of Medical Research and National Institute of Nutrition.
Correct
Correct! The correct answer is A: Tiny. “Massive” means very large, and “tiny” means very small, making it the opposite.
Meanings of the options:
1. Tiny: “very small” || “बहुत छोटा”
2. Heavy: “of great weight” || “भारी”
3. Large: “of considerable size” || “बड़ा”
4. Huge: “extremely large” || “विशाल”
5. Bulky: “taking up much space” || “भारी-भरकम”
Incorrect
Incorrect! The correct answer is A: Tiny. “Massive” means very large, and “tiny” means very small, making it the opposite.
Meanings of the options:
1. Tiny: “very small” || “बहुत छोटा”
2. Heavy: “of great weight” || “भारी”
3. Large: “of considerable size” || “बड़ा”
4. Huge: “extremely large” || “विशाल”
5. Bulky: “taking up much space” || “भारी-भरकम”
Unattempted
Incorrect! The correct answer is A: Tiny. “Massive” means very large, and “tiny” means very small, making it the opposite.
Meanings of the options:
1. Tiny: “very small” || “बहुत छोटा”
2. Heavy: “of great weight” || “भारी”
3. Large: “of considerable size” || “बड़ा”
4. Huge: “extremely large” || “विशाल”
5. Bulky: “taking up much space” || “भारी-भरकम”
About author
Add comment