ForumIAS Open Test - Doubts and Queries - Score & Rank Sharing - Official Thread

1235

Comments

  • porus said:

    Score 107. @DrKingSchultz kitna hua?
    Good questions @ForumIAS

    112 bhai.
    Par theek hai.
    No mugging up since August, no current affairs, nothing.
    Plus around 5-6 silly mistakes (correct/incorrect types).
    Can be propelled to 150 till June. :)
    Okk bhai.. ;) same here
  • porus said:

    porus said:

    Score 107. @DrKingSchultz kitna hua?
    Good questions @ForumIAS

    112 bhai.
    Par theek hai.
    No mugging up since August, no current affairs, nothing.
    Plus around 5-6 silly mistakes (correct/incorrect types).
    Can be propelled to 150 till June. :)
    Okk bhai.. ;) same here
    @porus
    Tame toh saheb madiya j nai amne LD par.
    Avu na chale.
    Prelims: 4. Mains: 2*. Interview: 1. Rank: NA.
    Literature of English Language.
    "Only through time time is conquered."
  • edited February 19

    @VivekJ2 said:
    @raushankumar @DrKingSchultz @Yo_Yo_Choti_Singh @Burger

    In case of a person being convicted by the Supreme Court of India, which of the following are correct?

    1. The person becomes unfit for contesting elections to the State Assembly

    2. The person becomes unfit for contesting election to the LokSabha

    3. The person is barred from being appointed as the Chief Minister of a state by the Governor

    4. The person is barred from being appointed as the Prime Minister by the President of India

    Select the correct answer using the codes given below

    Options:
    a
    1 and 2 only
    b
    1, 2 and 3 only
    c
    3 and 4 only
    d
    1, 2, 3 and 4


    1 and 2 are correct because RPA was amended to disallow it. But i think there is an error / discrepancy in 3 and 4.
    A person can be made CM or PM without being a member of either state assembly or Parliament. so even if someone is convicted but doesnt goto jail.. due to review petitionor stay.. he can become cm, .. only that after 6 months he has to be elected to states assembly or parliament.. and he is convicted so according to RPA, he cant.. so he wont be cm/pm after that.. but my question is that at least for 6 months there is no issue at all. isnt it?

    so answers should be 1 and 2 only? someone kindly clarify..



    As far as first two statements are concerned, RPA comes into picture. Conviction alone is not enough to declare a MP unfit. Condns like sentencing should be more than 2 yrs, convicted of specific offenders like social crimes etc..!

    So, mere conviction does not make legislators unfit.

    As far as last two statements are concerned, SC comes into picture. In some case ( I think Jaya's) It said, Ministers come under the ambit of public servants and no convicted public servants should hold public office..irrespective of sentences.

    So Chief Min and PM should resign if they are merely convicted.

    Yes if the PM and CM is convicted he should be resigned. Below is article from Hindu which clarifies from SC.

    http://www.thehindu.com/2001/10/02/stories/13020643.htm
    Secondly, in Ms. Jayalalithaa's case, it was held that a person who is disqualified from being a member of the legislature will consequently not be eligible to be appointed Minister or Chief Minister.

    +1

    First two due to RPA ..next due to SC verdict.. the attached TH article speaks it clearly.. ELIGIBLE for MLA then only CM !!

    SC in Jaya case held that "Constitutional spirit must be protected even against the brutal will of the majority !!" :)
    Being IAS... 4 U Onlyyy... :-)
  • 70 correct
    28 wrong

    Score: 121.33

    Need to revise indian history.Nice paper.
    CSE 2016 Indian Police Service ( IPS )
  • 70 correct
    28 wrong

    Score: 121.33

    Need to revise indian history.Nice paper.

    yaar,, without history also u are getting good marks.. anyway. history wasn't having that much weightage and questions were easily guessable.
    Writing CSE Mains 2016
  • edited February 19

    @VivekJ2 said:
    @raushankumar @DrKingSchultz @Yo_Yo_Choti_Singh @Burger

    In case of a person being convicted by the Supreme Court of India, which of the following are correct?

    1. The person becomes unfit for contesting elections to the State Assembly

    2. The person becomes unfit for contesting election to the LokSabha

    3. The person is barred from being appointed as the Chief Minister of a state by the Governor

    4. The person is barred from being appointed as the Prime Minister by the President of India

    Select the correct answer using the codes given below

    Options:
    a
    1 and 2 only
    b
    1, 2 and 3 only
    c
    3 and 4 only
    d
    1, 2, 3 and 4


    1 and 2 are correct because RPA was amended to disallow it. But i think there is an error / discrepancy in 3 and 4.
    A person can be made CM or PM without being a member of either state assembly or Parliament. so even if someone is convicted but doesnt goto jail.. due to review petitionor stay.. he can become cm, .. only that after 6 months he has to be elected to states assembly or parliament.. and he is convicted so according to RPA, he cant.. so he wont be cm/pm after that.. but my question is that at least for 6 months there is no issue at all. isnt it?

    so answers should be 1 and 2 only? someone kindly clarify..



    As far as first two statements are concerned, RPA comes into picture. Conviction alone is not enough to declare a MP unfit. Condns like sentencing should be more than 2 yrs, convicted of specific offenders like social crimes etc..!

    So, mere conviction does not make legislators unfit.

    As far as last two statements are concerned, SC comes into picture. In some case ( I think Jaya's) It said, Ministers come under the ambit of public servants and no convicted public servants should hold public office..irrespective of sentences.

    So Chief Min and PM should resign if they are merely convicted.

    Yes if the PM and CM is convicted he should be resigned. Below is article from Hindu which clarifies from SC.

    http://www.thehindu.com/2001/10/02/stories/13020643.htm
    Secondly, in Ms. Jayalalithaa's case, it was held that a person who is disqualified from being a member of the legislature will consequently not be eligible to be appointed Minister or Chief Minister.

    +1

    First two due to RPA ..next due to SC verdict.. the attached TH article speaks it clearly.. ELIGIBLE for MLA then only CM !!

    SC in Jaya case held that "Constitutional spirit must be protected even against the brutal will of the majority !!" :)
    thought provoking question....yes it is D all the above will apply....as said by yo yo it is jaya case for CM...another verdict in 2013 in the following link clarifies this for PM as well...they will become disqualified on date of conviction and need not wait for any appeal...as section 8(4) of RPA was held unconstitutional.

    http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/mps-mlas-to-be-disqualified-on-date-of-criminal-conviction/article4901596.ece

    Cmon...i aint gonna bite you
  • @VivekJ2 said:
    @raushankumar @DrKingSchultz @Yo_Yo_Choti_Singh @Burger

    In case of a person being convicted by the Supreme Court of India, which of the following are correct?

    1. The person becomes unfit for contesting elections to the State Assembly

    2. The person becomes unfit for contesting election to the LokSabha

    3. The person is barred from being appointed as the Chief Minister of a state by the Governor

    4. The person is barred from being appointed as the Prime Minister by the President of India

    Select the correct answer using the codes given below

    Options:
    a
    1 and 2 only
    b
    1, 2 and 3 only
    c
    3 and 4 only
    d
    1, 2, 3 and 4


    1 and 2 are correct because RPA was amended to disallow it. But i think there is an error / discrepancy in 3 and 4.
    A person can be made CM or PM without being a member of either state assembly or Parliament. so even if someone is convicted but doesnt goto jail.. due to review petitionor stay.. he can become cm, .. only that after 6 months he has to be elected to states assembly or parliament.. and he is convicted so according to RPA, he cant.. so he wont be cm/pm after that.. but my question is that at least for 6 months there is no issue at all. isnt it?

    so answers should be 1 and 2 only? someone kindly clarify..



    As far as first two statements are concerned, RPA comes into picture. Conviction alone is not enough to declare a MP unfit. Condns like sentencing should be more than 2 yrs, convicted of specific offenders like social crimes etc..!

    So, mere conviction does not make legislators unfit.

    As far as last two statements are concerned, SC comes into picture. In some case ( I think Jaya's) It said, Ministers come under the ambit of public servants and no convicted public servants should hold public office..irrespective of sentences.

    So Chief Min and PM should resign if they are merely convicted.

    Yes if the PM and CM is convicted he should be resigned. Below is article from Hindu which clarifies from SC.

    http://www.thehindu.com/2001/10/02/stories/13020643.htm
    Secondly, in Ms. Jayalalithaa's case, it was held that a person who is disqualified from being a member of the legislature will consequently not be eligible to be appointed Minister or Chief Minister.

    +1

    First two due to RPA ..next due to SC verdict.. the attached TH article speaks it clearly.. ELIGIBLE for MLA then only CM !!

    SC in Jaya case held that "Constitutional spirit must be protected even against the brutal will of the majority !!" :)
    thought provoking question....yes it is D all the above will apply....as said by yo yo it is jaya case for CM...another verdict in 2013 in the following link clarifies this for PM as well...they will become disqualified on date of conviction and need not wait for any appeal...as section 8(4) of RPA was held unconstitutional.

    http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/mps-mlas-to-be-disqualified-on-date-of-criminal-conviction/article4901596.ece

    But only in >2 yrs Criminal Conviction cases only !! Right ?? :)
    Being IAS... 4 U Onlyyy... :-)
  • @VivekJ2 said:
    @raushankumar @DrKingSchultz @Yo_Yo_Choti_Singh @Burger

    In case of a person being convicted by the Supreme Court of India, which of the following are correct?

    1. The person becomes unfit for contesting elections to the State Assembly

    2. The person becomes unfit for contesting election to the LokSabha

    3. The person is barred from being appointed as the Chief Minister of a state by the Governor

    4. The person is barred from being appointed as the Prime Minister by the President of India

    Select the correct answer using the codes given below

    Options:
    a
    1 and 2 only
    b
    1, 2 and 3 only
    c
    3 and 4 only
    d
    1, 2, 3 and 4


    1 and 2 are correct because RPA was amended to disallow it. But i think there is an error / discrepancy in 3 and 4.
    A person can be made CM or PM without being a member of either state assembly or Parliament. so even if someone is convicted but doesnt goto jail.. due to review petitionor stay.. he can become cm, .. only that after 6 months he has to be elected to states assembly or parliament.. and he is convicted so according to RPA, he cant.. so he wont be cm/pm after that.. but my question is that at least for 6 months there is no issue at all. isnt it?

    so answers should be 1 and 2 only? someone kindly clarify..



    As far as first two statements are concerned, RPA comes into picture. Conviction alone is not enough to declare a MP unfit. Condns like sentencing should be more than 2 yrs, convicted of specific offenders like social crimes etc..!

    So, mere conviction does not make legislators unfit.

    As far as last two statements are concerned, SC comes into picture. In some case ( I think Jaya's) It said, Ministers come under the ambit of public servants and no convicted public servants should hold public office..irrespective of sentences.

    So Chief Min and PM should resign if they are merely convicted.

    Yes if the PM and CM is convicted he should be resigned. Below is article from Hindu which clarifies from SC.

    http://www.thehindu.com/2001/10/02/stories/13020643.htm
    Secondly, in Ms. Jayalalithaa's case, it was held that a person who is disqualified from being a member of the legislature will consequently not be eligible to be appointed Minister or Chief Minister.

    +1

    First two due to RPA ..next due to SC verdict.. the attached TH article speaks it clearly.. ELIGIBLE for MLA then only CM !!

    SC in Jaya case held that "Constitutional spirit must be protected even against the brutal will of the majority !!" :)
    thought provoking question....yes it is D all the above will apply....as said by yo yo it is jaya case for CM...another verdict in 2013 in the following link clarifies this for PM as well...they will become disqualified on date of conviction and need not wait for any appeal...as section 8(4) of RPA was held unconstitutional.

    http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/mps-mlas-to-be-disqualified-on-date-of-criminal-conviction/article4901596.ece

    But only in >2 yrs Criminal Conviction cases only !! Right ?? :)
    no yaar, RPA 1951 in depth if we see...if you are just fined for an offence, you are disqualified for 6 years...and if you are convicted for some term, say 3 years then it will add to that 6...so 9 years...so it is just the word conviction itself is enough
    Cmon...i aint gonna bite you
  • Got 107...no revisions since august....
    I cant see the answers. Why? I can only c my score....
  • Can someone provide link to take test
  • VivekJ2 said:

    70 correct
    28 wrong

    Score: 121.33

    Need to revise indian history.Nice paper.

    yaar,, without history also u are getting good marks.. anyway. history wasn't having that much weightage and questions were easily guessable.
    16 questions from history.Thats a good number man.Got 8 wrong in these.
    CSE 2016 Indian Police Service ( IPS )
  • edited February 19

    @VivekJ2 said:
    @raushankumar @DrKingSchultz @Yo_Yo_Choti_Singh @Burger

    In case of a person being convicted by the Supreme Court of India, which of the following are correct?

    1. The person becomes unfit for contesting elections to the State Assembly

    2. The person becomes unfit for contesting election to the LokSabha

    3. The person is barred from being appointed as the Chief Minister of a state by the Governor

    4. The person is barred from being appointed as the Prime Minister by the President of India

    Select the correct answer using the codes given below

    Options:
    a
    1 and 2 only
    b
    1, 2 and 3 only
    c
    3 and 4 only
    d
    1, 2, 3 and 4


    1 and 2 are correct because RPA was amended to disallow it. But i think there is an error / discrepancy in 3 and 4.
    A person can be made CM or PM without being a member of either state assembly or Parliament. so even if someone is convicted but doesnt goto jail.. due to review petitionor stay.. he can become cm, .. only that after 6 months he has to be elected to states assembly or parliament.. and he is convicted so according to RPA, he cant.. so he wont be cm/pm after that.. but my question is that at least for 6 months there is no issue at all. isnt it?

    so answers should be 1 and 2 only? someone kindly clarify..


    should resign if they are merely convicted.

    Yes if the PM and CM is convicted he should be resigned. Below is article from Hindu which clarifies from SC.

    http://www.thehindu.com/2001/10/02/stories/13020643.htm
    Secondly, in Ms. Jayalalithaa's case, it was held that a person who is disqualified from being a member of the legislature will consequently not be eligible to be appointed Minister or Chief Minister.

    +1

    First two due to RPA ..next due to SC verdict.. the attached TH article speaks it clearly.. ELIGIBLE for MLA then only CM !!

    SC in Jaya case held that "Constitutional spirit must be protected even against the brutal will of the majority !!" :)
    thought provoking question....yes it is D all the above will apply....as said by yo yo it is jaya case for CM...another verdict in 2013 in the following link clarifies this for PM as well...they will become disqualified on date of conviction and need not wait for any appeal...as section 8(4) of RPA was held unconstitutional.

    http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/mps-mlas-to-be-disqualified-on-date-of-criminal-conviction/article4901596.ece

    But only in >2 yrs Criminal Conviction cases only !! Right ?? :)
    no yaar, RPA 1951 in depth if we see...if you are just fined for an offence, you are disqualified for 6 years...and if you are convicted for some term, say 3 years then it will add to that 6...so 9 years...so it is just the word conviction itself is enough
    after reading RPA 1951 thoroughly i say this -

    1) those SPECIFIC OFFENSES under Sec 8(1) or 8 (2) of disqualification para in RPA like Terrorism/Sati/Untouchability/UAPA etc ..if a person get convicted.. than s/he stands disqualified for 6yrs or punishment period plus 6 yrs.


    2) EXCEPT THOSE OFFENSES UNDER sec 8(1) or (2) under sec 3) of same para same page.. a person IF CONVICTED NOT Less than 2 yrs (like in disproportionate assets/false affidavit filing/beating others etc offenses ) .. than he stand disqualified for 6 yrs plus period of punishment.


    So EXCEPT SEC sec 8 (1) and (2) specific Offenses of RPA for all other offenses minimum 2 yrs punishment criterion applies..

    That's why ECI vehemently demanding to increase punishment for filling FALSE AFFIDAVITs from current 6 months to 2 yrs..bcz that will be a strong deterrent for any politician filing WRONG/Fuzzed affidavit like those regarding Assets/Qualification etc !!
    Being IAS... 4 U Onlyyy... :-)
  • 62 C
    31 W

    Total : 103.XX

    Need to give up now... just floating without any effort isn't going to work.
    To be, or not to be, that is the question...
  • @VivekJ2 said:
    @raushankumar @DrKingSchultz @Yo_Yo_Choti_Singh @Burger

    In case of a person being convicted by the Supreme Court of India, which of the following are correct?

    1. The person becomes unfit for contesting elections to the State Assembly

    2. The person becomes unfit for contesting election to the LokSabha

    3. The person is barred from being appointed as the Chief Minister of a state by the Governor

    4. The person is barred from being appointed as the Prime Minister by the President of India

    Select the correct answer using the codes given below

    Options:
    a
    1 and 2 only
    b
    1, 2 and 3 only
    c
    3 and 4 only
    d
    1, 2, 3 and 4


    1 and 2 are correct because RPA was amended to disallow it. But i think there is an error / discrepancy in 3 and 4.
    A person can be made CM or PM without being a member of either state assembly or Parliament. so even if someone is convicted but doesnt goto jail.. due to review petitionor stay.. he can become cm, .. only that after 6 months he has to be elected to states assembly or parliament.. and he is convicted so according to RPA, he cant.. so he wont be cm/pm after that.. but my question is that at least for 6 months there is no issue at all. isnt it?

    so answers should be 1 and 2 only? someone kindly clarify..


    should resign if they are merely convicted.

    Yes if the PM and CM is convicted he should be resigned. Below is article from Hindu which clarifies from SC.

    http://www.thehindu.com/2001/10/02/stories/13020643.htm
    Secondly, in Ms. Jayalalithaa's case, it was held that a person who is disqualified from being a member of the legislature will consequently not be eligible to be appointed Minister or Chief Minister.

    +1

    First two due to RPA ..next due to SC verdict.. the attached TH article speaks it clearly.. ELIGIBLE for MLA then only CM !!

    SC in Jaya case held that "Constitutional spirit must be protected even against the brutal will of the majority !!" :)
    thought provoking question....yes it is D all the above will apply....as said by yo yo it is jaya case for CM...another verdict in 2013 in the following link clarifies this for PM as well...they will become disqualified on date of conviction and need not wait for any appeal...as section 8(4) of RPA was held unconstitutional.

    http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/mps-mlas-to-be-disqualified-on-date-of-criminal-conviction/article4901596.ece

    But only in >2 yrs Criminal Conviction cases only !! Right ?? :)
    no yaar, RPA 1951 in depth if we see...if you are just fined for an offence, you are disqualified for 6 years...and if you are convicted for some term, say 3 years then it will add to that 6...so 9 years...so it is just the word conviction itself is enough
    after reading RPA 1951 thoroughly i say this -

    1) those SPECIFIC OFFENSES under Sec 8(1) or 8 (2) of disqualification para in RPA like Terrorism/Sati/Untouchability/UAPA etc ..if a person get convicted.. than s/he stands disqualified for 6yrs or punishment period plus 6 yrs.


    2) EXCEPT THOSE OFFENSES UNDER sec 8(1) or (2) under sec 3) of same para same page.. a person IF CONVICTED NOT Less than 2 yrs (like in disproportionate assets/false affidavit filing/beating others etc offenses ) .. than he stand disqualified for 6 yrs plus period of punishment.


    So EXCEPT SEC sec 8 (1) and (2) specific Offenses of RPA for all other offenses minimum 2 yrs punishment criterion applies..

    That's why ECI vehemently demanding to increase punishment for filling FALSE AFFIDAVITs from current 6 months to 2 yrs..bcz that will be a strong deterrent for any politician filing WRONG/Fuzzed affidavit like those regarding Assets/Qualification etc !!
    100% true....for instance if an MLA is convicted in hit run case where he crippled a man & the MLA is fined/imprisoned for 6 months for it then i dont think he would lose his seat
    The Wound is the place where the Light enters you.
  • The Lily Thomas case only ensured that the MLA would lose his/her seat at conviction itself and not after whole filing to higher court process is completed. But the case in no way changed the offences for which MLA loses his seat
    The Wound is the place where the Light enters you.
  • 62 C
    31 W

    Total : 103.XX

    Need to give up now... just floating without any effort isn't going to work.

    No, thats not correct . At least not for the Prelims. I am quite aware of your prep status. And its like you kind of give up just when the time to give the extra push comes. The Prelims is largely about studying the hardest you can - at least in the last 3 months.

    I know you are working, but with 103, you are quite close. Just that keep reading the same things and expand your reading. For example, you should start finishing off current affairs of December & Jan by now, and not wait for May - June when everything piles up.

    Dont do that. Plan out your studies - week by week. And try meeting those objectoives. Thats all. Even if you achieve 60-70% of the plan, you are good to go.

    Also whenever you write any test, keep some time gap in between and actually study in that gap. Most people who do not benefit from tests are the ones who keep writing tests without doing any studies in between tests.

    So, you are not off the mark at all. Unless you think so.
    *No good deed goes unpunished*
  • Score : 105.33

    Correct 61
    Incorrect 25

  • mushroom have high bio efficiency explain
  • 75 marks( I lacked in history and geography.). Should I now just focus on prelims or take few hours for optional also?
    @Neyawn @Yo_Yo_Choti_Singh and others, Plz suggest.
  • 62 C
    31 W

    Total : 103.XX

    Need to give up now... just floating without any effort isn't going to work.

    103 and giving up ? are you kidding ? Last year I started giving mock tests from June beginning and i was getting in 50s and 60s , and in prelims I got 135+. 103 is a very good score , because this is not the time that matters for prelims. For prelims its the last 2 months that matter.
  • Neyawn said:

    62 C
    31 W

    Total : 103.XX

    Need to give up now... just floating without any effort isn't going to work.

    No, thats not correct . At least not for the Prelims. I am quite aware of your prep status. And its like you kind of give up just when the time to give the extra push comes. The Prelims is largely about studying the hardest you can - at least in the last 3 months.

    I know you are working, but with 103, you are quite close. Just that keep reading the same things and expand your reading. For example, you should start finishing off current affairs of December & Jan by now, and not wait for May - June when everything piles up.

    Dont do that. Plan out your studies - week by week. And try meeting those objectoives. Thats all. Even if you achieve 60-70% of the plan, you are good to go.

    Also whenever you write any test, keep some time gap in between and actually study in that gap. Most people who do not benefit from tests are the ones who keep writing tests without doing any studies in between tests.

    So, you are not off the mark at all. Unless you think so.
    Thank you @Neyawn :)

    Am very frustrated these days... Baaki kahaani personally bataunga :( Thanks again for guiding me to the right path :)
    To be, or not to be, that is the question...
  • 100. Which of the following parameters would have inflationary effect on the Indian economy?

    1. RBI decreasing the Cash Reserve Ratio (CRR)

    2. RBI goes through the process of Sterilization

    3. Crisis of crude oil in International market

    4. Government rationalize the subsidies on goods and services

    Select the correct answer using the codes given below
    Options:

    a

    1 and 3 only

    b

    1, 3 and 4 only

    c

    2 and 4 only

    d

    1, 2 and 4 only


    Why option 4 donot have inflationary impact on Indian economy ? Are we assuming that the it will weed out the ghost beneficiaries which will result in less expenditure on subsidies, hence less money in the market ?? Can't it be the other way round that when govt rationalised subsidiy, there may be inclusion of those excluded persons and hence increase the govt spending ??


    Option 3 talks about crisis >>> Is here it talks about scarcity or over production or underproduction or political, economic, social crisis --- who will decide ??? So much vagueness in the statement
  • Was expecting 110 by Shankar in last year Pre and could not clear. Have been studying most of my optional till now.
    I got 106 marks in this without much revision.
    Can someone please clear the air on the claim in the other thread saying there's no optional this time? Have you guys been studying optional now or not?
    And I have planned to do pre specific study from April on wards. Does this plan sound good?
    @DrKingSchultz @Yo_Yo_Choti_Singh @Neyawn
  • The 10th Schedule to the Constitution, popularly referred to as the ‘Anti-Defection Law,' was inserted by the 52nd Amendment in 1985.

    A Member of Parliament or state legislature was defected if he either voluntarily resigned from his party or disobeyed the directives of the party leadership on a vote.
    They may not be allowed to vote on any issue pertaining to the party.
    Independent members would be disqualified if they joined a political party.
    Nominated members who are already not a member could join a party within 6 months, after that period, they were treated as a party member or independent member.
    - See more at: http://www.polyeyes.com/Article/Detailed-Overview-of-Anti-Defection-Law#sthash.vgnQwg2e.dpuf
  • When a public company is divested and its shares are to be sold to the public, who amongst the following is described as the seller?

    Options:
    a
    Government of India
    b
    President of India
    c
    Secretary of the concerned Ministry
    d
    Chairman of the public company
    Subject: Economy
    Selected Option:
    d
    Chairman of the public company

    Correct Option:
    a
    Government of India



    Can Any body tell about this question. Because public company is not a government owned company. so practically if govt of india is holding then it will get the divested money otherwise the chiarment
  • porus said:

    porus said:

    Score 107. @DrKingSchultz kitna hua?
    Good questions @ForumIAS

    112 bhai.
    Par theek hai.
    No mugging up since August, no current affairs, nothing.
    Plus around 5-6 silly mistakes (correct/incorrect types).
    Can be propelled to 150 till June. :)
    Okk bhai.. ;) same here
    @porus
    Tame toh saheb madiya j nai amne LD par.
    Avu na chale.
    @DrKingSchultz Hve jyare pn tme same avsho tyare chhokas same thi mdva aavish. Hve hu tmne odkhu 6u. o:)
  • result??
  • Result kab declare hoga?
  • Result kab declare hoga?

    prelims k bad
  • got only 79 :(
    Feeling dejected after seeing such high scores here.
    Should I even bother to fill up the pre form on 22 feb?
    The day we decided that the worth of an individual was determined by their performance in an examination, that was the day Education failed us.

    Long live Revolution, Down with ForumIAS. Ban me Mods
Sign In or Join to comment.

Courses by ForumIAS for CSE
ForumIAS is trusted by over 10,000+ students for their Prelims, Mains and Interview Preparation and we currently run several assistance programs to help students from Civil Services prelims preparation to rank upgradation to IAS. You can enroll for these programs by visiting http://blog.forumias.com/courses

Welcome!

We are a secret self-moderated community for Civil Services preparation. Feel free to join, start a discussion, answer a question or just to say Thank you.

Just dont spread the word ;)

Sign in or join with Facebook or Google

Subscribe to ForumIAS Blog