INTERVIEW FOR CSE 2019 All ForumIAS members selected for CSE 2019 Personality Test must submit their details and DAF and register below to receive further instructions and guidance from ForumIAS. Click here to register now
INTERVIEW 2020 CHANNEL ForumIAS Channel for Interview Preparation is now Active! Please join the channel by clicking here
M on border line in CSAT paper 2.... plz solve this question of paper 2...its going to be decisive for me... dont use any coaching institutes answer key...use the logic and answer. plzz.
Look at this one regarding Butler committee. It says the princely states should be transferred to British India and NOT to an Indian Government or (Government of India) as mentioned in the ALL the keys as well.
Butler Committee report answer is NOT Indian states and Government of India.
I think it's time to throw away spectrum and pick up Pearson General studies.
At that time Government of India meant the Government of British India only. GoI Act 1919/1935 were not named as GoBI Acts. No other choices of the question is even close for Butler report.
British India and Government of India are NOT the same. The source is CLEARLY stating that the states are NOT to be under any Indian Government that will be formed (Which is Government of India). It gives power to the Viceroy of India as the person responsible for states representing the crown. The option which states defining the power of secretary of state for India is the closest.
yeh aya launda .....ek number bhaiii ...kahan se lae itna tagda zeher
Ohhh Teri.... -2.66 humbly accepted!
Harcourt Butler Committee A three -member committee headed by Harcourt Butler, appointed on December 16, 1927 to examine the relations between the native states and the paramount power, declined to define what paramountcy was but clearly and fortrightly stated that “paramountcy must remain paramount”. The committee fully endorsed that the viceroy, not the governor general should remain the Crown agent in dealing with the native states. In fact the right to protect includes right to internal intervention. Paramountcy is the supreme sovereign power which was kept above the reach of law and interpretation, to be exercised at the appropriate time subject to resiraints of morality and constitutional propriety against an erring ruler of a native statewhen other correctional means had proved to be futile. It is a concept developed into a deterrent in the political relation between the British and the Indian rulers http://www.gktoday.in/quiz-questions/with-reference-to-the-relations-of-the-princely-states-with-british-crown-which-among-the-following-report-said-that-paramountcy-must-remain-paramount/
this shows it intend to define the jurisdiction of the Central and Provincial Governments
How did you derive Central and Provincial logic from this? Thoda thoh socho yaar.
no concept of indian states at that time ...only princely state and british indian states..it became tool for poltical intervention and gradually as detterent in relation between between the British and the Indian rulers..how come its ojective was to improve relations..stated object was to define paramountcy must remain paramount...
as per insight.. the link they have posted http://tinyurl.com/yatpetz2 in which it clearly states relationship of british states with crown and not govt of india
Bhai aisa tatti logic kaha se laate ho?
see i have given the link as posted by insight in their solution..just go to the link where it clearly mention relationship with crown and not govt of india... tatti karte but tatti logic nahi lagate..
Insight ko maaro goli.. seriously agar is exam ki prep Kar rhe ho to pehle NCEART and bipin Chandra padho
brother..just tell me ..relationship of paramount power with princely states....does paramount power point to"govt of india"...no..it tried to refer to crown..
Look at this one regarding Butler committee. It says the princely states should be transferred to British India and NOT to an Indian Government or (Government of India) as mentioned in the ALL the keys as well.
Butler Committee report answer is NOT Indian states and Government of India.
I think it's time to throw away spectrum and pick up Pearson General studies.
At that time Government of India meant the Government of British India only. GoI Act 1919/1935 were not named as GoBI Acts. No other choices of the question is even close for Butler report.
British India and Government of India are NOT the same. The source is CLEARLY stating that the states are NOT to be under any Indian Government that will be formed (Which is Government of India). It gives power to the Viceroy of India as the person responsible for states representing the crown. The option which states defining the power of secretary of state for India is the closest.
yeh aya launda .....ek number bhaiii ...kahan se lae itna tagda zeher
Ohhh Teri.... -2.66 humbly accepted!
Harcourt Butler Committee A three -member committee headed by Harcourt Butler, appointed on December 16, 1927 to examine the relations between the native states and the paramount power, declined to define what paramountcy was but clearly and fortrightly stated that “paramountcy must remain paramount”. The committee fully endorsed that the viceroy, not the governor general should remain the Crown agent in dealing with the native states. In fact the right to protect includes right to internal intervention. Paramountcy is the supreme sovereign power which was kept above the reach of law and interpretation, to be exercised at the appropriate time subject to resiraints of morality and constitutional propriety against an erring ruler of a native statewhen other correctional means had proved to be futile. It is a concept developed into a deterrent in the political relation between the British and the Indian rulers http://www.gktoday.in/quiz-questions/with-reference-to-the-relations-of-the-princely-states-with-british-crown-which-among-the-following-report-said-that-paramountcy-must-remain-paramount/
this shows it intend to define the jurisdiction of the Central and Provincial Governments
How did you derive Central and Provincial logic from this? Thoda thoh socho yaar.
no concept of indian states at that time ...only princely state and british indian states..it became tool for poltical intervention and gradually as detterent in relation between between the British and the Indian rulers..how come its ojective was to improve relations..stated object was to define paramountcy must remain paramount...
as per insight.. the link they have posted http://tinyurl.com/yatpetz2 in which it clearly states relationship of british states with crown and not govt of india
Bhai aisa tatti logic kaha se laate ho?
see i have given the link as posted by insight in their solution..just go to the link where it clearly mention relationship with crown and not govt of india... tatti karte but tatti logic nahi lagate..
Insight ko maaro goli.. seriously agar is exam ki prep Kar rhe ho to pehle NCEART and bipin Chandra padho
brother..just tell me ..relationship of paramount power with princely states....does paramount power point to"govt of india"...no..it tried to refer to crown..
http://www.iasplanner.com/civilservices/ias-main/gs-model-answer-butler-committee-report-india It gave the following recommendations: Paramountcy must remain supreme. States should not be handed over to an Indian government in British India, responsible to an Indian Legislature. But it could be done with the consent of states. It must fulfill its obligation, adopting and defining itself according to the shifting necessities of time and progressive development of states. The viceroy was made the Crown’s agent in dealing with states. Thus, the committee left it yet undefined creating ambiguity, which was appointed to define paramountcy. This hydra-headed creature was left to feed on usage, crown’s prerogative and the princes implied consent. By this definition in the report princes were shocked. As a result they resorted to constitution of All India Union to save themselves from such vague concept of Paramountcy.
96) Which of the following are not necessarily the consequences of the proclamation of President’s rule in a State? 1. Dissolution of the state legislative assembly 2. Removal of the Council of Ministers in the State 3. Dissolution of the Local bodies Select the correct answer using the code given below – (a) 1 and 2 only (b) 1 and 3 only (c) 2 and 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3 Answer: (b)
Can somebody explain me the reasoning behind the answer of this question? Statement says “not necessarily the consequences of the proclamation of President’s rule in a State” i.e. these situations can arise even if President rule is not imposed. President’s rule is not necessary for these situations to arise.
Now lets look at each option: 1. – CM can ask the governor to dissolve the assembly, may be to conduct early elections President’s rule not necessary
2. – If state budget does not get passed in the assembly, CoM will have to resign OR If no confidence motion is passed by State assembly, they are removed. In these examples, president’s rule doesn’t come into play.--> not necessary
Look at this one regarding Butler committee. It says the princely states should be transferred to British India and NOT to an Indian Government or (Government of India) as mentioned in the ALL the keys as well.
Butler Committee report answer is NOT Indian states and Government of India.
I think it's time to throw away spectrum and pick up Pearson General studies.
most appropriate option d hai..wo exactly sahi Na bhi ho toh koi baat nahi
At that time Government of India meant the Government of British India only. GoI Act 1919/1935 were not named as GoBI Acts. No other choices of the question is even close for Butler report.
British India and Government of India are NOT the same. The source is CLEARLY stating that the states are NOT to be under any Indian Government that will be formed (Which is Government of India). It gives power to the Viceroy of India as the person responsible for states representing the crown. The option which states defining the power of secretary of state for India is the closest.
yeh aya launda .....ek number bhaiii ...kahan se lae itna tagda zeher
Ohhh Teri.... -2.66 humbly accepted!
Harcourt Butler Committee A three -member committee headed by Harcourt Butler, appointed on December 16, 1927 to examine the relations between the native states and the paramount power, declined to define what paramountcy was but clearly and fortrightly stated that “paramountcy must remain paramount”. The committee fully endorsed that the viceroy, not the governor general should remain the Crown agent in dealing with the native states. In fact the right to protect includes right to internal intervention. Paramountcy is the supreme sovereign power which was kept above the reach of law and interpretation, to be exercised at the appropriate time subject to resiraints of morality and constitutional propriety against an erring ruler of a native statewhen other correctional means had proved to be futile. It is a concept developed into a deterrent in the political relation between the British and the Indian rulers http://www.gktoday.in/quiz-questions/with-reference-to-the-relations-of-the-princely-states-with-british-crown-which-among-the-following-report-said-that-paramountcy-must-remain-paramount/
this shows it intend to define the jurisdiction of the Central and Provincial Governments
How did you derive Central and Provincial logic from this? Thoda thoh socho yaar.
no concept of indian states at that time ...only princely state and british indian states..it became tool for poltical intervention and gradually as detterent in relation between between the British and the Indian rulers..how come its ojective was to improve relations..stated object was to define paramountcy must remain paramount...
as per insight.. the link they have posted http://tinyurl.com/yatpetz2 in which it clearly states relationship of british states with crown and not govt of india
Bhai aisa tatti logic kaha se laate ho?
see i have given the link as posted by insight in their solution..just go to the link where it clearly mention relationship with crown and not govt of india... tatti karte but tatti logic nahi lagate..
Insight ko maaro goli.. seriously agar is exam ki prep Kar rhe ho to pehle NCEART and bipin Chandra padho
brother..just tell me ..relationship of paramount power with princely states....does paramount power point to"govt of india"...no..it tried to refer to crown..
http://www.iasplanner.com/civilservices/ias-main/gs-model-answer-butler-committee-report-india It gave the following recommendations: Paramountcy must remain supreme. States should not be handed over to an Indian government in British India, responsible to an Indian Legislature. But it could be done with the consent of states. It must fulfill its obligation, adopting and defining itself according to the shifting necessities of time and progressive development of states. The viceroy was made the Crown’s agent in dealing with states. Thus, the committee left it yet undefined creating ambiguity, which was appointed to define paramountcy. This hydra-headed creature was left to feed on usage, crown’s prerogative and the princes implied consent. By this definition in the report princes were shocked. As a result they resorted to constitution of All India Union to save themselves from such vague concept of Paramountcy.
96) Which of the following are not necessarily the consequences of the proclamation of President’s rule in a State? 1. Dissolution of the state legislative assembly 2. Removal of the Council of Ministers in the State 3. Dissolution of the Local bodies Select the correct answer using the code given below – (a) 1 and 2 only (b) 1 and 3 only (c) 2 and 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3 Answer: (b)
Can somebody explain me the reasoning behind the answer of this question? Statement says “not necessarily the consequences of the proclamation of President’s rule in a State” i.e. these situations can arise even if President rule is not imposed. President’s rule is not necessary for these situations to arise.
Now lets look at each option: 1. – CM can ask the governor to dissolve the assembly, may be to conduct early elections President’s rule not necessary
2. – If state budget does not get passed in the assembly, CoM will have to resign OR If no confidence motion is passed by State assembly, they are removed. In these examples, president’s rule doesn’t come into play.--> not necessary
3. – Straightforward.-> not necessary
Answer should be 1,2,3
You misunderstood the question.It is asking which r not the necessary consequences if president rule is imposed in a state.
96) Which of the following are not necessarily the consequences of the proclamation of President’s rule in a State? 1. Dissolution of the state legislative assembly 2. Removal of the Council of Ministers in the State 3. Dissolution of the Local bodies Select the correct answer using the code given below – (a) 1 and 2 only (b) 1 and 3 only (c) 2 and 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3 Answer: (b)
Can somebody explain me the reasoning behind the answer of this question? Statement says “not necessarily the consequences of the proclamation of President’s rule in a State” i.e. these situations can arise even if President rule is not imposed. President’s rule is not necessary for these situations to arise.
Now lets look at each option: 1. – CM can ask the governor to dissolve the assembly, may be to conduct early elections President’s rule not necessary
2. – If state budget does not get passed in the assembly, CoM will have to resign OR If no confidence motion is passed by State assembly, they are removed. In these examples, president’s rule doesn’t come into play.--> not necessary
3. – Straightforward.-> not necessary
Answer should be 1,2,3
You misunderstood the question.It is asking which r not the necessary consequences if president rule is imposed in a state.
Or maybe you should read it again as it is saying that which of the following are not necessarily consequence of President's rule I.e. can be because of some other reason too.
96) Which of the following are not necessarily the consequences of the proclamation of President’s rule in a State? 1. Dissolution of the state legislative assembly 2. Removal of the Council of Ministers in the State 3. Dissolution of the Local bodies Select the correct answer using the code given below – (a) 1 and 2 only (b) 1 and 3 only (c) 2 and 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3 Answer: (b)
Can somebody explain me the reasoning behind the answer of this question? Statement says “not necessarily the consequences of the proclamation of President’s rule in a State” i.e. these situations can arise even if President rule is not imposed. President’s rule is not necessary for these situations to arise.
Now lets look at each option: 1. – CM can ask the governor to dissolve the assembly, may be to conduct early elections President’s rule not necessary
2. – If state budget does not get passed in the assembly, CoM will have to resign OR If no confidence motion is passed by State assembly, they are removed. In these examples, president’s rule doesn’t come into play.--> not necessary
3. – Straightforward.-> not necessary
Answer should be 1,2,3
I also used the same logic....and answered D....but it seems the logic is not correct....proclamation of prez rule definitely means means COM will be dismissed for sure...while Assembly may or may not be dissolved...i got over enthusiastic at such an EASY(seemingly) question and answered D
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
ForumIAS is India’s leading Online website for UPSC IAS Exam Online Preparation and guidance. At ForumIAS, we have a dream. Our dream is to make its members achieve their IAS dream. Today thousands of aspirants have joined the elite services such as IAS, IPS, IFS, IRS and other central and state services with the right inputs provided by ForumIAS. Take a look at our IAS Toppers
Free IAS Online Preparation Initiatives by ForumIAS
Current affairs is the most important part of UPSC IAS exam. ForumIAS provides a detailed analysis of important news articles through its 9PM brief. In current affairs reading Editorials Online needs an in-depth focus and hence we provide a separate analysis of daily editorials which is not found in any other website. Click the following link to access these free preparation initiatives in Portal . ForumIAS also provides compilations and Free downloads for UPSC IAS preparation
Knowing is never enough for IAS exam. An IAS aspirant must be engaged in answer writing practice to do well in UPSC IAS Mains Exam. ForumIAS has launched a Mains Marathon initiative for IAS mains Online answer writing. Click here to access UPSC Mains Marathon initiative . For Daily Must Read Newspaper articles, Visit Must Read Newspaper page here. Must Read Newspaper is an Initiative by Team ForumIAS to provide Current Affairs links to the Must Read Articles of The Day from Newspaper.
UPSC Syllabus
The most important part of UPSC IAS exam is its syllabus and there is a need to take an in-depth look at it. Click here to view the UPSC IAS Prelims syllabus. Visit UPSC IAS syllabus page here
UPSC IAS Study Material
ForumIAS is the repository of many toppers’ Online study materials for GS Mains and Optional subjects. The most unique thing about it is that they are handwritten by toppers themselves. Click here for UPSC sample notes
Interview Preparation for IAS
Interview is the last and crucial stage for becoming an IAS officer. How to prepare for it? We provide a solution. ForumIAS is the only online website where quality IAS interview preparations happen. Online Current affairs from an interview perspective are extensively discussed and specific preparation based on candidate’s profile and hobbies can be done. Please visit this link for UPSC Interview Preparation
At ForumIAS we have an exclusive Online page to read the UPSC Interview Transcripts
Indian Forest Service (IFoS)
IFoS is one of the most sought after All India Service. ForumIAS provides the right approach to excel in this exam through their toppers who have shared their success mantras and their study materials in an elaborate manner.
About Indian Administrative Service (IAS)
IAS is considered as one of the best jobs on earth. IAS officers hold the most important positions in Central and State Governments and in Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs). They also represent India in international organizations. They take the most important decisions in the administration of Government policies and development programs.
About Indian Police Service (IPS)
IPS officers occupy higher positions in the State Police Departments, Central Armed Police Forces and Intelligence Agencies. Their most important responsibilities are maintenance of Law and Order and internal security.
About Indian Foreign Service (IFS)
IFS officers serve as diplomats in international missions and embassies of India around the world and in prominent international organizations like United Nations (UN), World Bank, and IMF. They work to promote India’s interests from a bilateral and a global perspective.
The Study portal is a single point of online IAS preparation through its several initiatives like the Must Read News Articles, the 9 PM Brief, the Mains Marathon. If you are preparing for IAS exam online, ForumIAS is the place to go. ForumIAS is proud of ForumIAS Alumni in UPSC Service who have secured top Ranks in past 5 years.
Visit Us At
ForumIAS - Offline Guidance Centre
ForumIAS Academy, 1st Floor, IAPL House, 19, Pusa Road, Opposite Metro Pillar 95-96, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005,
View Google Map Location
Comments
isko karooo yaaar urgently.... plzzzzzzzz
please go to the link
http://www.iasplanner.com/civilservices/ias-main/gs-model-answer-butler-committee-report-india
It gave the following recommendations:
Paramountcy must remain supreme.
States should not be handed over to an Indian government in British India, responsible to an Indian Legislature.
But it could be done with the consent of states.
It must fulfill its obligation, adopting and defining itself according to the shifting necessities of time and progressive development of states.
The viceroy was made the Crown’s agent in dealing with states.
Thus, the committee left it yet undefined creating ambiguity, which was appointed to define paramountcy. This hydra-headed creature was left to feed on usage, crown’s prerogative and the princes implied consent. By this definition in the report princes were shocked. As a result they resorted to constitution of All India Union to save themselves from such vague concept of Paramountcy.
1. Dissolution of the state legislative assembly
2. Removal of the Council of Ministers in the State
3. Dissolution of the Local bodies
Select the correct answer using the code given below –
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 1 and 3 only
(c) 2 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3
Answer: (b)
Can somebody explain me the reasoning behind the answer of this question? Statement says “not necessarily the consequences of the proclamation of President’s rule in a State” i.e. these situations can arise even if President rule is not imposed. President’s rule is not necessary for these situations to arise.
Now lets look at each option:
1. – CM can ask the governor to dissolve the assembly, may be to conduct early elections President’s rule not necessary
2. – If state budget does not get passed in the assembly, CoM will have to resign OR
If no confidence motion is passed by State assembly, they are removed. In these examples, president’s rule doesn’t come into play.--> not necessary
3. – Straightforward.-> not necessary
Answer should be 1,2,3