Correct answer: (b) 2 only
Explanation
- A
1 only
1 only. Provincial members of the proposed CA were to be elected, not nominated by Assemblies; States would nominate.
- B
2 only
2 only. A province unwilling to join could negotiate a separate arrangement with Britain — the Cripps opt-out.
- C
Both 1 and 2
Both. Statement 1 misstates election vs nomination.
- D
Neither 1 nor 2
Neither. The opt-out limb is the Cripps offer.
Summary. Official key is (b) 2 only. Cripps (1942): an Indian union after the war; provinces could stay out and deal separately with Britain. Constituent Assembly seats from provinces were to be elected by provincial assemblies, not nominated; princely seats were the nominated slice.
Same topic · past papers
UPSC has asked this before
These previous-year questions sit on the same topic. Open one to practise the earlier ask.
-
2023 · Q32 · General Studies · 2 marks
Consider the following statements: * Statement-I: In India, prisons are managed by State Governments with their own rules and regulations for the day- to-day administration of prisons. Statement-II: In India, prisons are governed by the Prisons Act, 1894 which expressly kept the subject of prisons in the control of Provincial Governments. Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements? -
2023 · Q80 · General Studies · 2 marks
Consider the following statements in respect of election to the President of India: 1. The members nominated to either House of the Parliament or the Legislative Assemblies of States are also eligible to be included in the Electoral College. 2. Higher the number of elective Assembly seats, higher is the value of vote of each MLA of that State. 3. The value of vote of each MLA of Madhya Pradesh is greater than that of Kerala. 4. The value of vote of each MLA of Puducherry is higher than that of Arunachal Pradesh because the ratio of total population to total number of elective seats in Puducherry is greater as compared to Arunachal Pradesh How many of the above statements are correct?