Opens in a new tab
Join Anantam IAS Channel on Telegram

GS 2 · Practice archive

GS Paper 2 practice questions for UPSC Mains 2026.

Polity, Constitution, Governance, Social Justice and International Relations.

20 Qs / 250 marks426 questionsModel outlines included

GS Paper 2 · Tips & tricks

GS-2 — anchor every claim to an article, a judgment or a body

  1. Quote the Article number first.Article 200, Article 356, Article 14 — naming the constitutional provision in the first line of the body signals competence.
  2. Pair a judgment with the principle it laid down.S.R. Bommai (federalism), Kesavananda Bharati (basic structure), Vishaka (workplace harassment) — use them as shorthand, not lectures.
  3. Use the institution's real name.Not "election body" — Election Commission of India. Not "human rights body" — National Human Rights Commission. Not "the audit body" — CAG.
  4. For Governance, cite a real scheme + a real number.PM-KISAN beneficiaries, Aadhaar coverage %, MGNREGA person-days, DBT savings — concrete metrics anchor your point.
  5. IR answers need three verbs: convergence, divergence, balance.Every bilateral relationship has all three. Show all three in the same answer.
Q.110 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

The basic structure doctrine has reconciled parliamentary sovereignty with constitutional supremacy in India. In the light of landmark judgments, discuss.

Subtopic: Polity · Basic Structure & Constitutional Amendments

Show model answer outline

Introduction: Define basic structure as a judicial doctrine read into Article 368 in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) to limit Parliament's amending power.

Body: Three dimensions — (i) origin from Golak Nath (1967) through Kesavananda (1973) to Minerva Mills (1980); (ii) elements identified so far — federalism, secularism, judicial review, free and fair elections, rule of law, separation of powers; (iii) tensions — NJAC strike-down (2015), the unelected character of the bench versus an elected Parliament. Note that the doctrine itself is not in the text.

Way forward / Conclusion: The doctrine survives because it is invoked sparingly; institutional restraint, not textual expansion, is what keeps it credible.

Key points
  • Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) — 13-judge bench, 7:6 majority recognised basic structure
  • Article 368 grants amending power; basic structure is a judicially read limit
  • Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980) struck down 42nd Amendment clauses 4 and 5 to Article 368
  • S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) added federalism and secularism as basic features
  • I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007) extended basic-structure scrutiny to Ninth Schedule laws post-1973
  • Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (2015) struck down the 99th Amendment and NJAC Act for violating judicial independence
  • Golak Nath v. State of Punjab (1967) was overruled on the amending-power question by Kesavananda

Open full model answer →

Q.210 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

The Right to Information Act 2005 is being hollowed out by vacancies and the 2019 amendment. Evaluate.

Subtopic: Governance · Transparency & RTI

Show model answer outline

Introduction: The RTI Act 2005 made information a statutory right flowing from Article 19(1)(a), as recognised in S.P. Gupta (1981) and Raj Narain (1975).

Body: Three dimensions — (i) statutory architecture — PIO at every public authority, time-bound disclosure, CIC and SICs as appellate bodies; (ii) the RTI (Amendment) Act 2019 took CIC tenure and salary out of statute and into rules, eroding independence; (iii) Anjali Bhardwaj v. Union of India (2019) flagged systemic vacancies — the CIC and several SICs run with sanctioned strength unfilled.

Way forward / Conclusion: Restore statutory tenure and salaries, automate proactive disclosure under Section 4, and ring-fence the appointments collegium — the prescription of the Satark Nagrik Sangathan reports.

Key points
  • RTI Act 2005 — Section 4 proactive disclosure, Section 6 application, Section 7 thirty-day rule
  • Article 19(1)(a) basis recognised in State of U.P. v. Raj Narain (1975) and S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981)
  • RTI (Amendment) Act 2019 — CIC tenure and salary moved from statute to rules
  • Anjali Bhardwaj v. Union of India (2019) on CIC vacancies
  • Section 8 exemptions and Section 24 intelligence-agency exclusion
  • Whistle Blowers Protection Act 2014 — unenforced supporting law
  • Jan Soochna Portal Rajasthan as Section 4 model

Open full model answer →

Q.310 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

Civil-service neutrality is a constitutional value but a contested practice in India. With reference to the All India Services framework, discuss.

Subtopic: Governance · Civil Services

Show model answer outline

Introduction: The All India Services rest on Article 312 read with the All India Services Act 1951; the AIS (Conduct) Rules 1968 and the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules 1964 codify neutrality.

Body: Three dimensions — (i) constitutional basis — Article 311 protection and Article 312 dual-control design; (ii) institutional erosion — frequent transfers, the Hota Committee 2004 and 2nd ARC's 10th Report on insulating the steel frame; T.S.R. Subramanian v. Union of India (2013) ordered fixed tenure and a Civil Services Board; (iii) political signalling, lateral entry under UPSC's 2024 advertisements, and the Nolan Principles as a benchmark.

Way forward / Conclusion: Statutory Civil Services Boards, performance contracts under the Mission Karmayogi framework, and a published transfer-posting policy operationalise neutrality.

Key points
  • Article 312 — All India Services created by Rajya Sabha resolution
  • All India Services Act 1951 and the AIS (Conduct) Rules 1968
  • Article 311 — procedural safeguards for civil servants
  • T.S.R. Subramanian v. Union of India (2013) on Civil Services Board
  • 2nd Administrative Reforms Commission 10th Report (Refurbishing of Personnel Administration, 2008)
  • Hota Committee on Civil Services Reform 2004
  • Nolan Principles — selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty, leadership

Open full model answer →

Q.410 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

Education in India is a concurrent subject in law but an unequal entitlement in practice. With reference to the gaps the Right to Education Act 2009 has left unaddressed, examine.

Subtopic: Social Justice · Education

Show model answer outline

Introduction: Education moved to the Concurrent List by the 42nd Amendment 1976; the 86th Amendment 2002 inserted Article 21A and Articles 51A(k) and 45, operationalised by the RTE Act 2009.

Body: Three dimensions — (i) statutory floor — free and compulsory education 6–14 years, 25% EWS reservation upheld in Society for Unaided Private Schools v. Union of India (2012); (ii) outcomes — ASER 2024 reports about 25% of Class 5 children cannot read a Class 2 text, NIPUN Bharat targets unmet; (iii) policy shift — NEP 2020 extending RTE to 3–18, NCF 2023 reforms, school-rationalisation challenges.

Way forward / Conclusion: Bring 3–18 within Article 21A through a constitutional amendment, link grants to learning outcomes, and revive the Kothari Commission's six per cent of GDP norm.

Key points
  • 42nd Amendment 1976 — education to Concurrent List
  • 86th Constitutional Amendment 2002 — Article 21A right to education
  • RTE Act 2009 — free and compulsory education 6–14 years
  • Section 12(1)(c) RTE — 25% EWS reservation
  • Society for Unaided Private Schools v. Union of India (2012)
  • ASER 2024 reports learning-poverty gaps
  • National Education Policy 2020 — Foundational Literacy and Numeracy

Open full model answer →

Q.510 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

The Indian diaspora is the largest in the world and increasingly a lever of foreign policy. With reference to the policy frameworks that engage it, comment.

Subtopic: IR · Indian Diaspora

Show model answer outline

Introduction: The Ministry of External Affairs estimates an Indian diaspora of about 35.4 million as of 2024 — 19.5 million NRIs and 15.9 million OCIs; UN International Migrant Stock 2024 ranks India first globally on remittances at over USD 125 billion.

Body: Three dimensions — (i) institutional — PBSAS, the Pravasi Bharatiya Samman Awards, Madad portal, eMigrate system; (ii) statutory — Emigration Act 1983 (overdue Emigration Bill 2021 to replace it), Citizenship Act 1955 sections 7A-7D on OCI; (iii) strategic use — evacuations such as Operation Kaveri (Sudan 2023), Operation Ajay (Israel 2023), Operation Sindhu (Iran 2026); diaspora-led tech ecosystem with Indian-origin CEOs.

Way forward / Conclusion: Pass an Emigration Management Bill, sign social-security totalisation agreements with the US and Gulf, and protect blue-collar workers in West Asia with binding labour MoUs.

Key points
  • Indian diaspora about 35.4 million in 2024 (MEA): 19.5 million NRIs and 15.9 million OCIs
  • India remittances over USD 125 billion in 2024 (World Bank)
  • Emigration Act 1983 — due for replacement
  • Citizenship Act 1955 Sections 7A–7D — OCI scheme
  • Pravasi Bharatiya Divas observed annually on 9 January
  • Operation Kaveri (Sudan, April 2023), Operation Ajay (Israel, October 2023)
  • Operation Sindhu (Iran, 2026)

Open full model answer →

Q.610 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

The Preamble of the Indian Constitution is its identity card and a key to its interpretation. With reference to the words ‘Socialist’, ‘Secular’ and ‘Integrity’ inserted by the 42nd Amendment 1976, examine.

Subtopic: Polity · Indian Constitution & Preamble

Show model answer outline

Introduction: The Preamble, drafted by the Drafting Committee and adopted on 26 November 1949, reflects the Objectives Resolution moved by Jawaharlal Nehru on 13 December 1946.

Body: Three dimensions — (i) interpretive role — Berubari Union (1960) said the Preamble was not part of the Constitution; Kesavananda Bharati (1973) reversed this and held it is part of the Constitution and reflects the basic structure; (ii) the 42nd Amendment 1976 inserted 'Socialist, Secular and Integrity', upheld in Dr Balram Singh v. Union of India (25 November 2024); (iii) the words shape interpretation of Articles 14, 15, 25–28 and Article 1's 'Union of States'.

Way forward / Conclusion: The Preamble is not enforceable but it remains the lodestar of constitutional adjudication and of the basic structure doctrine.

Key points
  • Objectives Resolution moved 13 December 1946; Preamble adopted 26 November 1949
  • Berubari Union (1960) — Preamble is not part of the Constitution
  • Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) — overruled Berubari on this point
  • 42nd Constitutional Amendment 1976 inserted 'Socialist, Secular, Integrity'
  • Dr Balram Singh v. Union of India (25 November 2024) upheld 42nd Amendment Preamble changes
  • Article 1 — 'India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States'
  • S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) on secularism as basic structure

Open full model answer →

Q.710 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

The Inter-State Council under Article 263 is an under-used instrument of cooperative federalism. Comment.

Subtopic: Polity · Federalism & Inter-State Coordination

Show model answer outline

Introduction: Article 263 empowers the President to constitute an Inter-State Council to inquire and advise on inter-state disputes and matters of common interest; the Sarkaria Commission's recommendation led to its constitution on 28 May 1990.

Body: Three dimensions — (i) composition — Prime Minister as Chair, Chief Ministers of all States and UTs with legislature, Administrators of others, and six Union Cabinet Ministers; (ii) under-use — the Council has met only twelve times since 1990, with long gaps such as 2006 to 2016; (iii) overlap with NITI Aayog's Governing Council and the GST Council under Article 279A has crowded its space.

Way forward / Conclusion: Statutory meeting calendar of two sessions a year, public minutes, and a Standing Committee under Justice M.M. Punchhi's 2010 model would revive cooperative federalism.

Key points
  • Article 263 — Inter-State Council
  • Constituted on 28 May 1990 on Sarkaria Commission recommendation
  • Twelve meetings between 1990 and 2024
  • Standing Committee of Inter-State Council headed by Union Home Minister
  • Punchhi Commission Report 2010 on Centre-State Relations
  • GST Council under Article 279A added in 2016
  • Zonal Councils under States Reorganisation Act 1956 as parallel federal forums

Open full model answer →

Q.810 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

Department-Related Standing Committees are the engine room of parliamentary scrutiny but their effectiveness has weakened in recent Lok Sabhas. Discuss.

Subtopic: Polity · Parliament & Committee System

Show model answer outline

Introduction: The Department-Related Standing Committee system was constituted on 8 April 1993 on a recommendation of the Rules Committee; 24 DRSCs cover the work of all 99 Ministries and Departments.

Body: Three dimensions — (i) constitutional source — Articles 105 (privileges) and 118 (rules of procedure) provide the base; the Speaker constitutes committees on the floor; (ii) function — Bill scrutiny, Demands for Grants, subject reports; PRS data shows only 16 per cent of Bills referred in the 17th Lok Sabha (against 71 per cent in the 15th); (iii) systemic gaps — no research staff per Member, no sub-committee on legislation, anti-defection whip eroding free debate.

Way forward / Conclusion: Mandatory referral norms in the Rules of Procedure, public hearings on Bills, and a Parliamentary Budget Office on the US-Australia model would revive committee scrutiny.

Key points
  • DRSCs constituted 8 April 1993 — initially 17, now 24
  • Articles 105 and 118 — privileges and rules of procedure
  • Public Accounts Committee, Estimates Committee, Committee on Public Undertakings as Financial Committees
  • PRS Vital Stats — 16% Bills referred to DRSCs in 17th Lok Sabha
  • Joint Parliamentary Committee on Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill 2024
  • NCRWC 2002 recommended pre-legislative consultation
  • Standing Committees do not require government acceptance of recommendations

Open full model answer →

Q.910 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

The President of India is a constitutional head bound by aid and advice under Article 74, but the office retains real discretionary power in specific circumstances. Discuss.

Subtopic: Polity · Executive

Show model answer outline

Introduction: The President is the head of the Indian Union under Article 52; Article 74 binds the President to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, as clarified by the 42nd and 44th Amendments.

Body: Three dimensions — (i) constitutional architecture — Article 53 (executive power), Article 74(1) (binding advice, may be returned once), Article 75 (Council of Ministers), Article 78 (PM duty to communicate); (ii) discretionary spaces — appointment of PM when no party has a clear majority (Article 75), dissolution of Lok Sabha on PM's loss of majority, returning a bill under Article 111 (pocket veto by President Zail Singh on Postal Bill 1986), and pardoning power under Article 72 limited by Maru Ram (1981) and Epuru Sudhakar (2006); (iii) office in practice — President Droupadi Murmu's 2025 Reference under Article 143 on Governor's role.

Way forward / Conclusion: The Shamsher Singh (1974) line — that the President is a constitutional head — is the right anchor; the discretionary corridors must be narrow and reasoned.

Key points
  • Article 52 — President is head of the Union
  • Article 53 — executive power vested in the President
  • Article 74(1) — aid and advice binding; may be returned once
  • Article 75 — appointment of Prime Minister and Council of Ministers
  • Article 72 — pardoning power; Maru Ram (1981), Epuru Sudhakar (2006)
  • Article 111 — assent, withholding, return of Bills
  • Article 143 — Presidential Reference, used in November 2025 on Governor's role

Open full model answer →

Q.1010 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

The Rajya Sabha was designed as a chamber of mature deliberation and a federal voice. Evaluate its performance against the Constituent Assembly’s intention.

Subtopic: Polity · Parliament & Bicameralism

Show model answer outline

Introduction: The Rajya Sabha was modelled on the US Senate but with State legislatures as the electing college; the Constituent Assembly Debates (28 July 1947) record Gopalaswami Ayyangar's defence of bicameralism as a check on hasty legislation.

Body: Three dimensions — (i) constitutional architecture — Article 80 (composition of 245 with 12 nominated), Article 84 (qualifications), Article 249 (legislation on State List by two-thirds majority), Article 312 (creation of All India Services); (ii) federal voice — the Representation of the People (Amendment) Act 2003 removed the domicile requirement, criticised in Kuldip Nayar v. Union of India (2006) as diluting federal representation, though upheld; (iii) performance — fewer Bills properly debated, the Money Bill route under Article 110 has bypassed the Upper House on key laws.

Way forward / Conclusion: Restore the domicile requirement, narrow the Money Bill exception by judicial review, and use Article 249 as a federal trust mechanism rather than a Union override.

Key points
  • Article 80 — Rajya Sabha composition: 245 seats (233 elected + 12 nominated)
  • Article 249 — Parliament can legislate on State List with two-thirds Rajya Sabha resolution
  • Article 312 — All India Services created by Rajya Sabha resolution
  • Representation of the People (Amendment) Act 2003 — removed domicile requirement
  • Kuldip Nayar v. Union of India (2006) upheld the 2003 amendment
  • Article 110 — Money Bill exclusively in Lok Sabha; Rajya Sabha can only recommend
  • Constituent Assembly Debates 28 July 1947 — Gopalaswami Ayyangar on bicameralism

Open full model answer →

Q.1110 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

The Union Public Service Commission is a hundred-year-old constitutional body but its mandate and methods need a 2026 update. With reference to Article 315 and the UPSC at 100, examine.

Subtopic: Polity · Appointments to Constitutional Posts

Show model answer outline

Introduction: The Union Public Service Commission traces back to the Public Service Commission set up in October 1926 under the Government of India Act 1919; Article 315 of the Constitution gave it constitutional status from 26 January 1950.

Body: Three dimensions — (i) constitutional architecture — Article 315 (UPSC and State PSCs), Article 316 (appointment), Article 320 (functions: recruitment, advice on disciplinary matters), Article 322 (expenses on Consolidated Fund); (ii) functional concerns — exam-paper leaks at the State level, lateral entry (UPSC advertisement July 2024 for joint secretaries withdrawn), and faceless interview reform proposals; (iii) reform agenda — Baswan Committee 2016 on CSE pattern, 2nd ARC's Tenth Report on personnel administration, and the case for moving from selection-only to a strategic HR function for the Union.

Way forward / Conclusion: Operationalise the National Recruitment Agency, codify lateral-entry safeguards through legislation, and a public-facing performance audit of UPSC processes would modernise Article 315.

Key points
  • Public Service Commission constituted October 1926; UPSC constitutional from 26 January 1950
  • Article 315 — UPSC and State Public Service Commissions
  • Article 316 — appointment by President for six-year term or 65 years
  • Article 320 — functions of PSCs (recruitment, disciplinary advice)
  • Article 322 — expenses charged on Consolidated Fund of India
  • Baswan Committee on CSE Pattern (2016)
  • Lateral Entry UPSC advertisement 2024 — withdrawn after objection

Open full model answer →

Q.1210 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

Self-help groups have become a parallel architecture of grassroots democracy. With reference to the NRLM and the Lakhpati Didi initiative, evaluate.

Subtopic: Polity · Pressure Groups & Associations

Show model answer outline

Introduction: Self-help groups are 10–20 member voluntary associations of poor rural women practising thrift, credit and joint enterprise; SHGs are organised under the Deendayal Antyodaya Yojana — National Rural Livelihoods Mission (DAY-NRLM, launched 2011).

Body: Three dimensions — (i) scale — over 1 crore SHGs covering more than 10.8 crore households as of March 2025 (Ministry of Rural Development); (ii) institutional architecture — village organisations and cluster-level federations, Bank Sakhi network, SHG-Bank Linkage Programme launched by NABARD in 1992; (iii) democratic deepening — Lakhpati Didi target of 3 crore by 2027 (Budget 2024–25), Krishi Sakhi and Drone Didi initiatives; SHGs as a Tier-IV institution feeding into the panchayat under Article 243A Gram Sabha.

Way forward / Conclusion: Statutory recognition of cluster federations, predictable RBI-set lending norms, and SHG–Panchayat convergence under PRI mainstreaming will deepen the democracy SHGs represent.

Key points
  • DAY-NRLM launched 2011 under the Ministry of Rural Development
  • Over 1 crore SHGs and 10.8 crore households as of March 2025
  • SHG-Bank Linkage Programme launched by NABARD in 1992
  • Lakhpati Didi target of 3 crore by 2027
  • Article 243A — Gram Sabha at the heart of local democracy
  • Drone Didi (Namo Drone Didi) launched November 2023 with Rs 1,261 crore outlay
  • Krishi Sakhi initiative for women agricultural extension workers

Open full model answer →

Q.1310 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

Anaemia is India’s most pervasive nutritional deficiency. With reference to the Anaemia Mukt Bharat 6×6×6 strategy, evaluate the welfare architecture for vulnerable groups.

Subtopic: Governance · Welfare Schemes for Vulnerable Sections

Show model answer outline

Introduction: Anaemia Mukt Bharat was launched in 2018 within the POSHAN Abhiyaan to address anaemia across six target beneficiary groups using six interventions and six institutional mechanisms.

Body: Three dimensions — (i) the 6×6×6 design — six beneficiary groups (under-5 children, school-age 5–9, adolescents 10–19, pregnant women, lactating mothers, women of reproductive age 20–49), six interventions (IFA prophylaxis and treatment, deworming, behaviour-change communication, fortified foods, malaria and haemoglobinopathy management); (ii) outcomes — NFHS-5 (2019-21) anaemia in 6–59 month children at 67% (up from 58.6% in NFHS-4); among non-pregnant women 15–49 at 57%; (iii) institutional gaps — supply-chain stockouts, low compliance with weekly IFA, sickle-cell exemption from rice fortification flagged by ICMR.

Way forward / Conclusion: Convergence with the National Sickle Cell Anaemia Elimination Mission (Budget 2023-24), dietary diversification via the National Mission on Edible Oils — Oilseeds, and proactive disclosure of district-level anaemia data are the next steps.

Key points
  • Anaemia Mukt Bharat launched 2018 under POSHAN Abhiyaan
  • 6×6×6 framework — six beneficiaries, six interventions, six institutions
  • NFHS-5 anaemia: 67% in children 6–59 months, 57% in women 15–49
  • National Sickle Cell Anaemia Elimination Mission (Budget 2023-24)
  • Saksham Anganwadi and Mission POSHAN 2.0 (2021)
  • FSSAI rice fortification — mandatory in PDS, ICDS, PM POSHAN from April 2024
  • Weekly Iron and Folic Acid Supplementation Programme for adolescents

Open full model answer →

Q.1410 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

E-courts have become India’s largest digital-justice infrastructure. With reference to the e-Courts Project Phase III and the National Judicial Data Grid, evaluate.

Subtopic: Governance · E-Governance

Show model answer outline

Introduction: The e-Courts Mission Mode Project was launched in 2007 by the Department of Justice with Supreme Court e-Committee oversight; Phase III was approved on 13 September 2023 with an outlay of Rs 7,210 crore for 2023-27.

Body: Three dimensions — (i) digital backbone — Case Information System (CIS) deployed in over 19,000 court complexes, the National Judicial Data Grid as the public dashboard, e-Filing 3.0, virtual hearings under guidelines issued by Supreme Court e-Committee; (ii) impact — about 5.2 crore pending cases visible on NJDG (2025), over 3.34 crore virtual hearings between 2020 and 2025; (iii) gaps — digital divide for litigants, paper Vakalatnama still required in many courts, last-mile connectivity in subordinate courts.

Way forward / Conclusion: Mandatory e-Filing, integration with DigiLocker and the Online Dispute Resolution framework recommended by the Kovind Committee (NITI Aayog 2021) will deepen e-governance in justice delivery.

Key points
  • e-Courts Mission Mode Project launched 2007
  • Phase III approved 13 September 2023 — Rs 7,210 crore outlay
  • Case Information System in over 19,000 court complexes
  • National Judicial Data Grid as public dashboard
  • Over 3.34 crore virtual hearings between March 2020 and 2025
  • Supreme Court e-Committee chaired by senior SC judge
  • Article 39A — equal justice and free legal aid

Open full model answer →

Q.1510 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

Mission Karmayogi seeks to convert rules-based bureaucracy into a role-based, citizen-centric civil service. Examine the design and risks.

Subtopic: Governance · Role of Civil Services

Show model answer outline

Introduction: Mission Karmayogi — National Programme for Civil Services Capacity Building — was approved by the Union Cabinet on 2 September 2020 and is anchored in the Capacity Building Commission set up in April 2021.

Body: Three dimensions — (i) design — Frameworks of Roles, Activities and Competencies (FRACs) approach, iGOT Karmayogi digital platform with over 1,000 courses, Annual Capacity Building Plans for ministries; (ii) institutional architecture — Prime Minister's Public Human Resource Council at the apex, Capacity Building Commission, Karmayogi Bharat as the operating SPV; (iii) risks — voluntary nature of learning, capture by training-content vendors, displacement of LBSNAA and SVPNPA institutional roles.

Way forward / Conclusion: Tie iGOT performance to APAR and promotions, evaluate against the 2nd ARC's Refurbishing of Personnel Administration benchmarks, and codify a competency-based posting policy.

Key points
  • Mission Karmayogi approved 2 September 2020
  • Capacity Building Commission constituted April 2021
  • iGOT Karmayogi digital platform — over 1,000 courses
  • FRAC — Framework of Roles, Activities and Competencies
  • Karmayogi Bharat — SPV under Companies Act Section 8
  • PM's Public Human Resource Council at apex
  • 2nd ARC Tenth Report (Refurbishing of Personnel Administration, 2008)

Open full model answer →

Q.1610 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

MGNREGA 2005 created a justiciable right to 100 days of unskilled wage work but its real wage rates and budget have stagnated in recent years. Evaluate its continuing relevance for India’s rural poor.

Subtopic: Social Justice · Welfare schemes — performance

Show model answer outline

Introduction: The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act 2005 entitles every rural household to 100 days of manual work in a financial year and stands as India's largest demand-driven safety net.

Body: Three dimensions — (i) Counter-cyclical role: enrolled work peaked at 389 crore person-days in 2020-21 during the pandemic; (ii) Issues: average wage Rs 289-300 in 2024-25, lagging state minimum wages; FY 2025-26 BE around Rs 86,000 crore against a CAG-flagged real demand of more than Rs 1.5 lakh crore; mandatory Aadhaar-Based Payment System and National Mobile Monitoring System exclusion errors; (iii) Asset creation: water-conservation works and individual-beneficiary land development under convergence with PMAY-G and JJM.

Way forward / Conclusion: Re-index wages to inflation, untie budget from cap, restore demand-driven character and pilot an urban employment guarantee.

Key points
  • MGNREGA 2005 — 100 days wage employment per rural household per year
  • FY 2025-26 BE around Rs 86,000 crore; expenditure cap rather than demand-driven in practice
  • Average wage rate in 2024-25 about Rs 289-300, often below state minimum wages
  • Mandatory ABPS and NMMS attendance flagged for exclusion errors by labour rights groups
  • 389 crore person-days generated in 2020-21 (peak pandemic year)
  • Convergence with PMAY-G, Jal Jeevan Mission, and individual-beneficiary land works
  • Urban Employment Guarantee proposal (Azim Premji University 2020) under debate

Open full model answer →

Q.1710 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

Public health spending in India hovers below 2 percent of GDP against the National Health Policy 2017 target of 2.5 percent. Examine the consequences for equity and out-of-pocket expenditure.

Subtopic: Social Justice · Health

Show model answer outline

Introduction: India's public health expenditure remains around 1.84 percent of GDP (NHA 2021-22), short of the 2.5 percent target set in the National Health Policy 2017 and the High Level Expert Group on UHC (2011) benchmark of 3 percent.

Body: Three dimensions — (i) Out-of-pocket expenditure has fallen from about 64.2 percent (FY15) to 39.4 percent (FY22) but still drives an estimated 6 crore Indians into poverty annually; (ii) State variation — Tamil Nadu and Kerala spend more than 1 percent of GSDP on health while Uttar Pradesh and Bihar spend less than 0.5 percent; (iii) Federal design — health is a State Subject (List II Entry 6); 15th Finance Commission's Health Sector Grant of Rs 70,051 crore (2021-26) routed via local bodies.

Way forward / Conclusion: Earmark a cess-funded Health Equity Fund, expand PM-ABHIM critical-care blocks and condition central transfers on primary-care strengthening.

Key points
  • Public health expenditure about 1.84 percent of GDP (NHA 2021-22) against 2.5 percent NHP 2017 target
  • Out-of-pocket expenditure 39.4 percent of total health spend (NHA 2021-22), down from 64.2 percent in FY15
  • About 6 crore Indians pushed into poverty annually by health spending (WHO-NCAER 2021)
  • 15th Finance Commission Health Sector Grant Rs 70,051 crore (2021-26) routed via PRIs and ULBs
  • PM-ABHIM Pradhan Mantri Ayushman Bharat Health Infrastructure Mission (October 2021) — Rs 64,180 crore
  • Ayushman Arogya Mandirs (renamed HWCs) as primary-care backbone
  • Health a State Subject under List II Entry 6; insurance and ESI on Concurrent List

Open full model answer →

Q.1810 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

The National Education Policy 2020 promises foundational literacy and numeracy by 2026-27 through the NIPUN Bharat Mission and a 6 percent of GDP spending target. Evaluate the implementation status and structural gaps.

Subtopic: Social Justice · Education

Show model answer outline

Introduction: NEP 2020, the third national policy after 1968 and 1986/1992, restructures school education into a 5+3+3+4 design and reaffirms the Kothari Commission (1964-66) target of 6 percent of GDP on education.

Body: Three dimensions — (i) Foundational stage: NIPUN Bharat (July 2021) sets FLN targets by Grade 3 by 2026-27, with PM SHRI schools (Rs 27,360 crore, 2022-27) as model laboratories; (ii) Higher education: 50 percent GER target by 2035 from current 28.4 percent (AISHE 2021-22), Academic Bank of Credits, multidisciplinary universities, and UGC autonomy reforms; (iii) Spending gap: Education spend remains around 4.6 percent of GDP combined Centre and States, well below the 6 percent target; Right to Education enforcement, teacher vacancies (over 10 lakh) and learning losses captured in ASER 2024 persist.

Way forward / Conclusion: A Central FLN Mission with state co-finance, mother-tongue early instruction under Article 350A, end ad hoc teacher recruitment and link Samagra Shiksha grants to ASER outcomes.

Key points
  • NEP 2020 — 5+3+3+4 school structure replacing 10+2
  • NIPUN Bharat Mission (5 July 2021) — FLN targets by Grade 3 by 2026-27
  • Kothari Commission (1964-66) target of 6 percent of GDP; current spend around 4.6 percent (Centre+States)
  • GER in higher education 28.4 percent (AISHE 2021-22); NEP target 50 percent by 2035
  • PM SHRI scheme (2022) — Rs 27,360 crore for 14,500 model schools till 2026-27
  • Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009 — Article 21A
  • ASER 2024 — only 23.4 percent of Class 3 students in government schools can read a Class 2 text
  • Teacher vacancies — over 10 lakh sanctioned posts unfilled (Lok Sabha reply 2024)

Open full model answer →

Q.1910 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009 gave India a constitutional entitlement to schooling but learning outcomes have stagnated. Examine the gap between access and quality.

Subtopic: Social Justice · Education

Show model answer outline

Introduction: The 86th Constitutional Amendment (2002) inserted Article 21A making free and compulsory education for 6-14-year-olds a fundamental right, operationalised by the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009.

Body: Three dimensions — (i) Access wins: gross enrolment near universal at primary, drop-out at upper-primary at 5.2 percent (UDISE 2022-23); (ii) Quality stagnation: ASER 2024 shows only 23.4 percent of Class 3 government-school students can read a Class 2 text, and 33.7 percent can do subtraction; (iii) Structural issues: no-detention policy amended in 2019, 25 percent EWS quota in private schools (Section 12(1)(c)), teacher pupil-ratio breaches in 12 states.

Way forward / Conclusion: Link Samagra Shiksha funding to learning outcomes, reintroduce mid-year diagnostic assessments under NIPUN Bharat, and end ad hoc teacher recruitment under the State PSC route.

Key points
  • Article 21A inserted by 86th Constitutional Amendment 2002; RTE Act 2009 operationalised it
  • Section 12(1)(c) — 25 percent EWS reservation in unaided private schools
  • ASER 2024 — only 23.4 percent of Class 3 government-school students can read a Class 2 text
  • Drop-out rate at upper-primary 5.2 percent (UDISE+ 2022-23)
  • No-detention policy diluted by 2019 RTE amendment, allowing detention from Class 5/8
  • Teacher vacancies over 10 lakh per Ministry of Education data
  • Samagra Shiksha (2018) consolidates SSA, RMSA and TE schemes

Open full model answer →

Q.2010 marks · 150w 9 min Easy

China’s Belt and Road Initiative and India’s refusal to join it rest on the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor’s passage through Gilgit-Baltistan. Examine how this sovereignty position has shaped India’s connectivity diplomacy.

Subtopic: IR · India and its neighbourhood

Show model answer outline

Introduction: India boycotted the first Belt and Road Forum in 2017 over CPEC's $62 billion route through Gilgit-Baltistan and has maintained the line that activity on Indian-claimed territory is 'inherently illegal, illegitimate, and unacceptable'.

Body: Three dimensions — (i) Sovereignty rationale rooted in the Instrument of Accession 1947 and Article 1(3)(c) of the Constitution; (ii) Alternative corridors: IMEC (9 September 2023, G20 New Delhi Summit), INSTC via Chabahar (US sanctions waiver expired 26 April 2026), I2U2 (14 July 2022); (iii) BRI scale — about $1 trillion across 147 countries; India's hedge is a portfolio not a single bet.

Way forward / Conclusion: Keep the BRI boycott as principled but operationalise IMEC pilot cargoes via UAE-Israel Haifa link, formalise INSTC framework with Russia and Iran, and accelerate Trincomalee energy hub.

Key points
  • BRI launched 2013, about $1 trillion invested across 147 countries
  • CPEC about $62 billion, passes through Gilgit-Baltistan (India-claimed)
  • India boycotted Belt and Road Forums since 2017
  • Article 1(3)(c) Constitution includes territories acquired by Instrument of Accession 1947
  • IMEC announced 9 September 2023 at G20 New Delhi Summit; 8 MoU signatories
  • INSTC via Iran's Chabahar — about 30% cheaper, 40% shorter than Suez route
  • US sanctions waiver for Chabahar expired 26 April 2026

Open full model answer →