Mock 3 | Logical Reasoning

Passage 1

I read a disturbing news report in early March, which detailed how a prominent social activist,
Harsh Mander, was severely criticised by the Supreme Court for allegedly making derogatory
remarks about the judiciary. I found it odd that the court had prioritised focusing on his alleged
remarks, rather than the grounds of his petition which concerned political hate speech. In similar
vein I read a newspaper headline two days ago which really stayed with me: “Bar members can’t
hold the judiciary to ransom: SC”. The irony in that statement was so acute that I could not help
but sigh in dismay.

As Indians, we have watched helplessly in the past months as the government has held our
liberties and constitutional values to ransom, while the court appears to have abandoned us. It
has delayed, dithered and finally refused to take a stand on most issues that are fundamental to
our democratic ethos and indeed to every principle laid down by our founding fathers.
Constitutionality of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act? No urgency, let matters settle down.
Habeas corpus? Not important, it can wait. No internet access for the people in an entire state?
Sorry, won’t strike down restrictions that are unreasonable. Desperate, dying migrants? Adjourn,
adjourn and adjourn. Give the government enough time to render the matter infructuous. How
about the legitimacy and transparency of political funding via electoral bonds? Do we really need
to rule on that right now – elections are happening efficiently after all aren’t they. I could go on
and on. I read again with a mixture of irony and amusement the exchanges in court between our
judges and a senior member of the bar, Prashant Bhushan, for whom I carry no brief. Bhushan
had been fairly caustic in his observations about the court, post the migrant wage-payment writ
being dismissed. When he reappeared before the court in a different case, their Lordships hauled
him up for “insulting the institution” and asked why they should hear him given that he appeared
to have no faith in it. To which he said that he was only expressing his deep anguish at the bench
accepting the Centre’s representations without verification. Was he wrong in saying that? Was it
wrong to expect a neutral arbiter of disputes to doubt those before it, equally?

I was absolutely appalled that a constitutional court vested with more power than any other
public institution in the world, could simply choose to look away from a humanitarian problem
that it was duty bound to engage with. In the weeks since, this country has watched the most
pitiable images of human desperation and misery play out on their television screens and across
broadsheets. It is shocking that even six weeks into this lockdown, there has not been a single
intervention or positive direction by the court despite multiple petitions before it begging for
justice in the case of migrants. The court must also bear in mind that its exercise of taking suo
motu cognisance ought not to be limited to instances of perceived slights on its own “dignity”
but rather it should be deployed in matters of actual national importance, where the lives and
livelihoods of India’s weakest are at stake.

Q. Which of the following is the assumption on which the author’s argument depends?
A. It is the duty of the government to take cognizance of matters of national importance and of
SC to take a stand to defend our constitutional rights.
B. It is the duty of the SC to take cognizance of matters of national importance and take a stand to
defend our constitutional rights.
C. It is the duty of the government to take cognizance of matters of national importance and take
a stand to defend our constitutional rights.
D. It is the duty of the SC to take cognizance of matters of national importance and of
government to take a stand to defend our constitutional rights.

Q. Which of the following is the author most likely to agree with?

A. The Court has intervened and laid down positive directions to be implemented by the
respective governments to ensure the safety of migrants.
B. The Court seems to be biased in favour of the Central Government.
C. The Court has taken suo motu cognizance of all the matters of national importance.
D. It should be the absolute priority of the Court to defend it’s own dignity than to protect the
interest of India’s weakest.

Q. Which of the following is the author least likely to agree with?

A. The Court has failed to take a stand on most issues that are fundamental to our democratic
ethos.
B. Constitutionality of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act is a very important matter on which
Court should urgently take a stand.
C. Restriction on internet access for people in J&K is reasonably justified and should not be struck
down.
D. Legitimacy and transparency of political funding via electoral bonds is not as grave a matter
than the matter of dying migrants in the current scenario.

Q. Based on this passage which of the following must be true about the Prashant Bhusan?
A. He is a senior member of the bar and he filed a writ petition against migrant wage-payment.
B. The author is biased towards Prashant Bhusan and in reality he insulted the judges for
dismissing his writ petition.
C. It was wrong for him to expect a neutral arbiter of disputes to doubt those before it, equally.
D. It was arbitrary and against the rule of law for the Court to accept the representation of the
Centre without verification.

Q. The underlined sentences play which of the following roles in the author’s argument?
A. It provides justification for the author’s claim.
B. It refutes the author’s claim.
C. It is the author’s claim.
D. It plays no role in the author’s claim.

Passage 2

Universities around the globe are reassessing the means of imparting education. While
evaluating student progress through examinations is pertinent, the UGC should rethink if holding
exams at this time can be a viable option as Covid-19 cases increase everyday. Without
considering the situation at hand, the decisions we make right now will hamper the academic
performance of our students when their future hangs by a thread.

Students won't be able to travel long distances to reach universities or exam centres, or find
living arrangements; they also have to cope with the fear of the invisible virus, all just to write
their exams. The resources with our central universities are inadequate to provide hostel facilities
to all outstation students. They will be forced to rely on private accommodation, which will
reinforce the reluctance to appear for exams. There are also questions about how states will
manage large gatherings of students and the impossibility of maintaining social distancing. All
this has been raised by Aaditya Thackeray in his petition in the Supreme Court. There will be
thousands of students who won't be able to appear for examinations for reasons beyond their
control, and it will be a grave injustice to them if deprived of the opportunity to study in the next
academic session. We cannot put the health and the lives of lakhs of students in danger because
of our ill-conceived decisions.

India's higher education system is a glaring example of an overemphasis on exam scores while
rational thought and critical thinking are often compromised. Professors and faculty should now
be given the flexibility to rethink and implement course evaluation in their grading systems. This
will truly mean standing by our students and the teachers even as they demonstrate
extraordinary resilience. It is the government's responsibility to take into account the grievances
of their primary stakeholders, which are the students. Making plans for the conclusion of the
academic session and the beginning of the next one has to be done through a dialogue with
students as well as considering the infrastructure and resources we presently have.

The Energy, time and money spent on the ritual of examinations should be used to assess and
then overcome the institutional inadequacies that students are being subjected to. Even online
examinations will be disproportionately biased towards a vast majority of students. Only 12.5% of
Indian households with students have access to the internet and about 50 % of them have
laptops, and only a quarter of them have adequate internet connectivity which has affected their
attendance rates. It is unfortunate that the central government, since the lockdown, has made no
efforts to reach out to our students and bridge this digital divide.

Our central government's efforts look negligible as compared to this. This is where the Prime
Minister's much touted 'Digital India' campaign was most required - to bridge the digital divide.
The Maharashtra government is proposing a fair and equitable method- to make an assessment
based on students' past performance, not to fail students, and give them an opportunity to
improve their score in the next academic year. It has to be duly considered that the inequality of
internet access and the problems faced especially by students with disabilities renders them
incapable of participating in these ill-planned exams. We should take cues from other countries
and find innovative ways so that learning and education can continue seamlessly. Exams are the
most critical part of a student's life and decide their future, but evaluating their academic
performance should not be at the cost of their health. Examinations are there to fulfill a much
larger goal, not just the mere act of mastering it for its own sake. At the heart of the education
system are our students, who need to be our priority.

Q. Based on the above passage, which of the following must be true?

A. UGC’s decision to conduct exam is a well planned move considering the pandemic.
B. The energy, time and money spent on the conducting examinations should be used to save
lives of corona patients.
C. The Maharashtra government’s proposal takes into account the grievances of the students.
D. Central govt. has made extraordinary efforts in reaching out to the students and solving their
problems.

Q. Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the author’s argument?

A. One examination decides the future of the students therefore examination should be
conducted.
B. One examination can not decide the future of the students therefore examination should be
conducted.
C. Health and mental well-being of students should be given more priority than their academic
performance.
D. Exams should only be conducted for students from a strong financial background as they face
no hardship.

Q. Which of the following is true regarding the digital divide among Indian students?
A. 50% of Indian students have laptops.
B. Only 25% of Indian households with students having Internet connectivity have adequate
internet.
C. Majority of Indian households with students have internet.
D. Only A & C.

Q. Which of the following is the possible effect of UGC conducting exams in midst of pandemic?
A. There will be large gatherings of students and parents against the directive of maintaining
social distancing.
B. Many students won't be able to travel long distances to reach universities or exam centers to
appear for their exam.
C. Most of the students won’t be able to appear for online exams pertaining to the lack of
internet access.
D. All of the above.

D
Q. Which of the following is not the correct inference from this passage?
A. Prime Minister's 'Digital India' campaign has succeeded in bridging the digital divide among
students of India.
B. We should learn from other countries and find innovative ways for learning and education to
take place flawlessly.
C. Indian education system gives unnecessary importance to exam scores.
D. UGC’s decision to conduct exams for students will put the health and the lives of lakhs of
students in danger.

PASSAGE 3

In holding that people suffering from disability are entitled to the same benefits and relaxations
as candidates belonging to the Scheduled Castes, the Supreme Court has recognised the travails
of the disabled in accessing education or employment, regardless of their social status. Even
though drawn from all sections of society, those suffering from the several categories of disability
recognised by law have always been an under-privileged and under-represented section, a fact
noticed in official studies in the past. Recently, the top court ruled that the Delhi High Court had
correctly decided in 2012 that “people suffering from disabilities are also socially backward, and
are therefore, at the very least, entitled to the same benefits as given to the Scheduled
Castes/Scheduled Tribes candidates”. Therefore, it took the view that when SC/ST candidates get
a relaxation of a certain percentage of marks to qualify for admission, the same relaxation shall
apply to disabled candidates too. In the 2012 case before the High Court, a university had
allowed a 10% concession in the minimum eligibility requirement for SC/ST candidates, and 5%
concession for disabled applicants. The High Court ruled against this differential treatment,
terming it discriminatory. The larger principle behind this was that without imparting proper
education to those suffering from disabilities, “there cannot be any meaningful enforcement of
their rights” both under the Constitution and the then prevailing 1995 legislation on providing
equal opportunities to the disabled and protecting their rights. It can only be more applicable,
now that a fresh law that aims for a greater transformative effect, the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities Act, 2016, is in place.
A counterpoint to the idea of eliminating the distinction between the disabled and the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes may arise from those questioning the attempt to equate physical or
mental disability with the social disability and experience of untouchability suffered by
marginalised sections for centuries. For instance, the social background of disabled persons from
a traditionally privileged community may gave them an advantage over those suffering from
historical social disability. However, this may not always be the case. The Delhi High Court had
cited the abysmally low literacy and employment rates among persons with disabilities.
Educational indicators captured in the 2001 Census showed that illiteracy among the disabled
was much higher than the general population figure. The share of disabled children out of school
was quite higher than other major social categories. The 2001 Census put the illiteracy rate
among the disabled at 51%. There was similar evidence of their inadequate representation in
employment too. The 2016 law sought to address this by raising the quota for the disabled from
3% to 5% and envisaging incentives for the private sector to hire them too. It is vital that this is
fully given effect to so that this significant segment of the population is not left out of social and
economic advancement.

Q. Which of the following is the assumption on which the Court’s decision that people suffering
from disability are entitled to the same benefits and relaxations as candidates belonging to the
Scheduled Castes is based?
A. The experience of people suffering from disability is same as the experience of social disability
by marginalised sections.
B. The suffering of people with physical disability is more compared to the suffering caused by
social disability to the members of the marginalised sections of our society.
C. The suffering and experience of people with mental disability is same as people with physical
disability.
D. The suffering from social disability for centuries by the marginalised communities can’t be
compared to the suffering of people with mental or physical disability.

Q. Based on this passage, what could be a possible counter point to the Court’s decision?
A. Irrespective of the social background of disabled persons they suffer from the same social
discrimination in their community due to their disability.
B. Suffering of people with physical or mental disability can’t ever be cured but the stigma over
social disability suffered by people from marginalised communities can be eradicated with more
opportunities and representation.
C. The social background of disabled persons from a traditionally privileged community may give
them an advantage over those suffering from historical social disability.
D. The financial background of rich persons from marginalised communities will have an
advantage over those suffering from mental or physical disability.

Q. Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen author’s argument?

A. Literacy rate among disabled persons and persons from marginalised community is same.
B. A high percentage of disabled persons commit suicide owing to a life void of dignity and equal
treatment along with social humiliation on a every day basis.
C. Social disability has same effect on the person as the effect of physical or mental disability.
D. The disabled persons have inadequate representation in education and therefore employment.

Q. Which of the following, if true, would most weaken author’s argument?

A. Social disability has same effect on the person as the effect of physical or mental disability.
B. Disabled persons have always been under-privileged and under-represented section of our
society.
C. Disabled persons also suffer from untouchability.
D. The experience of social disability for centuries by the marginalised communities can be
equated to the suffering of a disabled person from the privileged community.

Q. All of the following facts, if true, supports the Court’s decision except?
A. Abysmally low literacy and employment rates among persons with disabilities.
B. The 2011 Census put the illiteracy rate among the disabled at 10% which is quite lower than
people from marginalised communities.
C. The disabled persons have inadequate representation in employment.
D. The share of disabled children out of school was quite higher than other major social
categories.

PASSAGE 4

I appeal to you, as a former proud member of the IPS fraternity. At 91+, I am one of the few living
IPS nonagenarians! I served the people in Maharashtra, Gujarat and Punjab, dispensing justice as
was their right. I do not intend to preach to you! I do not intend even to advise, because times
have changed, political compulsions have changed and more importantly, politicians are of a
different breed from the freedom-fighters who formulated policy in post-independent India. But
the values of honesty, compassion, yearning for truth and justice, commitment to the law and the
constitution are always constant and should hold the first spot in your mind’s eye whenever you
think, decide and finally act. As a true leader of men, your diktat should guide the thinking and
the actions of those who serve under your command.

While tackling crime and criminals the extraordinary methods, nay the classical methods of
fighting terrorism cannot be replicated in normal times. Gang lords and big criminal gangs come
into existence because they use money to bribe police officials and their political masters. It is the
nexus between the criminals, the police and the politicians that create these Frankensteins! You
know this as well as any ordinary policeman. As I said earlier I do not dare to advise you. There is
nothing much you can do to sway the politicians, but you can surely compel your own men to
desist from supporting the criminals thereby shaking one important leg of the three-legged
nexus!

The politicians will not ask you to allow the criminals to operate. They may ease you out of your
position at the top, but that is a much nobler option than to be privy to the creation of a Vikas
Dubey! And speaking of Vikas Dubey, his elimination involved usurping the role of the judiciary!
The investigators should not be empowered to prosecute and judge also as is happening in the
country now! Do you consider this wise or just or civilized? Do you feel the necessity of a police
state called India? The rise of criminals who ambush and kill law enforcers, who escape so easily
from their custody snatch the policemen’s weapons and Rambo like take them on till killed is so
common now and so routinely applauded by the middle classes that political bosses have turned
calamity into pasture grounds on the ooze of which they can feed! The murder of the father and
son duo in the Tuticorin district of Tamil Nadu is even more disturbing because cruelty had
consumed the perpetrators to such an extent that even middle-class support did not materialise!
Shameful! Every policeman in India should hang his head in shame.

I am not going to offer solutions. Arm-chair advisors often do more harm than good. I am sure
you will devise a strategy where fake encounters and brutal methods of interrogation are
abandoned in favour of not allowing Vikas Dubeys to rise in the first place and in favour of quick
trials of the Vikas Dubeys who slip through your net! Here allow me to break my promise to not
pontificate. I beg IPS officers to please stop the ugly spectacle of jockeying and lobbying for
cutting-edge posts in the hierarchy. This involves the sale of your independence to political
bosses who in turn will ‘request’ you to do things that you know will weaken your own authority
over those you have to command!

Your sorrowing brother,

Julio Ribeiro (I.P.S ’53- Mah)

Q. Which of the following is the author most likely to agree with?

A. The value of honesty is outdated and officers should not adhere to it in changed times.
B. Officers should help politicians in their wrongdoings instead of Gang lords.
C. Officers should be committed to the law and constitution in their thought and action.
D. Officers should be not be committed to the the values of honesty and compassion.

Q. The underlined sentence play which of the following role in the author’s argument?
A. They refute author’s claim.
B. They support author’s claim.
C. They establish a background for author’s claim.
D. They refute author’s claim by providing a plausible explanation for it.
C

Q. Which of the following is the assumption on which the author’s argument in his letter to the
officers depends?
A. Reading this letter will have some effect on the mind of the officers.
B. Reading this letter will create no change in the mind of the officers.
C. Reading this letter will encourage them to kill more criminals like Vikash Dubey.
D. Most officers would be indifferent to the appeal made by this letter to them.

Q. Which of the following if true, is the reason how big criminals like Vikash Dubey come into
existence?
A. Leniency of Police Officials.
B. Support of Politicians.
C. Nexus between politicians, police and criminals.
D. Support of ruling political party.

Q. Which of the following, accordingly to the author should be the way to deal with criminals like
Vikash Dubey?
A. Fake Encounters.
B. Brutal Interrogation.
C. Not letting them rise and having quick trials so they don’t slip away.
D. Taking bribe and letting them go.