1) Thequestion of age i.e 25 Years is only applicable for membership of the State legislatureandnot for being a Minister in a state(if he is appointed as minister without being member of state legislature)
That is why, in the question there is nowhere, any mention of RPA-1951. It only mentions the Constitution.The article 85 , I think it nowhere states as - So, If you simple rely on that - Statement is ditto copied and true.@PercivalYes, statement 1 is definitely right because
1) Thequestion of age i.e 25 Years is only applicable for membership of the State legislatureandnot for being a Minister in a state(if he is appointed as minister without being member of state legislature)2) Till the time a person is duly elected to state legislature as its Member,he can continue as Minister at leastfor6 months.The question of his qualification/ disqualification by virtue of his age(<25 years) will only arise when he will fill election/ nomination papers for the membership of state legislature
Also, the qualifications of minsiters are nowhere stated. So, A 18 year old person can be minister for 6 months. But, he cant be member of LA .. as he does not fulfills 25 year age criteria.. he has to give up ministership than.Deduction >>An 18 year person with voting rights can be a minister for 6 months only because any person can be a minister for 6 months without being member of house. The 25 year age criterian comes only in picture when you want to be member of house .. so .. you 18 year old can happy go to be a minister but beyond that - you have to member of house which you cant be .. so cant continue beyond 6 months in any case.But, If read it along with RPA and all , Then.. It makes all wrong.
Start preparing for mains.Last year idhar bht mathapachhi kiya tha digital signature, clouds, LS Rules, PDT Achary, ramsar, etc etc..Iss baar toh man bhi nhi kr rha..bcoz upsc directy verdict deta hai answer key me..no if and buts...
I am scoring 103.33 from forum and ias baba, 105.92 from vision,drishti and shankar...hopeful of writing my first mains this time..
Last yr scored 96 in prelims..missed by 2 marks..lets hope for the best this time..
iss baar ka prelims toh luck factor pe bht jyada aa gya hai..2-3 tukke jyada/kam lage aur u r in/out..
@gauravbrly409 bhai kya haal hai..i hope u remember me..digital signature pe upsc sala 3 only hi diya ans:)..usi ki wajah se bahar ho gya sala mai last time..
Bro, I am also getting 104.5 . For Gen is that sufficient? Asking because I live in this backward state with no one preparing for upsc around me. So don't have a perspective. Will be happy if you could give some insights
Cut-off wont go more than 95 in any case. Those who are saying otherwise are just playing with fears of aspirants
In Aadhaar question Statement 4 is wrong. Aadhaar Act does not mention that aadhaar is mandatory to get benefits from CFI. It simply says that that the gov. may register.
Chapter 3 Point 7
The Central Government or, as the case may be, the State Government may, for the purpose of establishing identity of an individual as a condition for receipt of a subsidy, benefit or service for which the expenditure is incurred from, or the receipt therefrom forms part of, the Consolidated Fund of India, require that such individual undergo authentication, or furnish proof of possession of Aadhaar number or in the case of an individual to whom no Aadhaar number has been assigned, such individual makes an application for enrolment: Provided that if an Aadhaar number is not assigned to an individual, the individual shall be offered alternate and viable means of identification for delivery of the subsidy, benefit or service.
I am finding conflicting reports on whether aadhaar is mandatory for insurance or not. Maybe some individual working in the insurance sector may enlighten. But if this option is also wrong than I am afraid the entire question is wrong. One should than send representation.
Bro, first read this act THE AADHAAR (TARGETED DELIVERY OF FINANCIAL AND OTHER SUBSIDIES, BENEFITS AND SERVICES) ACT, 2016and then read the SC judgement
This year, Shankar is gonna be so wrong. .. Cutoff will be
Gen =92-95
EWS= 89-92
OBC= 90-93
SC= 78-82
ST= 73-78
actually it will be higher than shankar's prediction. they have seriously underestimated how high people are scoring this year
There are always some people, who score way higher .. I am an ST candidate, serving in State services , giving prelims since 2012, cleared prelims 5 times, appeared in PT 3 times. You must have been undergrad, or in high school by then. Trust me when I say, the cutoff won’t go higher this year than what i quoted earlier
@Negan What is ur take on cutoff?Can it go down to 96?
Please Refer to my earlier comments.
Let's take up the chat when UPSC declares this year's cut-off of prelims next year. Experience always triumphs over the speculation.This year, Shankar is gonna be so wrong. .. Cutoff will be
Gen =92-95
EWS= 89-92
OBC= 90-93
SC= 78-82
ST= 73-78
actually it will be higher than shankar's prediction. they have seriously underestimated how high people are scoring this year
There are always some people, who score way higher .. I am an ST candidate, serving in State services , giving prelims since 2012, cleared prelims 5 times, appeared in PT 3 times. You must have been undergrad, or in high school by then. Trust me when I say, the cutoff won’t go higher this year than what i quoted earlier
ignoring your condescending tone, why dont you check out some of the polls? there are not just "some" people scoring high, its way too many. This year's options were set up in such a manner that anyone taking so called obvious guesses (typical prelims tricks) is scoring high.
For proof, u can check out polls. Even polls of reputed institutes like insights say almost 4-5k people above 105 in a sample of 20k, so you can do the math.
Now an experienced candidate like you will argue that polls are filled with fake scores, or insights is not a reputed institute, so go ahead believe what you want.
Also, coaching institutes 1. have an achor bias to previous year cutoffs, they are particularly scared to go higher. they may go lower when papeer is more difficult, but they tend to not go higher as seen in 2016 (compared to 2015). 2. lower cutoffs= more test series sold.
obviously above points are disputed. But this is the most objective way to look at it
Tougher paper, lesser appearing candidates and yet cutoff going higher. Yes that's strong logic right there.
I was one of the serious ones. Serious one's don't go on tukka spree. Those who are scoring 100-105+ are the ones who have guessed right in exams. But there are more losers than winners in this Tukka game. In the end, House(UPSC) always wins. You can't have 5k+ Gen candidates, with each one of them landing the Tukka's correct.This year, Shankar is gonna be so wrong. .. Cutoff will be
Gen =92-95
EWS= 89-92
OBC= 90-93
SC= 78-82
ST= 73-78
actually it will be higher than shankar's prediction. they have seriously underestimated how high people are scoring this year
There are always some people, who score way higher .. I am an ST candidate, serving in State services , giving prelims since 2012, cleared prelims 5 times, appeared in PT 3 times. You must have been undergrad, or in high school by then. Trust me when I say, the cutoff won’t go higher this year than what i quoted earlier
ignoring your condescending tone, why dont you check out some of the polls? there are not just "some" people scoring high, its way too many. This year's options were set up in such a manner that anyone taking so called obvious guesses (typical prelims tricks) is scoring high.
For proof, u can check out polls. Even polls of reputed institutes like insights say almost 4-5k people above 105 in a sample of 20k, so you can do the math.
Now an experienced candidate like you will argue that polls are filled with fake scores, or insights is not a reputed institute, so go ahead believe what you want.
Also, coaching institutes 1. have an achor bias to previous year cutoffs, they are particularly scared to go higher. they may go lower when papeer is more difficult, but they tend to not go higher as seen in 2016 (compared to 2015). 2. lower cutoffs= more test series sold.
obviously above points are disputed. But this is the most objective way to look at it
Tougher paper, lesser appearing candidates and yet cutoff going higher. Yes that's strong logic right there.
only non-serious candidates dont appear, serious ones won't skip for the fear of corona or anything else (majority of them)
