For the trade/current account deficit question, even if one considers quarterly data, the merchandise exports of India is lesser than merchandise imports. So, statement 1 is correct. Statement 3 is definitely correct. Hence only logical answer is D. "The merchandise trade deficit shrunk to just $10 billion in Q1FY21" - News article in Business standard.
With reference to the international trade of India at present, which of the following statement is/are correct?
1.India’s merchandise exports are less than its merchandise imports.
2. India’s imports of iron and steel chemicals, fertilisers and machinery have decreased in recent years.
3.India’s exports of services are more than its imports of services.
4. India suffers from an overall trade/current account deficit.
Select the correct answer using the code given below:
a) 1 and 2 only
b) 2 and 4 only
c) 3 only
d) 1, 3 and 4 only
With reference to carbon nanotubes, consider the following statements:
1. They can be used as carriers of drugs and antigens in the human body.
2. They can be made into artificial blood capillaries for an injured part of human body.
3. They can be used in biochemical sensors.
4. Carbon nanotubes are biodegradable.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
a) 1 and 2 only
b) 2, 3 and 4 only
c) 1, 3 and 4 only
d) 1, 2, 3 and 4
Friends, any link, source, reference for using carbon nanotubes as artificial blood capillaries? I got nothing even on searching specifically for it.
For preamble question, D is correct. Suppose, govt enacted a law to given effect to DPSP or any other provision, and if there is a case in SC regarding some ambiguity, then SC can use Preamble as a guide to give judgement.
Here SC will use Preamble + DPSP or Preamble + (any other part of Constitution). Thus legal effect of preamble only holds if it is used in combination to some other part.
Govt. cannot enact a law to give effect to provision of Preamble alone, neither can SC declare a law void if it goes only against preamble. Therefore, Preamble has no legal effect of its own,
But when used in combination with any other part, it has legal effect.
1. MPLADs and NALSA question then stands incorrect. Hope UPSC drops them.
2. My views on so called controversial questions:
(a) AI - 134 are correct (ai cannot create meaningful short stories effectively at present level of technology; wireless transfer of EE to rehne hi do.)
(b) Preamble has no legal effect independently of other parts, so D
(c) just eligible to vote cannot be made a minister, (ismai koi doubt hai hi nhi)
(d) 1884 case only 2 and 3 (age of consent and conjugal only)
Just my views...
For that eligible to vote can be made a minister question, SC has given guidelines long back (2001) in Jayalalitha case. Pasting from an article in The Hindu
As a general rule, a person can become a Minister only if he is a member of the Legislative Assembly or the Legislative Council. Article 164(4) states that a person cannot continue as Minister for more than six months if he is not a member of the legislature by that period.
Okay, Biradar leave all assumptions, let's only see what is written clearly in the question.
The statement says, "According to Constitution", so tell me which article or schedule of the Constitution says so?
The only related article is 164(4), which is as below
A Minister who for any period of six consecutive months is not a member of the Legislature of the State shall at the expiration of that period cease to be a Minister.
So from this how do we conclude that a person who is eligible to vote can be made a minister?
