Banking Exam PCI202533

Welcome to your Banking Exam PCI202533

DIRECTIONS Qs. (1-6): Study the following information carefully and answer the questions given below

The given bar graph shows the number of bats sold by five different companies on two different days of the week. i.e.
Monday and Tuesday



1. The number of bats sold on Monday by F is 30% more than the number of bats sold on Tuesday by B and the number of bats sold on Tuesday by F is 50% more than the number of bats sold on Monday by D. Find the total number of bats sold on Monday and Tuesday by F?

2.

The given bar graph shows the number of bats sold by five different companies on two different days of the week. i.e.
Monday and Tuesday



The ratio of the number of kookabura and New balance bats sold on Monday by E and C is 15 : 8 and 3 : 5 respectively. Find the number of kookabura bats sold on Monday by E and C?

3.

The given bar graph shows the number of bats sold by five different companies on two different days of the week. i.e.
Monday and Tuesday



Find the average number of bats sold on Tuesday by A, B, D and E together?

4.

The given bar graph shows the number of bats sold by five different companies on two different days of the week. i.e.
Monday and Tuesday



The ratios of the number of bats sold to unsold on Monday by A and on Tuesday by C is 1 : 2 and 4 : 3 respectively.
Find the total number of unsold bats on Monday by A and on Tuesday by C?

5.

The given bar graph shows the number of bats sold by five different companies on two different days of the week. i.e.
Monday and Tuesday



The number of bats unsold by G is equal to the average number of bats sold on Monday by B and E. If the number
of sold bats by G is 33% of the total number of bats by G, then find the total number of bats sold by G and the number
of bats sold on Tuesday by E?

6.

The given bar graph shows the number of bats sold by five different companies on two different days of the week. i.e.
Monday and Tuesday



The number of SS bats sold on Tuesday by A is 25% of the number of bats sold on Monday by B and the number of
TON Bats sold on Tuesday by D is half of the number of bats sold on Tuesday by A. Then the number of TON Bats
sold on Tuesday by A is approximately what percent of the number of SS bats sold on Tuesday by D? (The companies
sold two different types of bats TON and SS bats)

DIRECTIONS (Qs. 1-5) : The following questions are based on the stacked bar graph given below:




1. What is the total sales of Ruby as a per cent of the total sales of precious stones for the given period?

2.




By what percent is the average annual sales of Emerald for the given period more than the sales of Opal?

3.




For how many years is the sales of Bezel as a percentage of the total sales of precious stones less than that of Topaz?

4.




If the sales of Topaz increased from 2008-09 to 2014-15 by 25% and increased from 2013-2014 to 2014-15 by 50%, then
what is the difference between the sales of Topaz in 2008-09 and that in 2014-15?

5.




Which of the given precious stones experienced the highest percentage growth in the sales in any year over that of the
previous year for the period 2010-11 to 2013-14?

DIRECTIONS (Qs. 1-5): Study the given information carefully and answer the following questions.

Ten boxes with names A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J are placed one above the other in any particular order. Box number 10 is at the top and box number 1 is at the bottom. There are two boxes kept between E and G. Box J is at the bottom. There are three boxes between box C and box G. Box H is placed between box F and boxa The number of boxes between J and I is the same as the number of boxes between I and G. Box I is at 3rd number position. Box C is immediate below B and above F. Box D is not at the odd position. 

1. Which of the following box is at position number 5?

2. What is the box number of box D?

Ten boxes with names A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J are placed one above the other in any particular order. Box number 10 is at the top and box number 1 is at the bottom. There are two boxes kept between E and G. Box J is at the bottom. There are three boxes between box C and box G. Box H is placed between box F and boxa The number of boxes between J and I is the same as the number of boxes between I and G. Box I is at 3rd number position. Box C is immediate below B and above F. Box D is not at the odd position.

3. What is the box number of box F?

Ten boxes with names A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J are placed one above the other in any particular order. Box number 10 is at the top and box number 1 is at the bottom. There are two boxes kept between E and G. Box J is at the bottom. There are three boxes between box C and box G. Box H is placed between box F and boxa The number of boxes between J and I is the same as the number of boxes between I and G. Box I is at 3rd number position. Box C is immediate below B and above F. Box D is not at the odd position.

4. Which of the following box is placed between box G and box I?

Ten boxes with names A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J are placed one above the other in any particular order. Box number 10 is at the top and box number 1 is at the bottom. There are two boxes kept between E and G. Box J is at the bottom. There are three boxes between box C and box G. Box H is placed between box F and boxa The number of boxes between J and I is the same as the number of boxes between I and G. Box I is at 3rd number position. Box C is immediate below B and above F. Box D is not at the odd position.

5. If B is related to F and H is related to G in certain way, then D is related to which of the following box?

Ten boxes with names A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J are placed one above the other in any particular order. Box number 10 is at the top and box number 1 is at the bottom. There are two boxes kept between E and G. Box J is at the bottom. There are three boxes between box C and box G. Box H is placed between box F and boxa The number of boxes between J and I is the same as the number of boxes between I and G. Box I is at 3rd number position. Box C is immediate below B and above F. Box D is not at the odd position.

DIRECTIONS (Qs. 1-5): Study the following information carefully and answer the following questions.

Seven boxes T, U, V, W, X, Y and Z are kept one above the other to form a stack but not necessarily in the same order. More than three boxes are kept between Z and V. Box T is kept below box Y. Two boxes are kept between Y and T. Box Z is kept just below box T. Two boxes are kept between U and X. Box X is not kept above T.

1. How many boxes are kept above box W?

2. Which among the following box is kept just above T?

Seven boxes T, U, V, W, X, Y and Z are kept one above the other to form a stack but not necessarily in the same order. More than three boxes are kept between Z and V. Box T is kept below box Y. Two boxes are kept between Y and T. Box Z is kept just below box T. Two boxes are kept between U and X. Box X is not kept above T.

3. Number of box above W is same as number of box below ________?

Seven boxes T, U, V, W, X, Y and Z are kept one above the other to form a stack but not necessarily in the same order. More than three boxes are kept between Z and V. Box T is kept below box Y. Two boxes are kept between Y and T. Box Z is kept just below box T. Two boxes are kept between U and X. Box X is not kept above T.

4. Which of the following statement is NOT TRUE regarding arrangement?

Seven boxes T, U, V, W, X, Y and Z are kept one above the other to form a stack but not necessarily in the same order. More than three boxes are kept between Z and V. Box T is kept below box Y. Two boxes are kept between Y and T. Box Z is kept just below box T. Two boxes are kept between U and X. Box X is not kept above T.

5. Which of the following box is kept at the top?

Seven boxes T, U, V, W, X, Y and Z are kept one above the other to form a stack but not necessarily in the same order. More than three boxes are kept between Z and V. Box T is kept below box Y. Two boxes are kept between Y and T. Box Z is kept just below box T. Two boxes are kept between U and X. Box X is not kept above T.

DIRECTIONS (Qs. 1-8): Read the passage below and answer the questions that follow

I remember years ago the Delhi School of Economics had many great scholars visit the campus. They talked passionately and knowledgeably not just about the subject but about knowledge as a vocation. One of the most memorable of these performances was by Teodor Shanin, the economic historian who also edited Peasants and Peasant Societies. He talked quietly about his love for his subject and confessed, “I have been studying the peasantry when it was out of fashion, I am in it now when it is fashionable, and I will be there long after it has become out of fashion again.” I recollected his passion as I read sadly about farmers’ protests across India, particularly in Mandsaur in Madhya Pradesh.

It was not the nature of the reports that was distressing. It was more the way the regime was reacting to it. It was a kind of repeat of its response to the farmers complaining about the long drought in Tamil Nadu. Watching the protest and its drama, one sensed the regime did not care. The protest was dismissed as a colourful spectacle. The peasant as victim was dismissed as a futile clown, a failed trickster. One must emphasise that this was not due to the callousness of media reporting. Over the last month, journalists have captured the protests of the farmers in Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Madhya Pradesh. They have emphasised that what is rocking India is not only the battle of caste groups or worker struggles but the huge range of farmer protests across the country. Yet, one senses news is not enough. Information has not graduated to storytelling or even knowledge to dent the regime’s idea of agricultural policy. 

Something like what Buddhist monks dub “a touch of wholeness”. Somehow the narratives of agriculture have never possessed that sense. One misses an Indian Shanin, who can weave theory and practice, storytelling and policy together. The government’s reaction, bordering between illiteracy and indifference, has often made social scientists cynical. They retreat into the realm of jokes, of slapstick or concentration camp humour. The jokes might sound silly but they hit home, conveying the despair of the spectator and witness. I remember two in particular. 

A former member of the now disbanded Planning Commission asks his class at the Delhi School of Economics, “What is the difference between the Congress and the BJP?” Answer: the Congress knows economics but not agriculture. The BJP is illiterate about both. The second comment comes from the tragedy, the continuous epidemic of agricultural suicides that have haunted India for over a decade. The question is why John Maynard Keynes is not applicable to India. This joke remembers Keynes’s observation that in the long run, we are all dead. In India, we are dead in the short run too if one looks at suicide and starvation deaths. Behind the drab comedy, there is a poignant point. We might be an agricultural country, but our rulers lack a sense of political economy or sociology of agriculture. One has sensed this watching Home Minister Rajnath Singh and Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan respond to the protests at Mandsaur. There has been no sense of an agricultural crisis in their language. The BJP, in its paranoid way, converts every protest into a problem of law and order, into an internal security threat, imagining the forces of insurgency behind it. It creates a cordon sanitaire around the area, preventing activists and Congress leaders from reaching the area. The suicides of more than a dozen farmers create no sense of connectivity with similar happenings elsewhere. 


1. Teodor Shanin talked quietly about his love for his subject and confessed:

I. I will be there long after it has become out of fashion again.
II. I have been studying the peasantry when it was out of fashion
III. I am in it now when it is fashionable

2. Over the last month, journalists have captured the protests of which of the following states of farmers.

I remember years ago the Delhi School of Economics had many great scholars visit the campus. They talked passionately and knowledgeably not just about the subject but about knowledge as a vocation. One of the most memorable of these performances was by Teodor Shanin, the economic historian who also edited Peasants and Peasant Societies. He talked quietly about his love for his subject and confessed, “I have been studying the peasantry when it was out of fashion, I am in it now when it is fashionable, and I will be there long after it has become out of fashion again.” I recollected his passion as I read sadly about farmers’ protests across India, particularly in Mandsaur in Madhya Pradesh.

It was not the nature of the reports that was distressing. It was more the way the regime was reacting to it. It was a kind of repeat of its response to the farmers complaining about the long drought in Tamil Nadu. Watching the protest and its drama, one sensed the regime did not care. The protest was dismissed as a colourful spectacle. The peasant as victim was dismissed as a futile clown, a failed trickster. One must emphasise that this was not due to the callousness of media reporting. Over the last month, journalists have captured the protests of the farmers in Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Madhya Pradesh. They have emphasised that what is rocking India is not only the battle of caste groups or worker struggles but the huge range of farmer protests across the country. Yet, one senses news is not enough. Information has not graduated to storytelling or even knowledge to dent the regime’s idea of agricultural policy. 

Something like what Buddhist monks dub “a touch of wholeness”. Somehow the narratives of agriculture have never possessed that sense. One misses an Indian Shanin, who can weave theory and practice, storytelling and policy together. The government’s reaction, bordering between illiteracy and indifference, has often made social scientists cynical. They retreat into the realm of jokes, of slapstick or concentration camp humour. The jokes might sound silly but they hit home, conveying the despair of the spectator and witness. I remember two in particular. 

A former member of the now disbanded Planning Commission asks his class at the Delhi School of Economics, “What is the difference between the Congress and the BJP?” Answer: the Congress knows economics but not agriculture. The BJP is illiterate about both. The second comment comes from the tragedy, the continuous epidemic of agricultural suicides that have haunted India for over a decade. The question is why John Maynard Keynes is not applicable to India. This joke remembers Keynes’s observation that in the long run, we are all dead. In India, we are dead in the short run too if one looks at suicide and starvation deaths. Behind the drab comedy, there is a poignant point. We might be an agricultural country, but our rulers lack a sense of political economy or sociology of agriculture. One has sensed this watching Home Minister Rajnath Singh and Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan respond to the protests at Mandsaur. There has been no sense of an agricultural crisis in their language. The BJP, in its paranoid way, converts every protest into a problem of law and order, into an internal security threat, imagining the forces of insurgency behind it. It creates a cordon sanitaire around the area, preventing activists and Congress leaders from reaching the area. The suicides of more than a dozen farmers create no sense of connectivity with similar happenings elsewhere. 

3. Rearrange the following sentences:

I remember years ago the Delhi School of Economics had many great scholars visit the campus. They talked passionately and knowledgeably not just about the subject but about knowledge as a vocation. One of the most memorable of these performances was by Teodor Shanin, the economic historian who also edited Peasants and Peasant Societies. He talked quietly about his love for his subject and confessed, “I have been studying the peasantry when it was out of fashion, I am in it now when it is fashionable, and I will be there long after it has become out of fashion again.” I recollected his passion as I read sadly about farmers’ protests across India, particularly in Mandsaur in Madhya Pradesh.

It was not the nature of the reports that was distressing. It was more the way the regime was reacting to it. It was a kind of repeat of its response to the farmers complaining about the long drought in Tamil Nadu. Watching the protest and its drama, one sensed the regime did not care. The protest was dismissed as a colourful spectacle. The peasant as victim was dismissed as a futile clown, a failed trickster. One must emphasise that this was not due to the callousness of media reporting. Over the last month, journalists have captured the protests of the farmers in Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Madhya Pradesh. They have emphasised that what is rocking India is not only the battle of caste groups or worker struggles but the huge range of farmer protests across the country. Yet, one senses news is not enough. Information has not graduated to storytelling or even knowledge to dent the regime’s idea of agricultural policy. 

Something like what Buddhist monks dub “a touch of wholeness”. Somehow the narratives of agriculture have never possessed that sense. One misses an Indian Shanin, who can weave theory and practice, storytelling and policy together. The government’s reaction, bordering between illiteracy and indifference, has often made social scientists cynical. They retreat into the realm of jokes, of slapstick or concentration camp humour. The jokes might sound silly but they hit home, conveying the despair of the spectator and witness. I remember two in particular. 

A former member of the now disbanded Planning Commission asks his class at the Delhi School of Economics, “What is the difference between the Congress and the BJP?” Answer: the Congress knows economics but not agriculture. The BJP is illiterate about both. The second comment comes from the tragedy, the continuous epidemic of agricultural suicides that have haunted India for over a decade. The question is why John Maynard Keynes is not applicable to India. This joke remembers Keynes’s observation that in the long run, we are all dead. In India, we are dead in the short run too if one looks at suicide and starvation deaths. Behind the drab comedy, there is a poignant point. We might be an agricultural country, but our rulers lack a sense of political economy or sociology of agriculture. One has sensed this watching Home Minister Rajnath Singh and Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan respond to the protests at Mandsaur. There has been no sense of an agricultural crisis in their language. The BJP, in its paranoid way, converts every protest into a problem of law and order, into an internal security threat, imagining the forces of insurgency behind it. It creates a cordon sanitaire around the area, preventing activists and Congress leaders from reaching the area. The suicides of more than a dozen farmers create no sense of connectivity with similar happenings elsewhere. 


I. The BJP, in its paranoid way, converts every protest into a problem of law and order, into an internal security threat, imagining the forces of insurgency behind it.
II. There has been no sense of an agricultural crisis in their language.
III. It creates a cordon sanitaire around the area, preventing activists and Congress leaders from reaching the area.
IV. One has sensed this watching Home Minister Rajnath Singh and Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan respond to the protests at Mandsaur.

4. Which of the following is definitely false according to the passage?

I remember years ago the Delhi School of Economics had many great scholars visit the campus. They talked passionately and knowledgeably not just about the subject but about knowledge as a vocation. One of the most memorable of these performances was by Teodor Shanin, the economic historian who also edited Peasants and Peasant Societies. He talked quietly about his love for his subject and confessed, “I have been studying the peasantry when it was out of fashion, I am in it now when it is fashionable, and I will be there long after it has become out of fashion again.” I recollected his passion as I read sadly about farmers’ protests across India, particularly in Mandsaur in Madhya Pradesh.

It was not the nature of the reports that was distressing. It was more the way the regime was reacting to it. It was a kind of repeat of its response to the farmers complaining about the long drought in Tamil Nadu. Watching the protest and its drama, one sensed the regime did not care. The protest was dismissed as a colourful spectacle. The peasant as victim was dismissed as a futile clown, a failed trickster. One must emphasise that this was not due to the callousness of media reporting. Over the last month, journalists have captured the protests of the farmers in Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Madhya Pradesh. They have emphasised that what is rocking India is not only the battle of caste groups or worker struggles but the huge range of farmer protests across the country. Yet, one senses news is not enough. Information has not graduated to storytelling or even knowledge to dent the regime’s idea of agricultural policy. 

Something like what Buddhist monks dub “a touch of wholeness”. Somehow the narratives of agriculture have never possessed that sense. One misses an Indian Shanin, who can weave theory and practice, storytelling and policy together. The government’s reaction, bordering between illiteracy and indifference, has often made social scientists cynical. They retreat into the realm of jokes, of slapstick or concentration camp humour. The jokes might sound silly but they hit home, conveying the despair of the spectator and witness. I remember two in particular. 

A former member of the now disbanded Planning Commission asks his class at the Delhi School of Economics, “What is the difference between the Congress and the BJP?” Answer: the Congress knows economics but not agriculture. The BJP is illiterate about both. The second comment comes from the tragedy, the continuous epidemic of agricultural suicides that have haunted India for over a decade. The question is why John Maynard Keynes is not applicable to India. This joke remembers Keynes’s observation that in the long run, we are all dead. In India, we are dead in the short run too if one looks at suicide and starvation deaths. Behind the drab comedy, there is a poignant point. We might be an agricultural country, but our rulers lack a sense of political economy or sociology of agriculture. One has sensed this watching Home Minister Rajnath Singh and Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan respond to the protests at Mandsaur. There has been no sense of an agricultural crisis in their language. The BJP, in its paranoid way, converts every protest into a problem of law and order, into an internal security threat, imagining the forces of insurgency behind it. It creates a cordon sanitaire around the area, preventing activists and Congress leaders from reaching the area. The suicides of more than a dozen farmers create no sense of connectivity with similar happenings elsewhere. 


I. The government’s reaction, bordering between illiteracy and indifference, has often made social scientists cynical.
II. The jokes might sound good but they hit home, conveying the despair of the spectator and witness. I remember two in particular.
III. The second comment comes from the tragedy, the continuous epidemic of
agricultural suicides that have haunted India for over a decade.

5. Which of the following is definitely true according to the passage?

I remember years ago the Delhi School of Economics had many great scholars visit the campus. They talked passionately and knowledgeably not just about the subject but about knowledge as a vocation. One of the most memorable of these performances was by Teodor Shanin, the economic historian who also edited Peasants and Peasant Societies. He talked quietly about his love for his subject and confessed, “I have been studying the peasantry when it was out of fashion, I am in it now when it is fashionable, and I will be there long after it has become out of fashion again.” I recollected his passion as I read sadly about farmers’ protests across India, particularly in Mandsaur in Madhya Pradesh.

It was not the nature of the reports that was distressing. It was more the way the regime was reacting to it. It was a kind of repeat of its response to the farmers complaining about the long drought in Tamil Nadu. Watching the protest and its drama, one sensed the regime did not care. The protest was dismissed as a colourful spectacle. The peasant as victim was dismissed as a futile clown, a failed trickster. One must emphasise that this was not due to the callousness of media reporting. Over the last month, journalists have captured the protests of the farmers in Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Madhya Pradesh. They have emphasised that what is rocking India is not only the battle of caste groups or worker struggles but the huge range of farmer protests across the country. Yet, one senses news is not enough. Information has not graduated to storytelling or even knowledge to dent the regime’s idea of agricultural policy. 

Something like what Buddhist monks dub “a touch of wholeness”. Somehow the narratives of agriculture have never possessed that sense. One misses an Indian Shanin, who can weave theory and practice, storytelling and policy together. The government’s reaction, bordering between illiteracy and indifference, has often made social scientists cynical. They retreat into the realm of jokes, of slapstick or concentration camp humour. The jokes might sound silly but they hit home, conveying the despair of the spectator and witness. I remember two in particular. 

A former member of the now disbanded Planning Commission asks his class at the Delhi School of Economics, “What is the difference between the Congress and the BJP?” Answer: the Congress knows economics but not agriculture. The BJP is illiterate about both. The second comment comes from the tragedy, the continuous epidemic of agricultural suicides that have haunted India for over a decade. The question is why John Maynard Keynes is not applicable to India. This joke remembers Keynes’s observation that in the long run, we are all dead. In India, we are dead in the short run too if one looks at suicide and starvation deaths. Behind the drab comedy, there is a poignant point. We might be an agricultural country, but our rulers lack a sense of political economy or sociology of agriculture. One has sensed this watching Home Minister Rajnath Singh and Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan respond to the protests at Mandsaur. There has been no sense of an agricultural crisis in their language. The BJP, in its paranoid way, converts every protest into a problem of law and order, into an internal security threat, imagining the forces of insurgency behind it. It creates a cordon sanitaire around the area, preventing activists and Congress leaders from reaching the area. The suicides of more than a dozen farmers create no sense of connectivity with similar happenings elsewhere. 


I. A former member of the now disbanded Planning Commission asks his class at the Delhi School of Economics, “What is the difference between the Congress and the BJP?” Answer: the Congress knows economics but not agriculture. The BJP is
illiterate about both.
II. A former member of the now disbanded Planning Commission asks his class at the Delhi School of Economics, “What is the difference between the Congress and the BJD?” Answer: the Congress knows economics but not agriculture. The BJD is illiterate about both.
III A former member of the now disbanded Planning Commission asks his class at the Delhi School of Economics, “What is the difference between the Congress and the BJP?” Answer: the Congress does not know economics and agriculture. The BJP is
illiterate about both.

6. Choose the word which is MOST OPPOSITE in meaning of the word printed in bold as used in the passage. Trickster

I remember years ago the Delhi School of Economics had many great scholars visit the campus. They talked passionately and knowledgeably not just about the subject but about knowledge as a vocation. One of the most memorable of these performances was by Teodor Shanin, the economic historian who also edited Peasants and Peasant Societies. He talked quietly about his love for his subject and confessed, “I have been studying the peasantry when it was out of fashion, I am in it now when it is fashionable, and I will be there long after it has become out of fashion again.” I recollected his passion as I read sadly about farmers’ protests across India, particularly in Mandsaur in Madhya Pradesh.

It was not the nature of the reports that was distressing. It was more the way the regime was reacting to it. It was a kind of repeat of its response to the farmers complaining about the long drought in Tamil Nadu. Watching the protest and its drama, one sensed the regime did not care. The protest was dismissed as a colourful spectacle. The peasant as victim was dismissed as a futile clown, a failed trickster. One must emphasise that this was not due to the callousness of media reporting. Over the last month, journalists have captured the protests of the farmers in Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Madhya Pradesh. They have emphasised that what is rocking India is not only the battle of caste groups or worker struggles but the huge range of farmer protests across the country. Yet, one senses news is not enough. Information has not graduated to storytelling or even knowledge to dent the regime’s idea of agricultural policy. 

Something like what Buddhist monks dub “a touch of wholeness”. Somehow the narratives of agriculture have never possessed that sense. One misses an Indian Shanin, who can weave theory and practice, storytelling and policy together. The government’s reaction, bordering between illiteracy and indifference, has often made social scientists cynical. They retreat into the realm of jokes, of slapstick or concentration camp humour. The jokes might sound silly but they hit home, conveying the despair of the spectator and witness. I remember two in particular. 

A former member of the now disbanded Planning Commission asks his class at the Delhi School of Economics, “What is the difference between the Congress and the BJP?” Answer: the Congress knows economics but not agriculture. The BJP is illiterate about both. The second comment comes from the tragedy, the continuous epidemic of agricultural suicides that have haunted India for over a decade. The question is why John Maynard Keynes is not applicable to India. This joke remembers Keynes’s observation that in the long run, we are all dead. In India, we are dead in the short run too if one looks at suicide and starvation deaths. Behind the drab comedy, there is a poignant point. We might be an agricultural country, but our rulers lack a sense of political economy or sociology of agriculture. One has sensed this watching Home Minister Rajnath Singh and Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan respond to the protests at Mandsaur. There has been no sense of an agricultural crisis in their language. The BJP, in its paranoid way, converts every protest into a problem of law and order, into an internal security threat, imagining the forces of insurgency behind it. It creates a cordon sanitaire around the area, preventing activists and Congress leaders from reaching the area. The suicides of more than a dozen farmers create no sense of connectivity with similar happenings elsewhere. 


I. Hoaxer
II. Cheat
III. Prankster

7. Choose the word which is MOST OPPOSITE in meaning of the word printed in bold as used in the passage. Futile

I remember years ago the Delhi School of Economics had many great scholars visit the campus. They talked passionately and knowledgeably not just about the subject but about knowledge as a vocation. One of the most memorable of these performances was by Teodor Shanin, the economic historian who also edited Peasants and Peasant Societies. He talked quietly about his love for his subject and confessed, “I have been studying the peasantry when it was out of fashion, I am in it now when it is fashionable, and I will be there long after it has become out of fashion again.” I recollected his passion as I read sadly about farmers’ protests across India, particularly in Mandsaur in Madhya Pradesh.

It was not the nature of the reports that was distressing. It was more the way the regime was reacting to it. It was a kind of repeat of its response to the farmers complaining about the long drought in Tamil Nadu. Watching the protest and its drama, one sensed the regime did not care. The protest was dismissed as a colourful spectacle. The peasant as victim was dismissed as a futile clown, a failed trickster. One must emphasise that this was not due to the callousness of media reporting. Over the last month, journalists have captured the protests of the farmers in Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Madhya Pradesh. They have emphasised that what is rocking India is not only the battle of caste groups or worker struggles but the huge range of farmer protests across the country. Yet, one senses news is not enough. Information has not graduated to storytelling or even knowledge to dent the regime’s idea of agricultural policy. 

Something like what Buddhist monks dub “a touch of wholeness”. Somehow the narratives of agriculture have never possessed that sense. One misses an Indian Shanin, who can weave theory and practice, storytelling and policy together. The government’s reaction, bordering between illiteracy and indifference, has often made social scientists cynical. They retreat into the realm of jokes, of slapstick or concentration camp humour. The jokes might sound silly but they hit home, conveying the despair of the spectator and witness. I remember two in particular. 

A former member of the now disbanded Planning Commission asks his class at the Delhi School of Economics, “What is the difference between the Congress and the BJP?” Answer: the Congress knows economics but not agriculture. The BJP is illiterate about both. The second comment comes from the tragedy, the continuous epidemic of agricultural suicides that have haunted India for over a decade. The question is why John Maynard Keynes is not applicable to India. This joke remembers Keynes’s observation that in the long run, we are all dead. In India, we are dead in the short run too if one looks at suicide and starvation deaths. Behind the drab comedy, there is a poignant point. We might be an agricultural country, but our rulers lack a sense of political economy or sociology of agriculture. One has sensed this watching Home Minister Rajnath Singh and Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan respond to the protests at Mandsaur. There has been no sense of an agricultural crisis in their language. The BJP, in its paranoid way, converts every protest into a problem of law and order, into an internal security threat, imagining the forces of insurgency behind it. It creates a cordon sanitaire around the area, preventing activists and Congress leaders from reaching the area. The suicides of more than a dozen farmers create no sense of connectivity with similar happenings elsewhere. 


I. Vain
II. Fruitless
III. Productive

8. Choose the word which is MOST SIMILAR in meaning of the word printed in bold as used in the passage. Poignant

I remember years ago the Delhi School of Economics had many great scholars visit the campus. They talked passionately and knowledgeably not just about the subject but about knowledge as a vocation. One of the most memorable of these performances was by Teodor Shanin, the economic historian who also edited Peasants and Peasant Societies. He talked quietly about his love for his subject and confessed, “I have been studying the peasantry when it was out of fashion, I am in it now when it is fashionable, and I will be there long after it has become out of fashion again.” I recollected his passion as I read sadly about farmers’ protests across India, particularly in Mandsaur in Madhya Pradesh.

It was not the nature of the reports that was distressing. It was more the way the regime was reacting to it. It was a kind of repeat of its response to the farmers complaining about the long drought in Tamil Nadu. Watching the protest and its drama, one sensed the regime did not care. The protest was dismissed as a colourful spectacle. The peasant as victim was dismissed as a futile clown, a failed trickster. One must emphasise that this was not due to the callousness of media reporting. Over the last month, journalists have captured the protests of the farmers in Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Madhya Pradesh. They have emphasised that what is rocking India is not only the battle of caste groups or worker struggles but the huge range of farmer protests across the country. Yet, one senses news is not enough. Information has not graduated to storytelling or even knowledge to dent the regime’s idea of agricultural policy. 

Something like what Buddhist monks dub “a touch of wholeness”. Somehow the narratives of agriculture have never possessed that sense. One misses an Indian Shanin, who can weave theory and practice, storytelling and policy together. The government’s reaction, bordering between illiteracy and indifference, has often made social scientists cynical. They retreat into the realm of jokes, of slapstick or concentration camp humour. The jokes might sound silly but they hit home, conveying the despair of the spectator and witness. I remember two in particular. 

A former member of the now disbanded Planning Commission asks his class at the Delhi School of Economics, “What is the difference between the Congress and the BJP?” Answer: the Congress knows economics but not agriculture. The BJP is illiterate about both. The second comment comes from the tragedy, the continuous epidemic of agricultural suicides that have haunted India for over a decade. The question is why John Maynard Keynes is not applicable to India. This joke remembers Keynes’s observation that in the long run, we are all dead. In India, we are dead in the short run too if one looks at suicide and starvation deaths. Behind the drab comedy, there is a poignant point. We might be an agricultural country, but our rulers lack a sense of political economy or sociology of agriculture. One has sensed this watching Home Minister Rajnath Singh and Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan respond to the protests at Mandsaur. There has been no sense of an agricultural crisis in their language. The BJP, in its paranoid way, converts every protest into a problem of law and order, into an internal security threat, imagining the forces of insurgency behind it. It creates a cordon sanitaire around the area, preventing activists and Congress leaders from reaching the area. The suicides of more than a dozen farmers create no sense of connectivity with similar happenings elsewhere. 


I. Emotional
II. Serene
III. Good

DIRECTIONS (Qs. 1 -6): Given below is a paragraph against each number there is a blank. Fill the suitable word in the blanks

India seems to live in many centuries at once. In Karnataka a couple was stoned to death, four years after they got .....A....... He was a Dalit, her family opposed their relationship. The couple......B...... the social backlash, and worked as migrant construction labourers. On their return home, her brothers gathered a mob to hurl stones at them, killing them. This personal ......C...... has social roots: the refusal to accept a woman’s freedom to love who she wants. Stoning was the cruel and painful death prescribed for those who .......D...... social and sexual codes in the Bible, Torah, some Islamic hadiths and legal commentaries. When the idea of citizenship and its rights have not been internalised, then the family and group.....E........ their dreadful power. Patriarchy means that women have to bear the burden of collective “honour” – her freedom is destabilising to lineage and property. The rage of fathers and brothers is the fear of that disorder. And so, a woman simply choosing her own romantic path is enough to invite ......F....... violence – so that the community can maintain its warped notion of order. As the Karnataka case shows, socially learnt hate can disfigure the impulses of love and care. Such dishonour killings have occurred in many parts of India. Social oppression continues to challenge the protections and guarantees of the liberal constitutional state. These crimes must be tackled with exemplary will, if we are to truly achieve our Constitution. 

1. Which of the following words should fill in the blank (A) to make a contextually correct and meaningful sentence?

2.

India seems to live in many centuries at once. In Karnataka a couple was stoned to death, four years after they got .....A....... He was a Dalit, her family opposed their relationship. The couple......B...... the social backlash, and worked as migrant construction labourers. On their return home, her brothers gathered a mob to hurl stones at them, killing them. This personal ......C...... has social roots: the refusal to accept a woman’s freedom to love who she wants. Stoning was the cruel and painful death prescribed for those who .......D...... social and sexual codes in the Bible, Torah, some Islamic hadiths and legal commentaries. When the idea of citizenship and its rights have not been internalised, then the family and group.....E........ their dreadful power. Patriarchy means that women have to bear the burden of collective “honour” – her freedom is destabilising to lineage and property. The rage of fathers and brothers is the fear of that disorder. And so, a woman simply choosing her own romantic path is enough to invite ......F....... violence – so that the community can maintain its warped notion of order. As the Karnataka case shows, socially learnt hate can disfigure the impulses of love and care. Such dishonour killings have occurred in many parts of India. Social oppression continues to challenge the protections and guarantees of the liberal constitutional state. These crimes must be tackled with exemplary will, if we are to truly achieve our Constitution. 

Which of the following words should fill in the blank (B) to make a contextually correct and meaningful sentence?

3.

India seems to live in many centuries at once. In Karnataka a couple was stoned to death, four years after they got .....A....... He was a Dalit, her family opposed their relationship. The couple......B...... the social backlash, and worked as migrant construction labourers. On their return home, her brothers gathered a mob to hurl stones at them, killing them. This personal ......C...... has social roots: the refusal to accept a woman’s freedom to love who she wants. Stoning was the cruel and painful death prescribed for those who .......D...... social and sexual codes in the Bible, Torah, some Islamic hadiths and legal commentaries. When the idea of citizenship and its rights have not been internalised, then the family and group.....E........ their dreadful power. Patriarchy means that women have to bear the burden of collective “honour” – her freedom is destabilising to lineage and property. The rage of fathers and brothers is the fear of that disorder. And so, a woman simply choosing her own romantic path is enough to invite ......F....... violence – so that the community can maintain its warped notion of order. As the Karnataka case shows, socially learnt hate can disfigure the impulses of love and care. Such dishonour killings have occurred in many parts of India. Social oppression continues to challenge the protections and guarantees of the liberal constitutional state. These crimes must be tackled with exemplary will, if we are to truly achieve our Constitution. 

Which of the following words should fill in the blank (C) to make a contextually correct and meaningful sentence?

4.

India seems to live in many centuries at once. In Karnataka a couple was stoned to death, four years after they got .....A....... He was a Dalit, her family opposed their relationship. The couple......B...... the social backlash, and worked as migrant construction labourers. On their return home, her brothers gathered a mob to hurl stones at them, killing them. This personal ......C...... has social roots: the refusal to accept a woman’s freedom to love who she wants. Stoning was the cruel and painful death prescribed for those who .......D...... social and sexual codes in the Bible, Torah, some Islamic hadiths and legal commentaries. When the idea of citizenship and its rights have not been internalised, then the family and group.....E........ their dreadful power. Patriarchy means that women have to bear the burden of collective “honour” – her freedom is destabilising to lineage and property. The rage of fathers and brothers is the fear of that disorder. And so, a woman simply choosing her own romantic path is enough to invite ......F....... violence – so that the community can maintain its warped notion of order. As the Karnataka case shows, socially learnt hate can disfigure the impulses of love and care. Such dishonour killings have occurred in many parts of India. Social oppression continues to challenge the protections and guarantees of the liberal constitutional state. These crimes must be tackled with exemplary will, if we are to truly achieve our Constitution. 

Which of the following words should fill in the blank (D) to make a contextually correct and meaningful sentence?

5.

India seems to live in many centuries at once. In Karnataka a couple was stoned to death, four years after they got .....A....... He was a Dalit, her family opposed their relationship. The couple......B...... the social backlash, and worked as migrant construction labourers. On their return home, her brothers gathered a mob to hurl stones at them, killing them. This personal ......C...... has social roots: the refusal to accept a woman’s freedom to love who she wants. Stoning was the cruel and painful death prescribed for those who .......D...... social and sexual codes in the Bible, Torah, some Islamic hadiths and legal commentaries. When the idea of citizenship and its rights have not been internalised, then the family and group.....E........ their dreadful power. Patriarchy means that women have to bear the burden of collective “honour” – her freedom is destabilising to lineage and property. The rage of fathers and brothers is the fear of that disorder. And so, a woman simply choosing her own romantic path is enough to invite ......F....... violence – so that the community can maintain its warped notion of order. As the Karnataka case shows, socially learnt hate can disfigure the impulses of love and care. Such dishonour killings have occurred in many parts of India. Social oppression continues to challenge the protections and guarantees of the liberal constitutional state. These crimes must be tackled with exemplary will, if we are to truly achieve our Constitution. 

Which of the following words should fill in the blank (E) to make a contextually correct and meaningful sentence?

6.

India seems to live in many centuries at once. In Karnataka a couple was stoned to death, four years after they got .....A....... He was a Dalit, her family opposed their relationship. The couple......B...... the social backlash, and worked as migrant construction labourers. On their return home, her brothers gathered a mob to hurl stones at them, killing them. This personal ......C...... has social roots: the refusal to accept a woman’s freedom to love who she wants. Stoning was the cruel and painful death prescribed for those who .......D...... social and sexual codes in the Bible, Torah, some Islamic hadiths and legal commentaries. When the idea of citizenship and its rights have not been internalised, then the family and group.....E........ their dreadful power. Patriarchy means that women have to bear the burden of collective “honour” – her freedom is destabilising to lineage and property. The rage of fathers and brothers is the fear of that disorder. And so, a woman simply choosing her own romantic path is enough to invite ......F....... violence – so that the community can maintain its warped notion of order. As the Karnataka case shows, socially learnt hate can disfigure the impulses of love and care. Such dishonour killings have occurred in many parts of India. Social oppression continues to challenge the protections and guarantees of the liberal constitutional state. These crimes must be tackled with exemplary will, if we are to truly achieve our Constitution. 

Which of the following words should fill in the blank (F) to make a contextually correct and meaningful sentence?

Arrange the following sentecnces to make a meannigful and coherent paragraph

If Sentence (D), “The nation is today witnessing an abundance of exuberance, and this is possibly wellmerited.” is the first sentence, what is the order of other sentences after rearrangement?

A. India’s growth rate is expected to be 7.5 per cent in 2018, as against China’s 6.3 per cent.

B. India is today one of the few bright spots in terms of economic growth.

C. The country has become the most favoured destination for foreign investment; its trade deficit has shrunk.

D. The nation is today witnessing an abundance of exuberance, and this is possibly well-merited.

E. The Prime Minister’s forays to several countries across the globe have raised India’s prestige.

F. The International Monetary Fund has projected that India’s economy will grow faster than that of other major economies, China included.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *