Directions: In one of the historical reforms of the economy of India, Rs 500…
2023
Directions: In one of the historical reforms of the economy of India, Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 notes were banned. This was one of the boldest movements by the Government of India, announced over a 40-minute speech. Most of the industry and commoners alike reacted to this decision to curb corruption with overwhelming support. Whereas some sections are of the opinion that it is a draconian scheme causing hardships to people. A recent study had pegged India's black-market economy at over Rs 30 lakh crore or about 20 percent of total GDP. This is even bigger than the GDP of countries like Thailand and Argentina.
Rather than getting support from most of the industry, what would have been the reason that some of them declared it as a draconian scheme?
(I) It was declared without giving time to people to withdraw ample cash for their use.
(II) It had caused certain hardships in daily activities.
(III) It stopped the earning of black money for majority of the people.
- A.
Only II and III
- B.
Only III
- C.
Only I and II
- D.
Only I and III
- E.
All of three
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: C
Concept
A reason for calling a scheme draconian must be a hardship or grievance felt by people, not the scheme's own intended benefit. In such inference questions, accept a statement only if the passage supports it AND it actually works as a complaint against the scheme.
Application
Apply this test to each statement:
Statement (I): the ban was announced suddenly in a 40-minute speech, giving no time to withdraw cash. This is a genuine hardship, so it is valid.
Statement (II): the passage itself says the scheme caused hardships to people in daily activities, so it is valid.
Statement (III): it claims demonetisation stopped black-money earning for the majority of people. This fails as a grievance for two reasons. First, curbing black money was the very AIM of the scheme, so it is a stated benefit, not a hardship that would make people protest. Second, the passage never says most people earn black money — it only notes the black economy's size — so the sweeping 'majority of the people' claim is unsupported. So (III) is not a valid reason.
Cross-check
The valid grievances are (I) and (II) only, so the correct reason is the option naming just those two statements.