UPSC Exam > UPSC Questions > What were the drawbacks of Montague Chelmsfor...
Start Learning for Free
What were the drawbacks of Montague Chelmsford reforms?
1. Franchise was very limited.
2. At the centre, the legislature had no control over the governor-general and his executive council.
3. Division of subjects was not satisfactory at the centre.
4. Allocation of seats for Central Legislature to provinces was based on ‘importance’ of provinces for instance, Punjab’s military importance and Bombay’s commercial importance.
5. At the level of provinces, division of subjects and parallel administration of two parts i.e. Dyarchy was irrational and hence unworkable.
6.The provincial ministers had no control over finances and over the bureaucrats, leading to constant friction between the two. Ministers were often not consulted on important matters too; in fact, they could be overruled by the governor on any matter that the latter considered special.
- a)1 and 2 Only
- b)2 and 3 Only
- c)1 and 3 Only
- d)All of them
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
| FREE This question is part of | Download PDF Attempt this Test |
Verified Answer
What were the drawbacks of Montague Chelmsford reforms?1.Franchise was...
All these statements are correct. Drawbacks The reforms had many drawbacks:
(i) Franchise was very limited. The electorate was extended to someone and a half million for the central legislature, while India's population was around 20 million, as per one estimate.
(ii) At the centre, the legislature had no control over the viceroy and executive council.
(iii) Division of subjects was not satisfactory at the centre.
(iv) Allocation of seats for the central legislature to the provinces was based on 'importance of provinces, for instance, Punjab's military importance and Bombay's commercial importance.
(v) At the level of provinces, division of subjects and parallel administration of two parts was irrational and unworkable. Subjects like irrigation, finance, police, press, and justice were 'reserved'.
(vi) The provincial ministers had no control over finances and the bureaucrats, leading to constant friction between the two. Ministers were often not consulted on important matters too; in fact, they could be overruled special by the governor on any matter that the latter considered special.
(i) Franchise was very limited. The electorate was extended to someone and a half million for the central legislature, while India's population was around 20 million, as per one estimate.
(ii) At the centre, the legislature had no control over the viceroy and executive council.
(iii) Division of subjects was not satisfactory at the centre.
(iv) Allocation of seats for the central legislature to the provinces was based on 'importance of provinces, for instance, Punjab's military importance and Bombay's commercial importance.
(v) At the level of provinces, division of subjects and parallel administration of two parts was irrational and unworkable. Subjects like irrigation, finance, police, press, and justice were 'reserved'.
(vi) The provincial ministers had no control over finances and the bureaucrats, leading to constant friction between the two. Ministers were often not consulted on important matters too; in fact, they could be overruled special by the governor on any matter that the latter considered special.
Most Upvoted Answer
What were the drawbacks of Montague Chelmsford reforms?1.Franchise was...
The president of the annual session of Indian National Congress in 1919 was Motilal Nehru.
Motilal Nehru was a prominent Indian lawyer and politician. He was one of the leading figures of the Indian independence movement and played an important role in the Indian National Congress.
Background:
The Indian National Congress was founded in 1885 with the aim of promoting India's interests and securing its independence from British rule. The Congress held annual sessions where its leaders discussed various issues and strategies for achieving independence.
Annual Session of Indian National Congress in 1919:
The annual session of the Indian National Congress in 1919 was held in Amritsar. This session was significant because it took place soon after the end of World War I and the introduction of the Rowlatt Act by the British government, which allowed for the detention of political activists without trial.
Motilal Nehru as President:
Motilal Nehru was elected as the president of the Congress session in 1919. In his presidential address, he criticized the Rowlatt Act and called for its repeal. He also emphasized the need for a united front among Indians to achieve independence.
Impact of the Session:
The Amritsar session of the Indian National Congress in 1919 played a crucial role in the Indian independence movement. The Congress passed a resolution demanding the repeal of the Rowlatt Act and called for a nationwide protest on 6 April 1919. The protest, known as the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre, led to the killing of hundreds of unarmed civilians by British troops. This event further strengthened the Indian independence movement and galvanized Indians to fight for their freedom.
Conclusion:
Motilal Nehru's presidency of the Indian National Congress in 1919 was a significant moment in the Indian independence movement. His leadership and the resolutions passed at the session played a crucial role in shaping the future of India.
Motilal Nehru was a prominent Indian lawyer and politician. He was one of the leading figures of the Indian independence movement and played an important role in the Indian National Congress.
Background:
The Indian National Congress was founded in 1885 with the aim of promoting India's interests and securing its independence from British rule. The Congress held annual sessions where its leaders discussed various issues and strategies for achieving independence.
Annual Session of Indian National Congress in 1919:
The annual session of the Indian National Congress in 1919 was held in Amritsar. This session was significant because it took place soon after the end of World War I and the introduction of the Rowlatt Act by the British government, which allowed for the detention of political activists without trial.
Motilal Nehru as President:
Motilal Nehru was elected as the president of the Congress session in 1919. In his presidential address, he criticized the Rowlatt Act and called for its repeal. He also emphasized the need for a united front among Indians to achieve independence.
Impact of the Session:
The Amritsar session of the Indian National Congress in 1919 played a crucial role in the Indian independence movement. The Congress passed a resolution demanding the repeal of the Rowlatt Act and called for a nationwide protest on 6 April 1919. The protest, known as the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre, led to the killing of hundreds of unarmed civilians by British troops. This event further strengthened the Indian independence movement and galvanized Indians to fight for their freedom.
Conclusion:
Motilal Nehru's presidency of the Indian National Congress in 1919 was a significant moment in the Indian independence movement. His leadership and the resolutions passed at the session played a crucial role in shaping the future of India.
Attention UPSC Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed UPSC study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in UPSC.
|
Explore Courses for UPSC exam
|
|
Top Courses for UPSCView all
What were the drawbacks of Montague Chelmsford reforms?1.Franchise was very limited.2.At the centre, the legislature had no control over the governor-general and his executive council.3.Division of subjects was not satisfactory at the centre.4.Allocation of seats for Central Legislature to provinces was based on ‘importance’ of provinces for instance, Punjab’s military importance and Bombay’s commercial importance.5. At the level of provinces, division of subjects and parallel administration of two parts i.e. Dyarchy was irrational and hence unworkable.6.The provincial ministers had no control over finances and over the bureaucrats, leading to constant friction between the two. Ministers were often not consulted on important matters too; in fact, they could be overruled by the governor on any matter that the latter considered special.a)1 and 2 Onlyb)2 and 3 Onlyc)1 and 3 Onlyd)All of themCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
What were the drawbacks of Montague Chelmsford reforms?1.Franchise was very limited.2.At the centre, the legislature had no control over the governor-general and his executive council.3.Division of subjects was not satisfactory at the centre.4.Allocation of seats for Central Legislature to provinces was based on ‘importance’ of provinces for instance, Punjab’s military importance and Bombay’s commercial importance.5. At the level of provinces, division of subjects and parallel administration of two parts i.e. Dyarchy was irrational and hence unworkable.6.The provincial ministers had no control over finances and over the bureaucrats, leading to constant friction between the two. Ministers were often not consulted on important matters too; in fact, they could be overruled by the governor on any matter that the latter considered special.a)1 and 2 Onlyb)2 and 3 Onlyc)1 and 3 Onlyd)All of themCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for UPSC 2024 is part of UPSC preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the UPSC exam syllabus. Information about What were the drawbacks of Montague Chelmsford reforms?1.Franchise was very limited.2.At the centre, the legislature had no control over the governor-general and his executive council.3.Division of subjects was not satisfactory at the centre.4.Allocation of seats for Central Legislature to provinces was based on ‘importance’ of provinces for instance, Punjab’s military importance and Bombay’s commercial importance.5. At the level of provinces, division of subjects and parallel administration of two parts i.e. Dyarchy was irrational and hence unworkable.6.The provincial ministers had no control over finances and over the bureaucrats, leading to constant friction between the two. Ministers were often not consulted on important matters too; in fact, they could be overruled by the governor on any matter that the latter considered special.a)1 and 2 Onlyb)2 and 3 Onlyc)1 and 3 Onlyd)All of themCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for UPSC 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for What were the drawbacks of Montague Chelmsford reforms?1.Franchise was very limited.2.At the centre, the legislature had no control over the governor-general and his executive council.3.Division of subjects was not satisfactory at the centre.4.Allocation of seats for Central Legislature to provinces was based on ‘importance’ of provinces for instance, Punjab’s military importance and Bombay’s commercial importance.5. At the level of provinces, division of subjects and parallel administration of two parts i.e. Dyarchy was irrational and hence unworkable.6.The provincial ministers had no control over finances and over the bureaucrats, leading to constant friction between the two. Ministers were often not consulted on important matters too; in fact, they could be overruled by the governor on any matter that the latter considered special.a)1 and 2 Onlyb)2 and 3 Onlyc)1 and 3 Onlyd)All of themCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.
What were the drawbacks of Montague Chelmsford reforms?1.Franchise was very limited.2.At the centre, the legislature had no control over the governor-general and his executive council.3.Division of subjects was not satisfactory at the centre.4.Allocation of seats for Central Legislature to provinces was based on ‘importance’ of provinces for instance, Punjab’s military importance and Bombay’s commercial importance.5. At the level of provinces, division of subjects and parallel administration of two parts i.e. Dyarchy was irrational and hence unworkable.6.The provincial ministers had no control over finances and over the bureaucrats, leading to constant friction between the two. Ministers were often not consulted on important matters too; in fact, they could be overruled by the governor on any matter that the latter considered special.a)1 and 2 Onlyb)2 and 3 Onlyc)1 and 3 Onlyd)All of themCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for UPSC 2024 is part of UPSC preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the UPSC exam syllabus. Information about What were the drawbacks of Montague Chelmsford reforms?1.Franchise was very limited.2.At the centre, the legislature had no control over the governor-general and his executive council.3.Division of subjects was not satisfactory at the centre.4.Allocation of seats for Central Legislature to provinces was based on ‘importance’ of provinces for instance, Punjab’s military importance and Bombay’s commercial importance.5. At the level of provinces, division of subjects and parallel administration of two parts i.e. Dyarchy was irrational and hence unworkable.6.The provincial ministers had no control over finances and over the bureaucrats, leading to constant friction between the two. Ministers were often not consulted on important matters too; in fact, they could be overruled by the governor on any matter that the latter considered special.a)1 and 2 Onlyb)2 and 3 Onlyc)1 and 3 Onlyd)All of themCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for UPSC 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for What were the drawbacks of Montague Chelmsford reforms?1.Franchise was very limited.2.At the centre, the legislature had no control over the governor-general and his executive council.3.Division of subjects was not satisfactory at the centre.4.Allocation of seats for Central Legislature to provinces was based on ‘importance’ of provinces for instance, Punjab’s military importance and Bombay’s commercial importance.5. At the level of provinces, division of subjects and parallel administration of two parts i.e. Dyarchy was irrational and hence unworkable.6.The provincial ministers had no control over finances and over the bureaucrats, leading to constant friction between the two. Ministers were often not consulted on important matters too; in fact, they could be overruled by the governor on any matter that the latter considered special.a)1 and 2 Onlyb)2 and 3 Onlyc)1 and 3 Onlyd)All of themCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for What were the drawbacks of Montague Chelmsford reforms?1.Franchise was very limited.2.At the centre, the legislature had no control over the governor-general and his executive council.3.Division of subjects was not satisfactory at the centre.4.Allocation of seats for Central Legislature to provinces was based on ‘importance’ of provinces for instance, Punjab’s military importance and Bombay’s commercial importance.5. At the level of provinces, division of subjects and parallel administration of two parts i.e. Dyarchy was irrational and hence unworkable.6.The provincial ministers had no control over finances and over the bureaucrats, leading to constant friction between the two. Ministers were often not consulted on important matters too; in fact, they could be overruled by the governor on any matter that the latter considered special.a)1 and 2 Onlyb)2 and 3 Onlyc)1 and 3 Onlyd)All of themCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for UPSC.
Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for UPSC Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of What were the drawbacks of Montague Chelmsford reforms?1.Franchise was very limited.2.At the centre, the legislature had no control over the governor-general and his executive council.3.Division of subjects was not satisfactory at the centre.4.Allocation of seats for Central Legislature to provinces was based on ‘importance’ of provinces for instance, Punjab’s military importance and Bombay’s commercial importance.5. At the level of provinces, division of subjects and parallel administration of two parts i.e. Dyarchy was irrational and hence unworkable.6.The provincial ministers had no control over finances and over the bureaucrats, leading to constant friction between the two. Ministers were often not consulted on important matters too; in fact, they could be overruled by the governor on any matter that the latter considered special.a)1 and 2 Onlyb)2 and 3 Onlyc)1 and 3 Onlyd)All of themCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of
What were the drawbacks of Montague Chelmsford reforms?1.Franchise was very limited.2.At the centre, the legislature had no control over the governor-general and his executive council.3.Division of subjects was not satisfactory at the centre.4.Allocation of seats for Central Legislature to provinces was based on ‘importance’ of provinces for instance, Punjab’s military importance and Bombay’s commercial importance.5. At the level of provinces, division of subjects and parallel administration of two parts i.e. Dyarchy was irrational and hence unworkable.6.The provincial ministers had no control over finances and over the bureaucrats, leading to constant friction between the two. Ministers were often not consulted on important matters too; in fact, they could be overruled by the governor on any matter that the latter considered special.a)1 and 2 Onlyb)2 and 3 Onlyc)1 and 3 Onlyd)All of themCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for What were the drawbacks of Montague Chelmsford reforms?1.Franchise was very limited.2.At the centre, the legislature had no control over the governor-general and his executive council.3.Division of subjects was not satisfactory at the centre.4.Allocation of seats for Central Legislature to provinces was based on ‘importance’ of provinces for instance, Punjab’s military importance and Bombay’s commercial importance.5. At the level of provinces, division of subjects and parallel administration of two parts i.e. Dyarchy was irrational and hence unworkable.6.The provincial ministers had no control over finances and over the bureaucrats, leading to constant friction between the two. Ministers were often not consulted on important matters too; in fact, they could be overruled by the governor on any matter that the latter considered special.a)1 and 2 Onlyb)2 and 3 Onlyc)1 and 3 Onlyd)All of themCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of What were the drawbacks of Montague Chelmsford reforms?1.Franchise was very limited.2.At the centre, the legislature had no control over the governor-general and his executive council.3.Division of subjects was not satisfactory at the centre.4.Allocation of seats for Central Legislature to provinces was based on ‘importance’ of provinces for instance, Punjab’s military importance and Bombay’s commercial importance.5. At the level of provinces, division of subjects and parallel administration of two parts i.e. Dyarchy was irrational and hence unworkable.6.The provincial ministers had no control over finances and over the bureaucrats, leading to constant friction between the two. Ministers were often not consulted on important matters too; in fact, they could be overruled by the governor on any matter that the latter considered special.a)1 and 2 Onlyb)2 and 3 Onlyc)1 and 3 Onlyd)All of themCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an
ample number of questions to practice What were the drawbacks of Montague Chelmsford reforms?1.Franchise was very limited.2.At the centre, the legislature had no control over the governor-general and his executive council.3.Division of subjects was not satisfactory at the centre.4.Allocation of seats for Central Legislature to provinces was based on ‘importance’ of provinces for instance, Punjab’s military importance and Bombay’s commercial importance.5. At the level of provinces, division of subjects and parallel administration of two parts i.e. Dyarchy was irrational and hence unworkable.6.The provincial ministers had no control over finances and over the bureaucrats, leading to constant friction between the two. Ministers were often not consulted on important matters too; in fact, they could be overruled by the governor on any matter that the latter considered special.a)1 and 2 Onlyb)2 and 3 Onlyc)1 and 3 Onlyd)All of themCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice UPSC tests.
|
|
Explore Courses for UPSC exam
|
|
Suggested Free Tests
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
|
© EduRev
|
Education Revolution
|
Follow Us
|
Signup to see your scores
go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup