CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >  Directions: Read the following passage and an... Start Learning for Free
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.


India's record in promoting occupational and industrial safety remains weak even with years of robust economic growth. Making work environments safer is a low priority, although the productivity benefits of such investments have always been clear. The consequences are frequently seen in the form of a large number of fatalities and injuries, but in a market that has a steady supply of labour, policymakers tend to ignore the wider impact of such losses. It will be no surprise, therefore, if the deaths of four people, including a senior officer, in a fire at the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation gas facility in Navi Mumbai, or the tragedy that killed nearly two dozen people at a firecracker factory in Batala, Punjab are quickly forgotten. Such incidents make it imperative that the Central government abandon its reductionist approach to the challenge, and engage in serious reform. There is not much evidence, of progressive moves. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2019, introduced in the Lok Sabha in July to combine 13 existing laws pays little attention to the sector-specific requirements of workers. One of its major shortcomings is that formation of safety committees and appointment of safety officers, the latter in the case of establishments with 500 workers, is left to the discretion of State governments.

A safe work environment is a basic right, and India's recent decades of high growth should have ushered in a framework of guarantees. Unfortunately, successive governments have not felt it necessary to ratify many fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Compromising on safety can lead to extreme consequences that go beyond factories and leave something that is etched in the nation's memory as in the case of the Bhopal gas disaster.

[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Opinion, The Hindu]


Q. What incident is cited in the passage as an example of the extreme consequences of compromising on safety?

  • a)
    The Navi Mumbai gas facility fire

  • b)
    The Batala firecracker factory tragedy

  • c)
    The Bhopal gas disaster

  • d)
    The Oil and Natural Gas Corporation accident

Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Most Upvoted Answer
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Indias ...
In the passage, it is mentioned that compromising on safety can have extreme consequences that go beyond factories and leave something etched in the nation's memory. It then specifically mentions the Bhopal gas disaster as an example of such extreme consequences. This incident refers to the gas leak that occurred in December 1984 at the Union Carbide pesticide plant in Bhopal, India. The leak released toxic gases, resulting in the immediate death of thousands of people and causing long-term health issues for many others. It is one of the world's worst industrial disasters.

Therefore, the passage cites the Bhopal gas disaster as an example of the extreme consequences of compromising on safety.
Free Test
Community Answer
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Indias ...
Understanding the Correct Answer
The passage discusses the issues surrounding occupational safety in India, highlighting several incidents that showcase the repercussions of neglecting safety standards. Among these incidents, the Bhopal gas disaster is specifically cited as an example of the extreme consequences of compromising on safety.
Key Points Supporting the Answer
- Historical Context: The Bhopal gas disaster, which occurred in 1984, is one of the worst industrial disasters in history. It resulted in thousands of deaths and long-term health effects for the local population due to the release of toxic gas.
- Significance in the Passage: The author references the Bhopal disaster to emphasize the severe and lasting impacts of inadequate safety measures. It serves as a poignant reminder of the potential dangers associated with neglecting occupational safety.
- Contrast with Other Incidents: While the Navi Mumbai gas facility fire and the Batala firecracker factory tragedy are tragic events, the passage portrays the Bhopal incident as a landmark case that exemplifies the catastrophic results of safety failures on a national scale.
- Call for Reform: The mention of the Bhopal disaster underscores the necessity for serious reform in India's approach to occupational safety, indicating that without such reforms, history could repeat itself.
In conclusion, the passage points to the Bhopal gas disaster as a critical example of the extreme consequences of safety compromises, making option 'C' the correct answer.
Attention CLAT Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed CLAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in CLAT.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Indias record in promoting occupational and industrial safety remains weak even with years of robust economic growth. Making work environments safer is a low priority, although the productivity benefits of such investments have always been clear. The consequences are frequently seen in the form of a large number of fatalities and injuries, but in a market that has a steady supply of labour, policymakers tend to ignore the wider impact of such losses. It will be no surprise, therefore, if the deaths of four people, including a senior officer, in a fire at the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation gas facility in Navi Mumbai, or the tragedy that killed nearly two dozen people at a firecracker factory in Batala, Punjab are quickly forgotten. Such incidents make it imperative that the Central government abandon its reductionist approach to the challenge, and engage in serious reform. There is not much evidence, of progressive moves. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2019, introduced in the Lok Sabha in July to combine 13 existing laws pays little attention to the sector-specific requirements of workers. One of its major shortcomings is that formation of safety committees and appointment of safety officers, the latter in the case of establishments with 500 workers, is left to the discretion of State governments.A safe work environment is a basic right, and Indias recent decades of high growth should have ushered in a framework of guarantees. Unfortunately, successive governments have not felt it necessary to ratify many fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Compromising on safety can lead to extreme consequences that go beyond factories and leave something that is etched in the nations memory as in the case of the Bhopal gas disaster.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Opinion, The Hindu]Q.What is one of the major shortcomings of the Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2019, as mentioned in the passage?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Indias record in promoting occupational and industrial safety remains weak even with years of robust economic growth. Making work environments safer is a low priority, although the productivity benefits of such investments have always been clear. The consequences are frequently seen in the form of a large number of fatalities and injuries, but in a market that has a steady supply of labour, policymakers tend to ignore the wider impact of such losses. It will be no surprise, therefore, if the deaths of four people, including a senior officer, in a fire at the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation gas facility in Navi Mumbai, or the tragedy that killed nearly two dozen people at a firecracker factory in Batala, Punjab are quickly forgotten. Such incidents make it imperative that the Central government abandon its reductionist approach to the challenge, and engage in serious reform. There is not much evidence, of progressive moves. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2019, introduced in the Lok Sabha in July to combine 13 existing laws pays little attention to the sector-specific requirements of workers. One of its major shortcomings is that formation of safety committees and appointment of safety officers, the latter in the case of establishments with 500 workers, is left to the discretion of State governments.A safe work environment is a basic right, and Indias recent decades of high growth should have ushered in a framework of guarantees. Unfortunately, successive governments have not felt it necessary to ratify many fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Compromising on safety can lead to extreme consequences that go beyond factories and leave something that is etched in the nations memory as in the case of the Bhopal gas disaster.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Opinion, The Hindu]Q.What does the passage suggest about Indias approach to ratifying international labor conventions?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Indias record in promoting occupational and industrial safety remains weak even with years of robust economic growth. Making work environments safer is a low priority, although the productivity benefits of such investments have always been clear. The consequences are frequently seen in the form of a large number of fatalities and injuries, but in a market that has a steady supply of labour, policymakers tend to ignore the wider impact of such losses. It will be no surprise, therefore, if the deaths of four people, including a senior officer, in a fire at the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation gas facility in Navi Mumbai, or the tragedy that killed nearly two dozen people at a firecracker factory in Batala, Punjab are quickly forgotten. Such incidents make it imperative that the Central government abandon its reductionist approach to the challenge, and engage in serious reform. There is not much evidence, of progressive moves. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2019, introduced in the Lok Sabha in July to combine 13 existing laws pays little attention to the sector-specific requirements of workers. One of its major shortcomings is that formation of safety committees and appointment of safety officers, the latter in the case of establishments with 500 workers, is left to the discretion of State governments.A safe work environment is a basic right, and Indias recent decades of high growth should have ushered in a framework of guarantees. Unfortunately, successive governments have not felt it necessary to ratify many fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Compromising on safety can lead to extreme consequences that go beyond factories and leave something that is etched in the nations memory as in the case of the Bhopal gas disaster.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Opinion, The Hindu]Q.According to the passage, why does Indias record in promoting occupational and industrial safety remain weak?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Indias record in promoting occupational and industrial safety remains weak even with years of robust economic growth. Making work environments safer is a low priority, although the productivity benefits of such investments have always been clear. The consequences are frequently seen in the form of a large number of fatalities and injuries, but in a market that has a steady supply of labour, policymakers tend to ignore the wider impact of such losses. It will be no surprise, therefore, if the deaths of four people, including a senior officer, in a fire at the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation gas facility in Navi Mumbai, or the tragedy that killed nearly two dozen people at a firecracker factory in Batala, Punjab are quickly forgotten. Such incidents make it imperative that the Central government abandon its reductionist approach to the challenge, and engage in serious reform. There is not much evidence, of progressive moves. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2019, introduced in the Lok Sabha in July to combine 13 existing laws pays little attention to the sector-specific requirements of workers. One of its major shortcomings is that formation of safety committees and appointment of safety officers, the latter in the case of establishments with 500 workers, is left to the discretion of State governments.A safe work environment is a basic right, and Indias recent decades of high growth should have ushered in a framework of guarantees. Unfortunately, successive governments have not felt it necessary to ratify many fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Compromising on safety can lead to extreme consequences that go beyond factories and leave something that is etched in the nations memory as in the case of the Bhopal gas disaster.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Opinion, The Hindu]Q.According to the passage, why do policymakers tend to ignore the wider impact of fatalities and injuries in the workplace?

Read the context and answer the following question.Indias record in promoting occupational and industrial safety remains weak even with years of robust economic growth. Making work environments safer is a low priority, although the productivity benefits of such investments have always been clear. The consequences are frequently seen in the form of a large number of fatalities and injuries, but in a market that has a steady supply of labour, policymakers tend to ignore the wider impact of such losses. There is not much evidence, of progressive moves. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2019, introduced in the Lok Sabha in July to combine 13 existing laws pays little attention to the sector-specific requirements of workers. One of its major shortcomings is that formation of safety committees and appointment of safety officers, the latter in the case of establishments with 500 workers, is left to the discretion of State governments.A safe work environment is a basic right, and Indias recent decades of high growth should have ushered in a framework of guarantees. Unfortunately, successive governments have not felt it necessary to ratify many fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Compromising on safety can lead to extreme consequences that go beyond factories and leave something that is etched in the nations memory as in the case of the Bhopal gas disaster.Q.Which of the following, if true, most weakens the authors conclusion?

Top Courses for CLAT

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Indias record in promoting occupational and industrial safety remains weak even with years of robust economic growth. Making work environments safer is a low priority, although the productivity benefits of such investments have always been clear. The consequences are frequently seen in the form of a large number of fatalities and injuries, but in a market that has a steady supply of labour, policymakers tend to ignore the wider impact of such losses. It will be no surprise, therefore, if the deaths of four people, including a senior officer, in a fire at the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation gas facility in Navi Mumbai, or the tragedy that killed nearly two dozen people at a firecracker factory in Batala, Punjab are quickly forgotten. Such incidents make it imperative that the Central government abandon its reductionist approach to the challenge, and engage in serious reform. There is not much evidence, of progressive moves. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2019, introduced in the Lok Sabha in July to combine 13 existing laws pays little attention to the sector-specific requirements of workers. One of its major shortcomings is that formation of safety committees and appointment of safety officers, the latter in the case of establishments with 500 workers, is left to the discretion of State governments.A safe work environment is a basic right, and Indias recent decades of high growth should have ushered in a framework of guarantees. Unfortunately, successive governments have not felt it necessary to ratify many fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Compromising on safety can lead to extreme consequences that go beyond factories and leave something that is etched in the nations memory as in the case of the Bhopal gas disaster.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Opinion, The Hindu]Q.What incident is cited in the passage as an example of the extreme consequences of compromising on safety?a)The Navi Mumbai gas facility fireb)The Batala firecracker factory tragedyc)The Bhopal gas disasterd)The Oil and Natural Gas Corporation accidentCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Indias record in promoting occupational and industrial safety remains weak even with years of robust economic growth. Making work environments safer is a low priority, although the productivity benefits of such investments have always been clear. The consequences are frequently seen in the form of a large number of fatalities and injuries, but in a market that has a steady supply of labour, policymakers tend to ignore the wider impact of such losses. It will be no surprise, therefore, if the deaths of four people, including a senior officer, in a fire at the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation gas facility in Navi Mumbai, or the tragedy that killed nearly two dozen people at a firecracker factory in Batala, Punjab are quickly forgotten. Such incidents make it imperative that the Central government abandon its reductionist approach to the challenge, and engage in serious reform. There is not much evidence, of progressive moves. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2019, introduced in the Lok Sabha in July to combine 13 existing laws pays little attention to the sector-specific requirements of workers. One of its major shortcomings is that formation of safety committees and appointment of safety officers, the latter in the case of establishments with 500 workers, is left to the discretion of State governments.A safe work environment is a basic right, and Indias recent decades of high growth should have ushered in a framework of guarantees. Unfortunately, successive governments have not felt it necessary to ratify many fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Compromising on safety can lead to extreme consequences that go beyond factories and leave something that is etched in the nations memory as in the case of the Bhopal gas disaster.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Opinion, The Hindu]Q.What incident is cited in the passage as an example of the extreme consequences of compromising on safety?a)The Navi Mumbai gas facility fireb)The Batala firecracker factory tragedyc)The Bhopal gas disasterd)The Oil and Natural Gas Corporation accidentCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Indias record in promoting occupational and industrial safety remains weak even with years of robust economic growth. Making work environments safer is a low priority, although the productivity benefits of such investments have always been clear. The consequences are frequently seen in the form of a large number of fatalities and injuries, but in a market that has a steady supply of labour, policymakers tend to ignore the wider impact of such losses. It will be no surprise, therefore, if the deaths of four people, including a senior officer, in a fire at the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation gas facility in Navi Mumbai, or the tragedy that killed nearly two dozen people at a firecracker factory in Batala, Punjab are quickly forgotten. Such incidents make it imperative that the Central government abandon its reductionist approach to the challenge, and engage in serious reform. There is not much evidence, of progressive moves. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2019, introduced in the Lok Sabha in July to combine 13 existing laws pays little attention to the sector-specific requirements of workers. One of its major shortcomings is that formation of safety committees and appointment of safety officers, the latter in the case of establishments with 500 workers, is left to the discretion of State governments.A safe work environment is a basic right, and Indias recent decades of high growth should have ushered in a framework of guarantees. Unfortunately, successive governments have not felt it necessary to ratify many fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Compromising on safety can lead to extreme consequences that go beyond factories and leave something that is etched in the nations memory as in the case of the Bhopal gas disaster.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Opinion, The Hindu]Q.What incident is cited in the passage as an example of the extreme consequences of compromising on safety?a)The Navi Mumbai gas facility fireb)The Batala firecracker factory tragedyc)The Bhopal gas disasterd)The Oil and Natural Gas Corporation accidentCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Indias record in promoting occupational and industrial safety remains weak even with years of robust economic growth. Making work environments safer is a low priority, although the productivity benefits of such investments have always been clear. The consequences are frequently seen in the form of a large number of fatalities and injuries, but in a market that has a steady supply of labour, policymakers tend to ignore the wider impact of such losses. It will be no surprise, therefore, if the deaths of four people, including a senior officer, in a fire at the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation gas facility in Navi Mumbai, or the tragedy that killed nearly two dozen people at a firecracker factory in Batala, Punjab are quickly forgotten. Such incidents make it imperative that the Central government abandon its reductionist approach to the challenge, and engage in serious reform. There is not much evidence, of progressive moves. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2019, introduced in the Lok Sabha in July to combine 13 existing laws pays little attention to the sector-specific requirements of workers. One of its major shortcomings is that formation of safety committees and appointment of safety officers, the latter in the case of establishments with 500 workers, is left to the discretion of State governments.A safe work environment is a basic right, and Indias recent decades of high growth should have ushered in a framework of guarantees. Unfortunately, successive governments have not felt it necessary to ratify many fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Compromising on safety can lead to extreme consequences that go beyond factories and leave something that is etched in the nations memory as in the case of the Bhopal gas disaster.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Opinion, The Hindu]Q.What incident is cited in the passage as an example of the extreme consequences of compromising on safety?a)The Navi Mumbai gas facility fireb)The Batala firecracker factory tragedyc)The Bhopal gas disasterd)The Oil and Natural Gas Corporation accidentCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Indias record in promoting occupational and industrial safety remains weak even with years of robust economic growth. Making work environments safer is a low priority, although the productivity benefits of such investments have always been clear. The consequences are frequently seen in the form of a large number of fatalities and injuries, but in a market that has a steady supply of labour, policymakers tend to ignore the wider impact of such losses. It will be no surprise, therefore, if the deaths of four people, including a senior officer, in a fire at the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation gas facility in Navi Mumbai, or the tragedy that killed nearly two dozen people at a firecracker factory in Batala, Punjab are quickly forgotten. Such incidents make it imperative that the Central government abandon its reductionist approach to the challenge, and engage in serious reform. There is not much evidence, of progressive moves. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2019, introduced in the Lok Sabha in July to combine 13 existing laws pays little attention to the sector-specific requirements of workers. One of its major shortcomings is that formation of safety committees and appointment of safety officers, the latter in the case of establishments with 500 workers, is left to the discretion of State governments.A safe work environment is a basic right, and Indias recent decades of high growth should have ushered in a framework of guarantees. Unfortunately, successive governments have not felt it necessary to ratify many fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Compromising on safety can lead to extreme consequences that go beyond factories and leave something that is etched in the nations memory as in the case of the Bhopal gas disaster.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Opinion, The Hindu]Q.What incident is cited in the passage as an example of the extreme consequences of compromising on safety?a)The Navi Mumbai gas facility fireb)The Batala firecracker factory tragedyc)The Bhopal gas disasterd)The Oil and Natural Gas Corporation accidentCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Indias record in promoting occupational and industrial safety remains weak even with years of robust economic growth. Making work environments safer is a low priority, although the productivity benefits of such investments have always been clear. The consequences are frequently seen in the form of a large number of fatalities and injuries, but in a market that has a steady supply of labour, policymakers tend to ignore the wider impact of such losses. It will be no surprise, therefore, if the deaths of four people, including a senior officer, in a fire at the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation gas facility in Navi Mumbai, or the tragedy that killed nearly two dozen people at a firecracker factory in Batala, Punjab are quickly forgotten. Such incidents make it imperative that the Central government abandon its reductionist approach to the challenge, and engage in serious reform. There is not much evidence, of progressive moves. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2019, introduced in the Lok Sabha in July to combine 13 existing laws pays little attention to the sector-specific requirements of workers. One of its major shortcomings is that formation of safety committees and appointment of safety officers, the latter in the case of establishments with 500 workers, is left to the discretion of State governments.A safe work environment is a basic right, and Indias recent decades of high growth should have ushered in a framework of guarantees. Unfortunately, successive governments have not felt it necessary to ratify many fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Compromising on safety can lead to extreme consequences that go beyond factories and leave something that is etched in the nations memory as in the case of the Bhopal gas disaster.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Opinion, The Hindu]Q.What incident is cited in the passage as an example of the extreme consequences of compromising on safety?a)The Navi Mumbai gas facility fireb)The Batala firecracker factory tragedyc)The Bhopal gas disasterd)The Oil and Natural Gas Corporation accidentCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Indias record in promoting occupational and industrial safety remains weak even with years of robust economic growth. Making work environments safer is a low priority, although the productivity benefits of such investments have always been clear. The consequences are frequently seen in the form of a large number of fatalities and injuries, but in a market that has a steady supply of labour, policymakers tend to ignore the wider impact of such losses. It will be no surprise, therefore, if the deaths of four people, including a senior officer, in a fire at the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation gas facility in Navi Mumbai, or the tragedy that killed nearly two dozen people at a firecracker factory in Batala, Punjab are quickly forgotten. Such incidents make it imperative that the Central government abandon its reductionist approach to the challenge, and engage in serious reform. There is not much evidence, of progressive moves. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2019, introduced in the Lok Sabha in July to combine 13 existing laws pays little attention to the sector-specific requirements of workers. One of its major shortcomings is that formation of safety committees and appointment of safety officers, the latter in the case of establishments with 500 workers, is left to the discretion of State governments.A safe work environment is a basic right, and Indias recent decades of high growth should have ushered in a framework of guarantees. Unfortunately, successive governments have not felt it necessary to ratify many fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Compromising on safety can lead to extreme consequences that go beyond factories and leave something that is etched in the nations memory as in the case of the Bhopal gas disaster.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Opinion, The Hindu]Q.What incident is cited in the passage as an example of the extreme consequences of compromising on safety?a)The Navi Mumbai gas facility fireb)The Batala firecracker factory tragedyc)The Bhopal gas disasterd)The Oil and Natural Gas Corporation accidentCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Indias record in promoting occupational and industrial safety remains weak even with years of robust economic growth. Making work environments safer is a low priority, although the productivity benefits of such investments have always been clear. The consequences are frequently seen in the form of a large number of fatalities and injuries, but in a market that has a steady supply of labour, policymakers tend to ignore the wider impact of such losses. It will be no surprise, therefore, if the deaths of four people, including a senior officer, in a fire at the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation gas facility in Navi Mumbai, or the tragedy that killed nearly two dozen people at a firecracker factory in Batala, Punjab are quickly forgotten. Such incidents make it imperative that the Central government abandon its reductionist approach to the challenge, and engage in serious reform. There is not much evidence, of progressive moves. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2019, introduced in the Lok Sabha in July to combine 13 existing laws pays little attention to the sector-specific requirements of workers. One of its major shortcomings is that formation of safety committees and appointment of safety officers, the latter in the case of establishments with 500 workers, is left to the discretion of State governments.A safe work environment is a basic right, and Indias recent decades of high growth should have ushered in a framework of guarantees. Unfortunately, successive governments have not felt it necessary to ratify many fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Compromising on safety can lead to extreme consequences that go beyond factories and leave something that is etched in the nations memory as in the case of the Bhopal gas disaster.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Opinion, The Hindu]Q.What incident is cited in the passage as an example of the extreme consequences of compromising on safety?a)The Navi Mumbai gas facility fireb)The Batala firecracker factory tragedyc)The Bhopal gas disasterd)The Oil and Natural Gas Corporation accidentCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Indias record in promoting occupational and industrial safety remains weak even with years of robust economic growth. Making work environments safer is a low priority, although the productivity benefits of such investments have always been clear. The consequences are frequently seen in the form of a large number of fatalities and injuries, but in a market that has a steady supply of labour, policymakers tend to ignore the wider impact of such losses. It will be no surprise, therefore, if the deaths of four people, including a senior officer, in a fire at the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation gas facility in Navi Mumbai, or the tragedy that killed nearly two dozen people at a firecracker factory in Batala, Punjab are quickly forgotten. Such incidents make it imperative that the Central government abandon its reductionist approach to the challenge, and engage in serious reform. There is not much evidence, of progressive moves. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2019, introduced in the Lok Sabha in July to combine 13 existing laws pays little attention to the sector-specific requirements of workers. One of its major shortcomings is that formation of safety committees and appointment of safety officers, the latter in the case of establishments with 500 workers, is left to the discretion of State governments.A safe work environment is a basic right, and Indias recent decades of high growth should have ushered in a framework of guarantees. Unfortunately, successive governments have not felt it necessary to ratify many fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Compromising on safety can lead to extreme consequences that go beyond factories and leave something that is etched in the nations memory as in the case of the Bhopal gas disaster.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Opinion, The Hindu]Q.What incident is cited in the passage as an example of the extreme consequences of compromising on safety?a)The Navi Mumbai gas facility fireb)The Batala firecracker factory tragedyc)The Bhopal gas disasterd)The Oil and Natural Gas Corporation accidentCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Indias record in promoting occupational and industrial safety remains weak even with years of robust economic growth. Making work environments safer is a low priority, although the productivity benefits of such investments have always been clear. The consequences are frequently seen in the form of a large number of fatalities and injuries, but in a market that has a steady supply of labour, policymakers tend to ignore the wider impact of such losses. It will be no surprise, therefore, if the deaths of four people, including a senior officer, in a fire at the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation gas facility in Navi Mumbai, or the tragedy that killed nearly two dozen people at a firecracker factory in Batala, Punjab are quickly forgotten. Such incidents make it imperative that the Central government abandon its reductionist approach to the challenge, and engage in serious reform. There is not much evidence, of progressive moves. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2019, introduced in the Lok Sabha in July to combine 13 existing laws pays little attention to the sector-specific requirements of workers. One of its major shortcomings is that formation of safety committees and appointment of safety officers, the latter in the case of establishments with 500 workers, is left to the discretion of State governments.A safe work environment is a basic right, and Indias recent decades of high growth should have ushered in a framework of guarantees. Unfortunately, successive governments have not felt it necessary to ratify many fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Compromising on safety can lead to extreme consequences that go beyond factories and leave something that is etched in the nations memory as in the case of the Bhopal gas disaster.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Opinion, The Hindu]Q.What incident is cited in the passage as an example of the extreme consequences of compromising on safety?a)The Navi Mumbai gas facility fireb)The Batala firecracker factory tragedyc)The Bhopal gas disasterd)The Oil and Natural Gas Corporation accidentCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev