Passage: A few weeks ago I ran into an old friend who currently one of t he mandarins deciding India‘s economic and financial policies. He asked, ―And so, how is IIT doing? As one can only indulge in friendly banter at such gatherings, I responded with, ―Not so well actually. Your market-friendly policies have forced us to raise the fee, so we have 50% fewer PhD applicants this year. Not batting an eyelid, he shot back: ―Obviously. Your PhD students don‘t have any market value. Taken aback, I shifted to a more serious tone and tried to start a discussion on the need for research in these globalised times. But he had already walked away. The last word on the imperatives of the ‘market ‘had been spoken. Actually, this view f higher education should not have surprised me. Worthies who look at everything as consumer products classify higher education as a ‘non-merit ‘good. Non-merit goods are those where only the individual benefits from acquiring them and not the society as a whole. Multilateral agencies like the World Bank have too been pushing countries like India to stop subsidies to higher education. When Ron Brown, former US commerce secretary visited India, a public meeting was organized at IIT Delhi. At that meeting I asked him: ―I understand that since the 19th century all the way up to the 1970s, most land grant and state universities in the US virtually provided free education to state citizens. Was that good for the economy, or should they have charged high fees in the early 20th century? He replied, ―It was great for the economy. It was one of the best things that the US government did at that particular time in American history building institutions of higher education which were accessible to the masses of the people. I think it is one of the reasons why our economy grew and prospered , one of the ways in which the US was able to close some of its social gaps. So people who lived in rural areas would have the same kind of access to higher education as people living in other parts of the country. It was one of the reasons for making America strong. Our policy-makers seem unaware that their mentors in the US did not follow policies at home which they now prescribe for other countries. Ron Brown‘s remarks summaries the importance of policy-makers in the US place on higher education as a vehicle for upward mobility, for the poorer sectors of their population. Even today, a majority of Americans study in state-run institutions. Some of these Michigan, Illinois, Ohio, Wisconsin and Texas, are among the best in world. The annual tuition charged from state residents (about $ 5000 a year) is about a month‘s salary paid to a lecturer. Even this fee is waived for most students. In addition, students receive stipends for books, food and hostel charges. The basic principle is that no student who gets admission to a university should have to depend on parental support if it is not available. Ron Brown‘s remarks went unnoticed in India. Every other day some luminary or the other opines that universities and technical education institutions should increase their charges and that such education should not be subsidized. Most editorials echo these sentiments. Eminent industrialists pontificate that we should run educational institutions like business houses. Visiting experts from the Bank and the IMF, in their newly emerging concern for the poor, advise us to divert funds from higher education to primary education. Q. The author of the passage seems to be a/an

Official working in economic affairs department

Financial advisor to Government or a bureaucrat in finance department

Social activist devoted to illiteracy eradication programme

Educationist in IIT or some such educational institution

Passage: A few weeks ago I ran into an old friend who currently one of t he mandarins deciding India‘s economic and financial policies. He asked, ―And so, how is IIT doing? As one can only indulge in friendly banter at such gatherings, I responded with, ―Not so well actually. Your market-friendly policies have forced us to raise the fee, so we have 50% fewer PhD applicants this year. Not batting an eyelid, he shot back: ―Obviously. Your PhD students don‘t have any market value. Taken aback, I shifted to a more serious tone and tried to start a discussion on the need for research in these globalised times. But he had already walked away. The last word on the imperatives of the ‘market ‘had been spoken. Actually, this view f higher education should not have surprised me. Worthies who look at everything as consumer products classify higher education as a ‘non-merit ‘good. Non-merit goods are those where only the individual benefits from acquiring them and not the society as a whole. Multilateral agencies like the World Bank have too been pushing countries like India to stop subsidies to higher education. When Ron Brown, former US commerce secretary visited India, a public meeting was organized at IIT Delhi. At that meeting I asked him: ―I understand that since the 19th century all the way up to the 1970s, most land grant and state universities in the US virtually provided free education to state citizens. Was that good for the economy, or should they have charged high fees in the early 20th century? He replied, ―It was great for the economy. It was one of the best things that the US government did at that particular time in American history building institutions of higher education which were accessible to the masses of the people. I think it is one of the reasons why our economy grew and prospered , one of the ways in which the US was able to close some of its social gaps. So people who lived in rural areas would have the same kind of access to higher education as people living in other parts of the country. It was one of the reasons for making America strong. Our policy-makers seem unaware that their mentors in the US did not follow policies at home which they now prescribe for other countries. Ron Brown‘s remarks summaries the importance of policy-makers in the US place on higher education as a vehicle for upward mobility, for the poorer sectors of their population. Even today, a majority of Americans study in state-run institutions. Some of these Michigan, Illinois, Ohio, Wisconsin and Texas, are among the best in world. The annual tuition charged from state residents (about $ 5000 a year) is about a month‘s salary paid to a lecturer. Even this fee is waived for most students. In addition, students receive stipends for books, food and hostel charges. The basic principle is that no student who gets admission to a university should have to depend on parental support if it is not available. Ron Brown‘s remarks went unnoticed in India. Every other day some luminary or the other opines that universities and technical education institutions should increase their charges and that such education should not be subsidized. Most editorials echo these sentiments. Eminent industrialists pontificate that we should run educational institutions like business houses. Visiting experts from the Bank and the IMF, in their newly emerging concern for the poor, advise us to divert funds from higher education to primary education. Q. What was the net tangible impact of raising fees on the higher level of technological research?

The number of prospective researchers was reduced to almost a half.

The market value of PhD students was almost lost.

Research studies attained a higher market value.

Research became more and more relevant to market demands.

Passage: A few weeks ago I ran into an old friend who currently one of t he mandarins deciding India‘s economic and financial policies. He asked, ―And so, how is IIT doing? As one can only indulge in friendly banter at such gatherings, I responded with, ―Not so well actually. Your market-friendly policies have forced us to raise the fee, so we have 50% fewer PhD applicants this year. Not batting an eyelid, he shot back: ―Obviously. Your PhD students don‘t have any market value. Taken aback, I shifted to a more serious tone and tried to start a discussion on the need for research in these globalised times. But he had already walked away. The last word on the imperatives of the ‘market ‘had been spoken. Actually, this view f higher education should not have surprised me. Worthies who look at everything as consumer products classify higher education as a ‘non-merit ‘good. Non-merit goods are those where only the individual benefits from acquiring them and not the society as a whole. Multilateral agencies like the World Bank have too been pushing countries like India to stop subsidies to higher education. When Ron Brown, former US commerce secretary visited India, a public meeting was organized at IIT Delhi. At that meeting I asked him: ―I understand that since the 19th century all the way up to the 1970s, most land grant and state universities in the US virtually provided free education to state citizens. Was that good for the economy, or should they have charged high fees in the early 20th century? He replied, ―It was great for the economy. It was one of the best things that the US government did at that particular time in American history building institutions of higher education which were accessible to the masses of the people. I think it is one of the reasons why our economy grew and prospered , one of the ways in which the US was able to close some of its social gaps. So people who lived in rural areas would have the same kind of access to higher education as people living in other parts of the country. It was one of the reasons for making America strong. Our policy-makers seem unaware that their mentors in the US did not follow policies at home which they now prescribe for other countries. Ron Brown‘s remarks summaries the importance of policy-makers in the US place on higher education as a vehicle for upward mobility, for the poorer sectors of their population. Even today, a majority of Americans study in state-run institutions. Some of these Michigan, Illinois, Ohio, Wisconsin and Texas, are among the best in world. The annual tuition charged from state residents (about $ 5000 a year) is about a month‘s salary paid to a lecturer. Even this fee is waived for most students. In addition, students receive stipends for books, food and hostel charges. The basic principle is that no student who gets admission to a university should have to depend on parental support if it is not available. Ron Brown‘s remarks went unnoticed in India. Every other day some luminary or the other opines that universities and technical education institutions should increase their charges and that such education should not be subsidized. Most editorials echo these sentiments. Eminent industrialists pontificate that we should run educational institutions like business houses. Visiting experts from the Bank and the IMF, in their newly emerging concern for the poor, advise us to divert funds from higher education to primary education. Q. According to the author, the US policymakers consider education as a

Hindrance in the way to economic growth and prosperity

Means for achieving upward mobility for the poor

Wastage of resources and a totally futile exercise

Matter of concern only for the parents of the students

Passage: A few weeks ago I ran into an old friend who currently one of t he mandarins deciding India‘s economic and financial policies. He asked, ―And so, how is IIT doing? As one can only indulge in friendly banter at such gatherings, I responded with, ―Not so well actually. Your market-friendly policies have forced us to raise the fee, so we have 50% fewer PhD applicants this year. Not batting an eyelid, he shot back: ―Obviously. Your PhD students don‘t have any market value. Taken aback, I shifted to a more serious tone and tried to start a discussion on the need for research in these globalised times. But he had already walked away. The last word on the imperatives of the ‘market ‘had been spoken. Actually, this view f higher education should not have surprised me. Worthies who look at everything as consumer products classify higher education as a ‘non-merit ‘good. Non-merit goods are those where only the individual benefits from acquiring them and not the society as a whole. Multilateral agencies like the World Bank have too been pushing countries like India to stop subsidies to higher education. When Ron Brown, former US commerce secretary visited India, a public meeting was organized at IIT Delhi. At that meeting I asked him: ―I understand that since the 19th century all the way up to the 1970s, most land grant and state universities in the US virtually provided free education to state citizens. Was that good for the economy, or should they have charged high fees in the early 20th century? He replied, ―It was great for the economy. It was one of the best things that the US government did at that particular time in American history building institutions of higher education which were accessible to the masses of the people. I think it is one of the reasons why our economy grew and prospered , one of the ways in which the US was able to close some of its social gaps. So people who lived in rural areas would have the same kind of access to higher education as people living in other parts of the country. It was one of the reasons for making America strong. Our policy-makers seem unaware that their mentors in the US did not follow policies at home which they now prescribe for other countries. Ron Brown‘s remarks summaries the importance of policy-makers in the US place on higher education as a vehicle for upward mobility, for the poorer sectors of their population. Even today, a majority of Americans study in state-run institutions. Some of these Michigan, Illinois, Ohio, Wisconsin and Texas, are among the best in world. The annual tuition charged from state residents (about $ 5000 a year) is about a month‘s salary paid to a lecturer. Even this fee is waived for most students. In addition, students receive stipends for books, food and hostel charges. The basic principle is that no student who gets admission to a university should have to depend on parental support if it is not available. Ron Brown‘s remarks went unnoticed in India. Every other day some luminary or the other opines that universities and technical education institutions should increase their charges and that such education should not be subsidized. Most editorials echo these sentiments. Eminent industrialists pontificate that we should run educational institutions like business houses. Visiting experts from the Bank and the IMF, in their newly emerging concern for the poor, advise us to divert funds from higher education to primary education. Q. Which of the following makes the policymakers classify education as ―non-merit‖ commodity?

The tendency of people to seek any individual benefit

The attitude of giving unreasonably more weight age to society

The tendency of viewing everything as mere consumer product

Undue pressure from International Agencies like the World Bank, etc

Passage: A few weeks ago I ran into an old friend who currently one of t he mandarins deciding India‘s economic and financial policies. He asked, ―And so, how is IIT doing? As one can only indulge in friendly banter at such gatherings, I responded with, ―Not so well actually. Your market-friendly policies have forced us to raise the fee, so we have 50% fewer PhD applicants this year. Not batting an eyelid, he shot back: ―Obviously. Your PhD students don‘t have any market value. Taken aback, I shifted to a more serious tone and tried to start a discussion on the need for research in these globalised times. But he had already walked away. The last word on the imperatives of the ‘market ‘had been spoken. Actually, this view f higher education should not have surprised me. Worthies who look at everything as consumer products classify higher education as a ‘non-merit ‘good. Non-merit goods are those where only the individual benefits from acquiring them and not the society as a whole. Multilateral agencies like the World Bank have too been pushing countries like India to stop subsidies to higher education. When Ron Brown, former US commerce secretary visited India, a public meeting was organized at IIT Delhi. At that meeting I asked him: ―I understand that since the 19th century all the way up to the 1970s, most land grant and state universities in the US virtually provided free education to state citizens. Was that good for the economy, or should they have charged high fees in the early 20th century? He replied, ―It was great for the economy. It was one of the best things that the US government did at that particular time in American history building institutions of higher education which were accessible to the masses of the people. I think it is one of the reasons why our economy grew and prospered , one of the ways in which the US was able to close some of its social gaps. So people who lived in rural areas would have the same kind of access to higher education as people living in other parts of the country. It was one of the reasons for making America strong. Our policy-makers seem unaware that their mentors in the US did not follow policies at home which they now prescribe for other countries. Ron Brown‘s remarks summaries the importance of policy-makers in the US place on higher education as a vehicle for upward mobility, for the poorer sectors of their population. Even today, a majority of Americans study in state-run institutions. Some of these Michigan, Illinois, Ohio, Wisconsin and Texas, are among the best in world. The annual tuition charged from state residents (about $ 5000 a year) is about a month‘s salary paid to a lecturer. Even this fee is waived for most students. In addition, students receive stipends for books, food and hostel charges. The basic principle is that no student who gets admission to a university should have to depend on parental support if it is not available. Ron Brown‘s remarks went unnoticed in India. Every other day some luminary or the other opines that universities and technical education institutions should increase their charges and that such education should not be subsidized. Most editorials echo these sentiments. Eminent industrialists pontificate that we should run educational institutions like business houses. Visiting experts from the Bank and the IMF, in their newly emerging concern for the poor, advise us to divert funds from higher education to primary education. Q. What was Ron Brown‘s reaction to the author‘s question on free education provided by US universities to their citizens? Ron Brown

Criticized the US govt for its action.

Appreciated the author buy remained non-committed.

Ignored the fact and gave an ambiguous reaction.

Mentioned that the author‘s information was not correct.

Passage: A few weeks ago I ran into an old friend who currently one of t he mandarins deciding India‘s economic and financial policies. He asked, ―And so, how is IIT doing? As one can only indulge in friendly banter at such gatherings, I responded with, ―Not so well actually. Your market-friendly policies have forced us to raise the fee, so we have 50% fewer PhD applicants this year. Not batting an eyelid, he shot back: ―Obviously. Your PhD students don‘t have any market value. Taken aback, I shifted to a more serious tone and tried to start a discussion on the need for research in these globalised times. But he had already walked away. The last word on the imperatives of the ‘market ‘had been spoken. Actually, this view f higher education should not have surprised me. Worthies who look at everything as consumer products classify higher education as a ‘non-merit ‘good. Non-merit goods are those where only the individual benefits from acquiring them and not the society as a whole. Multilateral agencies like the World Bank have too been pushing countries like India to stop subsidies to higher education. When Ron Brown, former US commerce secretary visited India, a public meeting was organized at IIT Delhi. At that meeting I asked him: ―I understand that since the 19th century all the way up to the 1970s, most land grant and state universities in the US virtually provided free education to state citizens. Was that good for the economy, or should they have charged high fees in the early 20th century? He replied, ―It was great for the economy. It was one of the best things that the US government did at that particular time in American history building institutions of higher education which were accessible to the masses of the people. I think it is one of the reasons why our economy grew and prospered , one of the ways in which the US was able to close some of its social gaps. So people who lived in rural areas would have the same kind of access to higher education as people living in other parts of the country. It was one of the reasons for making America strong. Our policy-makers seem unaware that their mentors in the US did not follow policies at home which they now prescribe for other countries. Ron Brown‘s remarks summaries the importance of policy-makers in the US place on higher education as a vehicle for upward mobility, for the poorer sectors of their population. Even today, a majority of Americans study in state-run institutions. Some of these Michigan, Illinois, Ohio, Wisconsin and Texas, are among the best in world. The annual tuition charged from state residents (about $ 5000 a year) is about a month‘s salary paid to a lecturer. Even this fee is waived for most students. In addition, students receive stipends for books, food and hostel charges. The basic principle is that no student who gets admission to a university should have to depend on parental support if it is not available. Ron Brown‘s remarks went unnoticed in India. Every other day some luminary or the other opines that universities and technical education institutions should increase their charges and that such education should not be subsidized. Most editorials echo these sentiments. Eminent industrialists pontificate that we should run educational institutions like business houses. Visiting experts from the Bank and the IMF, in their newly emerging concern for the poor, advise us to divert funds from higher education to primary education. Q. The basic principle adopted by the renowned State-run Universities in the US is that the students

Must pay the lecturer‘s salary from their own resources

Should earn while they learn and pay higher education fees

Must seek the necessary help from their parents on whom they depend

Need not be required to depend upon their parents for acquiring higher education

Passage: A few weeks ago I ran into an old friend who currently one of t he mandarins deciding India‘s economic and financial policies. He asked, ―And so, how is IIT doing? As one can only indulge in friendly banter at such gatherings, I responded with, ―Not so well actually. Your market-friendly policies have forced us to raise the fee, so we have 50% fewer PhD applicants this year. Not batting an eyelid, he shot back: ―Obviously. Your PhD students don‘t have any market value. Taken aback, I shifted to a more serious tone and tried to start a discussion on the need for research in these globalised times. But he had already walked away. The last word on the imperatives of the ‘market ‘had been spoken. Actually, this view f higher education should not have surprised me. Worthies who look at everything as consumer products classify higher education as a ‘non-merit ‘good. Non-merit goods are those where only the individual benefits from acquiring them and not the society as a whole. Multilateral agencies like the World Bank have too been pushing countries like India to stop subsidies to higher education. When Ron Brown, former US commerce secretary visited India, a public meeting was organized at IIT Delhi. At that meeting I asked him: ―I understand that since the 19th century all the way up to the 1970s, most land grant and state universities in the US virtually provided free education to state citizens. Was that good for the economy, or should they have charged high fees in the early 20th century? He replied, ―It was great for the economy. It was one of the best things that the US government did at that particular time in American history building institutions of higher education which were accessible to the masses of the people. I think it is one of the reasons why our economy grew and prospered , one of the ways in which the US was able to close some of its social gaps. So people who lived in rural areas would have the same kind of access to higher education as people living in other parts of the country. It was one of the reasons for making America strong. Our policy-makers seem unaware that their mentors in the US did not follow policies at home which they now prescribe for other countries. Ron Brown‘s remarks summaries the importance of policy-makers in the US place on higher education as a vehicle for upward mobility, for the poorer sectors of their population. Even today, a majority of Americans study in state-run institutions. Some of these Michigan, Illinois, Ohio, Wisconsin and Texas, are among the best in world. The annual tuition charged from state residents (about $ 5000 a year) is about a month‘s salary paid to a lecturer. Even this fee is waived for most students. In addition, students receive stipends for books, food and hostel charges. The basic principle is that no student who gets admission to a university should have to depend on parental support if it is not available. Ron Brown‘s remarks went unnoticed in India. Every other day some luminary or the other opines that universities and technical education institutions should increase their charges and that such education should not be subsidized. Most editorials echo these sentiments. Eminent industrialists pontificate that we should run educational institutions like business houses. Visiting experts from the Bank and the IMF, in their newly emerging concern for the poor, advise us to divert funds from higher education to primary education. Q. What was the outcome of the US strategy of imparting free university education to US citizens?

Education was easily accessible to the vast majority.

US citizens found it unaffordable and expensive.

US economy suffered due to such a lopsided decision.

Passage: A few weeks ago I ran into an old friend who currently one of t he mandarins deciding India‘s economic and financial policies. He asked, ―And so, how is IIT doing? As one can only indulge in friendly banter at such gatherings, I responded with, ―Not so well actually. Your market-friendly policies have forced us to raise the fee, so we have 50% fewer PhD applicants this year. Not batting an eyelid, he shot back: ―Obviously. Your PhD students don‘t have any market value. Taken aback, I shifted to a more serious tone and tried to start a discussion on the need for research in these globalised times. But he had already walked away. The last word on the imperatives of the ‘market ‘had been spoken. Actually, this view f higher education should not have surprised me. Worthies who look at everything as consumer products classify higher education as a ‘non-merit ‘good. Non-merit goods are those where only the individual benefits from acquiring them and not the society as a whole. Multilateral agencies like the World Bank have too been pushing countries like India to stop subsidies to higher education. When Ron Brown, former US commerce secretary visited India, a public meeting was organized at IIT Delhi. At that meeting I asked him: ―I understand that since the 19th century all the way up to the 1970s, most land grant and state universities in the US virtually provided free education to state citizens. Was that good for the economy, or should they have charged high fees in the early 20th century? He replied, ―It was great for the economy. It was one of the best things that the US government did at that particular time in American history building institutions of higher education which were accessible to the masses of the people. I think it is one of the reasons why our economy grew and prospered , one of the ways in which the US was able to close some of its social gaps. So people who lived in rural areas would have the same kind of access to higher education as people living in other parts of the country. It was one of the reasons for making America strong. Our policy-makers seem unaware that their mentors in the US did not follow policies at home which they now prescribe for other countries. Ron Brown‘s remarks summaries the importance of policy-makers in the US place on higher education as a vehicle for upward mobility, for the poorer sectors of their population. Even today, a majority of Americans study in state-run institutions. Some of these Michigan, Illinois, Ohio, Wisconsin and Texas, are among the best in world. The annual tuition charged from state residents (about $ 5000 a year) is about a month‘s salary paid to a lecturer. Even this fee is waived for most students. In addition, students receive stipends for books, food and hostel charges. The basic principle is that no student who gets admission to a university should have to depend on parental support if it is not available. Ron Brown‘s remarks went unnoticed in India. Every other day some luminary or the other opines that universities and technical education institutions should increase their charges and that such education should not be subsidized. Most editorials echo these sentiments. Eminent industrialists pontificate that we should run educational institutions like business houses. Visiting experts from the Bank and the IMF, in their newly emerging concern for the poor, advise us to divert funds from higher education to primary education. Q. Multilateral agencies like The World Bank have been

Pressurizing India and other countries to stop substantial higher education

Insisting on discontinuance of subsidies to higher education

Analyzing the possibilities of increasing subsidies to higher learning

Emphasizing on the needs of lowering fees for higher education

Passage: The rapid and unprecedented changes in the external environment such as liberalization of the economy, globalization of international markets, and deregulation of the financial system and implications of various clauses under WTO exerted considerable pressure on the agricultural system. The inadequate levels of capital formation in the agricultural sector, distancing of farm technologies from requirements of the market, inadequate and untimely supply of credit and post-harvest losses are the worrying factors. Agricultural sector employs about 64% of the workforce, contributes 27.4% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and accounts for about 18% share of the value of the country‘s exports. It supplies bulk of wage goods required by non-agricultural sector and raw material for a large section of the industry. In terms of gross fertilizer consumption, India ranks 4th in the world after USA, Russia and China. The country has the largest area in the world under pulse crops while in the field of cotton; India is the first to evolve a cotton hybrid. In 1996-97, the per capital net availability of foodgrains touched 528.77gms, which was a mere 395gms at the time of India‘s independence. Therefore, it has a vital place in the economic development of the country. Significant strides have been made in agricultural production towards ensuring food security. There has been a significant improvement in agricultural productivity which has helped in reducing rural poverty. The trend in the growth of foodgrain production, particularly in high productivity areas like Haryana and Punjab, is on the decline. Agricultural productivity in the Eastern region, excepting West Bengal, is low, and it is mainly attributed to weak infrastructure. Indian agriculture is also on the threshold of becoming globally competitive and is in a position to make major gains in the export market. Foodgrains account for 63% of country‘s agricultural output and hence even a marginal production has ‘ripple effect‘on the rest of the economy. IN 1997, the foodgrains output was 199 million tones but in 1998 it was lowered by over 4 million tones owing to a fall in the pulse production. Initiatives for increasing the production and productivity of cereal crops on the basis of cropping systems approach continued during the year 1996-97. In 1997-98, 31.2 million tones of coarse cereals were produced. However, barring the record production of 69.3 million tonnes of wheat in 1996-97, the production of wheat at 66.5 million tonnes in 1997-98 and expected rice production at 83.5 million tones is said to be the highest ever. Procurement of wheat during the rabbi marketing season 1998-99 touched a record high of 10.61 million tonnes. Pulses production in the country has been stagnating around 8-14 million tonnes for the last 40 years. The production of pulses is expected to be about 13 million tonnes in 1997-98 compared to 13.19 million tonnes during 1995-96. The adverse agro-climatic conditions have had their impact on the production of commercial crops. The production of 9 major oilseeds in 1997-98 is expected to be 24 million tonnes, as compared to 25 million tonnes in 1996-97 and 22.4 million tonnes in ‘95-96. Among the nine oilseed crops grown in the country, groundnut and rasped/mustard together account for 62% of the total oilseeds production. The production of groundnut and rapeseed and mustard is expected to touch 8 million and 6 million tonnes compared to 9 million and 7 million tonnes in 1996-97. Q. The author has mentioned the following factors that influenced the agricultural system EXCEPT

Bringing international markets together

Freeing various economic activities from restrictions

Automation in agro and industrial sectors

Deregulation of financial system

Passage: The rapid and unprecedented changes in the external environment such as liberalization of the economy, globalization of international markets, and deregulation of the financial system and implications of various clauses under WTO exerted considerable pressure on the agricultural system. The inadequate levels of capital formation in the agricultural sector, distancing of farm technologies from requirements of the market, inadequate and untimely supply of credit and post-harvest losses are the worrying factors. Agricultural sector employs about 64% of the workforce, contributes 27.4% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and accounts for about 18% share of the value of the country‘s exports. It supplies bulk of wage goods required by non-agricultural sector and raw material for a large section of the industry. In terms of gross fertilizer consumption, India ranks 4th in the world after USA, Russia and China. The country has the largest area in the world under pulse crops while in the field of cotton; India is the first to evolve a cotton hybrid. In 1996-97, the per capital net availability of foodgrains touched 528.77gms, which was a mere 395gms at the time of India‘s independence. Therefore, it has a vital place in the economic development of the country. Significant strides have been made in agricultural production towards ensuring food security. There has been a significant improvement in agricultural productivity which has helped in reducing rural poverty. The trend in the growth of foodgrain production, particularly in high productivity areas like Haryana and Punjab, is on the decline. Agricultural productivity in the Eastern region, excepting West Bengal, is low, and it is mainly attributed to weak infrastructure. Indian agriculture is also on the threshold of becoming globally competitive and is in a position to make major gains in the export market. Foodgrains account for 63% of country‘s agricultural output and hence even a marginal production has ‘ripple effect‘on the rest of the economy. IN 1997, the foodgrains output was 199 million tones but in 1998 it was lowered by over 4 million tones owing to a fall in the pulse production. Initiatives for increasing the production and productivity of cereal crops on the basis of cropping systems approach continued during the year 1996-97. In 1997-98, 31.2 million tones of coarse cereals were produced. However, barring the record production of 69.3 million tonnes of wheat in 1996-97, the production of wheat at 66.5 million tonnes in 1997-98 and expected rice production at 83.5 million tones is said to be the highest ever. Procurement of wheat during the rabbi marketing season 1998-99 touched a record high of 10.61 million tonnes. Pulses production in the country has been stagnating around 8-14 million tonnes for the last 40 years. The production of pulses is expected to be about 13 million tonnes in 1997-98 compared to 13.19 million tonnes during 1995-96. The adverse agro-climatic conditions have had their impact on the production of commercial crops. The production of 9 major oilseeds in 1997-98 is expected to be 24 million tonnes, as compared to 25 million tonnes in 1996-97 and 22.4 million tonnes in ‘95-96. Among the nine oilseed crops grown in the country, groundnut and rasped/mustard together account for 62% of the total oilseeds production. The production of groundnut and rapeseed and mustard is expected to touch 8 million and 6 million tonnes compared to 9 million and 7 million tonnes in 1996-97. Q. Which of the following is TRUE about China?

It has the largest area under pulse crops.

It exceeds India‘s gross fertilizer consumption.

It is just a rank below in gross fertilizer consumption.

It is just a rank after India to evolve a cotton hybrid

Passage: The rapid and unprecedented changes in the external environment such as liberalization of the economy, globalization of international markets, and deregulation of the financial system and implications of various clauses under WTO exerted considerable pressure on the agricultural system. The inadequate levels of capital formation in the agricultural sector, distancing of farm technologies from requirements of the market, inadequate and untimely supply of credit and post-harvest losses are the worrying factors. Agricultural sector employs about 64% of the workforce, contributes 27.4% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and accounts for about 18% share of the value of the country‘s exports. It supplies bulk of wage goods required by non-agricultural sector and raw material for a large section of the industry. In terms of gross fertilizer consumption, India ranks 4th in the world after USA, Russia and China. The country has the largest area in the world under pulse crops while in the field of cotton; India is the first to evolve a cotton hybrid. In 1996-97, the per capital net availability of foodgrains touched 528.77gms, which was a mere 395gms at the time of India‘s independence. Therefore, it has a vital place in the economic development of the country. Significant strides have been made in agricultural production towards ensuring food security. There has been a significant improvement in agricultural productivity which has helped in reducing rural poverty. The trend in the growth of foodgrain production, particularly in high productivity areas like Haryana and Punjab, is on the decline. Agricultural productivity in the Eastern region, excepting West Bengal, is low, and it is mainly attributed to weak infrastructure. Indian agriculture is also on the threshold of becoming globally competitive and is in a position to make major gains in the export market. Foodgrains account for 63% of country‘s agricultural output and hence even a marginal production has ‘ripple effect‘on the rest of the economy. IN 1997, the foodgrains output was 199 million tones but in 1998 it was lowered by over 4 million tones owing to a fall in the pulse production. Initiatives for increasing the production and productivity of cereal crops on the basis of cropping systems approach continued during the year 1996-97. In 1997-98, 31.2 million tones of coarse cereals were produced. However, barring the record production of 69.3 million tonnes of wheat in 1996-97, the production of wheat at 66.5 million tonnes in 1997-98 and expected rice production at 83.5 million tones is said to be the highest ever. Procurement of wheat during the rabbi marketing season 1998-99 touched a record high of 10.61 million tonnes. Pulses production in the country has been stagnating around 8-14 million tonnes for the last 40 years. The production of pulses is expected to be about 13 million tonnes in 1997-98 compared to 13.19 million tonnes during 1995-96. The adverse agro-climatic conditions have had their impact on the production of commercial crops. The production of 9 major oilseeds in 1997-98 is expected to be 24 million tonnes, as compared to 25 million tonnes in 1996-97 and 22.4 million tonnes in ‘95-96. Among the nine oilseed crops grown in the country, groundnut and rasped/mustard together account for 62% of the total oilseeds production. The production of groundnut and rapeseed and mustard is expected to touch 8 million and 6 million tonnes compared to 9 million and 7 million tonnes in 1996-97. Q. Decline in production of commercial crops is mainly due to

Want of timely procurement of food grains

Reduction in production of oilseed crops

Passage: The rapid and unprecedented changes in the external environment such as liberalization of the economy, globalization of international markets, and deregulation of the financial system and implications of various clauses under WTO exerted considerable pressure on the agricultural system. The inadequate levels of capital formation in the agricultural sector, distancing of farm technologies from requirements of the market, inadequate and untimely supply of credit and post-harvest losses are the worrying factors. Agricultural sector employs about 64% of the workforce, contributes 27.4% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and accounts for about 18% share of the value of the country‘s exports. It supplies bulk of wage goods required by non-agricultural sector and raw material for a large section of the industry. In terms of gross fertilizer consumption, India ranks 4th in the world after USA, Russia and China. The country has the largest area in the world under pulse crops while in the field of cotton; India is the first to evolve a cotton hybrid. In 1996-97, the per capital net availability of foodgrains touched 528.77gms, which was a mere 395gms at the time of India‘s independence. Therefore, it has a vital place in the economic development of the country. Significant strides have been made in agricultural production towards ensuring food security. There has been a significant improvement in agricultural productivity which has helped in reducing rural poverty. The trend in the growth of foodgrain production, particularly in high productivity areas like Haryana and Punjab, is on the decline. Agricultural productivity in the Eastern region, excepting West Bengal, is low, and it is mainly attributed to weak infrastructure. Indian agriculture is also on the threshold of becoming globally competitive and is in a position to make major gains in the export market. Foodgrains account for 63% of country‘s agricultural output and hence even a marginal production has ‘ripple effect‘on the rest of the economy. IN 1997, the foodgrains output was 199 million tones but in 1998 it was lowered by over 4 million tones owing to a fall in the pulse production. Initiatives for increasing the production and productivity of cereal crops on the basis of cropping systems approach continued during the year 1996-97. In 1997-98, 31.2 million tones of coarse cereals were produced. However, barring the record production of 69.3 million tonnes of wheat in 1996-97, the production of wheat at 66.5 million tonnes in 1997-98 and expected rice production at 83.5 million tones is said to be the highest ever. Procurement of wheat during the rabbi marketing season 1998-99 touched a record high of 10.61 million tonnes. Pulses production in the country has been stagnating around 8-14 million tonnes for the last 40 years. The production of pulses is expected to be about 13 million tonnes in 1997-98 compared to 13.19 million tonnes during 1995-96. The adverse agro-climatic conditions have had their impact on the production of commercial crops. The production of 9 major oilseeds in 1997-98 is expected to be 24 million tonnes, as compared to 25 million tonnes in 1996-97 and 22.4 million tonnes in ‘95-96. Among the nine oilseed crops grown in the country, groundnut and rasped/mustard together account for 62% of the total oilseeds production. The production of groundnut and rapeseed and mustard is expected to touch 8 million and 6 million tonnes compared to 9 million and 7 million tonnes in 1996-97. Q. According to the passage, how is agro sector helpful to other industries?

It utilizes 64% of the workforce.

It contributes to more than one-fourth of the GDP.

It contributes to about 18% of the value of the country‘s exports.

It provides raw material to various industries.

Passage: The rapid and unprecedented changes in the external environment such as liberalization of the economy, globalization of international markets, and deregulation of the financial system and implications of various clauses under WTO exerted considerable pressure on the agricultural system. The inadequate levels of capital formation in the agricultural sector, distancing of farm technologies from requirements of the market, inadequate and untimely supply of credit and post-harvest losses are the worrying factors. Agricultural sector employs about 64% of the workforce, contributes 27.4% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and accounts for about 18% share of the value of the country‘s exports. It supplies bulk of wage goods required by non-agricultural sector and raw material for a large section of the industry. In terms of gross fertilizer consumption, India ranks 4th in the world after USA, Russia and China. The country has the largest area in the world under pulse crops while in the field of cotton; India is the first to evolve a cotton hybrid. In 1996-97, the per capital net availability of foodgrains touched 528.77gms, which was a mere 395gms at the time of India‘s independence. Therefore, it has a vital place in the economic development of the country. Significant strides have been made in agricultural production towards ensuring food security. There has been a significant improvement in agricultural productivity which has helped in reducing rural poverty. The trend in the growth of foodgrain production, particularly in high productivity areas like Haryana and Punjab, is on the decline. Agricultural productivity in the Eastern region, excepting West Bengal, is low, and it is mainly attributed to weak infrastructure. Indian agriculture is also on the threshold of becoming globally competitive and is in a position to make major gains in the export market. Foodgrains account for 63% of country‘s agricultural output and hence even a marginal production has ‘ripple effect‘on the rest of the economy. IN 1997, the foodgrains output was 199 million tones but in 1998 it was lowered by over 4 million tones owing to a fall in the pulse production. Initiatives for increasing the production and productivity of cereal crops on the basis of cropping systems approach continued during the year 1996-97. In 1997-98, 31.2 million tones of coarse cereals were produced. However, barring the record production of 69.3 million tonnes of wheat in 1996-97, the production of wheat at 66.5 million tonnes in 1997-98 and expected rice production at 83.5 million tones is said to be the highest ever. Procurement of wheat during the rabbi marketing season 1998-99 touched a record high of 10.61 million tonnes. Pulses production in the country has been stagnating around 8-14 million tonnes for the last 40 years. The production of pulses is expected to be about 13 million tonnes in 1997-98 compared to 13.19 million tonnes during 1995-96. The adverse agro-climatic conditions have had their impact on the production of commercial crops. The production of 9 major oilseeds in 1997-98 is expected to be 24 million tonnes, as compared to 25 million tonnes in 1996-97 and 22.4 million tonnes in ‘95-96. Among the nine oilseed crops grown in the country, groundnut and rasped/mustard together account for 62% of the total oilseeds production. The production of groundnut and rapeseed and mustard is expected to touch 8 million and 6 million tonnes compared to 9 million and 7 million tonnes in 1996-97. Q. What is the author‘s assessment about Indian agriculture in terms of the world scenario?

It is not gaining the desirable impact.

It is likely to show only a marginal increase in production

It will fetch reasonable gain by way of exports.

It is on the fourth position in global competition.

Passage: The rapid and unprecedented changes in the external environment such as liberalization of the economy, globalization of international markets, and deregulation of the financial system and implications of various clauses under WTO exerted considerable pressure on the agricultural system. The inadequate levels of capital formation in the agricultural sector, distancing of farm technologies from requirements of the market, inadequate and untimely supply of credit and post-harvest losses are the worrying factors. Agricultural sector employs about 64% of the workforce, contributes 27.4% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and accounts for about 18% share of the value of the country‘s exports. It supplies bulk of wage goods required by non-agricultural sector and raw material for a large section of the industry. In terms of gross fertilizer consumption, India ranks 4th in the world after USA, Russia and China. The country has the largest area in the world under pulse crops while in the field of cotton; India is the first to evolve a cotton hybrid. In 1996-97, the per capital net availability of foodgrains touched 528.77gms, which was a mere 395gms at the time of India‘s independence. Therefore, it has a vital place in the economic development of the country. Significant strides have been made in agricultural production towards ensuring food security. There has been a significant improvement in agricultural productivity which has helped in reducing rural poverty. The trend in the growth of foodgrain production, particularly in high productivity areas like Haryana and Punjab, is on the decline. Agricultural productivity in the Eastern region, excepting West Bengal, is low, and it is mainly attributed to weak infrastructure. Indian agriculture is also on the threshold of becoming globally competitive and is in a position to make major gains in the export market. Foodgrains account for 63% of country‘s agricultural output and hence even a marginal production has ‘ripple effect‘on the rest of the economy. IN 1997, the foodgrains output was 199 million tones but in 1998 it was lowered by over 4 million tones owing to a fall in the pulse production. Initiatives for increasing the production and productivity of cereal crops on the basis of cropping systems approach continued during the year 1996-97. In 1997-98, 31.2 million tones of coarse cereals were produced. However, barring the record production of 69.3 million tonnes of wheat in 1996-97, the production of wheat at 66.5 million tonnes in 1997-98 and expected rice production at 83.5 million tones is said to be the highest ever. Procurement of wheat during the rabbi marketing season 1998-99 touched a record high of 10.61 million tonnes. Pulses production in the country has been stagnating around 8-14 million tonnes for the last 40 years. The production of pulses is expected to be about 13 million tonnes in 1997-98 compared to 13.19 million tonnes during 1995-96. The adverse agro-climatic conditions have had their impact on the production of commercial crops. The production of 9 major oilseeds in 1997-98 is expected to be 24 million tonnes, as compared to 25 million tonnes in 1996-97 and 22.4 million tonnes in ‘95-96. Among the nine oilseed crops grown in the country, groundnut and rasped/mustard together account for 62% of the total oilseeds production. The production of groundnut and rapeseed and mustard is expected to touch 8 million and 6 million tonnes compared to 9 million and 7 million tonnes in 1996-97. Q. The sharp decline in foodgrain production in 1998 over its preceding year is attributed to

Increasing productivity of cereal crops

Sub-standard production of cereals

Decrease in the pulse production

Passage: The rapid and unprecedented changes in the external environment such as liberalization of the economy, globalization of international markets, and deregulation of the financial system and implications of various clauses under WTO exerted considerable pressure on the agricultural system. The inadequate levels of capital formation in the agricultural sector, distancing of farm technologies from requirements of the market, inadequate and untimely supply of credit and post-harvest losses are the worrying factors. Agricultural sector employs about 64% of the workforce, contributes 27.4% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and accounts for about 18% share of the value of the country‘s exports. It supplies bulk of wage goods required by non-agricultural sector and raw material for a large section of the industry. In terms of gross fertilizer consumption, India ranks 4th in the world after USA, Russia and China. The country has the largest area in the world under pulse crops while in the field of cotton; India is the first to evolve a cotton hybrid. In 1996-97, the per capital net availability of foodgrains touched 528.77gms, which was a mere 395gms at the time of India‘s independence. Therefore, it has a vital place in the economic development of the country. Significant strides have been made in agricultural production towards ensuring food security. There has been a significant improvement in agricultural productivity which has helped in reducing rural poverty. The trend in the growth of foodgrain production, particularly in high productivity areas like Haryana and Punjab, is on the decline. Agricultural productivity in the Eastern region, excepting West Bengal, is low, and it is mainly attributed to weak infrastructure. Indian agriculture is also on the threshold of becoming globally competitive and is in a position to make major gains in the export market. Foodgrains account for 63% of country‘s agricultural output and hence even a marginal production has ‘ripple effect‘on the rest of the economy. IN 1997, the foodgrains output was 199 million tones but in 1998 it was lowered by over 4 million tones owing to a fall in the pulse production. Initiatives for increasing the production and productivity of cereal crops on the basis of cropping systems approach continued during the year 1996-97. In 1997-98, 31.2 million tones of coarse cereals were produced. However, barring the record production of 69.3 million tonnes of wheat in 1996-97, the production of wheat at 66.5 million tonnes in 1997-98 and expected rice production at 83.5 million tones is said to be the highest ever. Procurement of wheat during the rabbi marketing season 1998-99 touched a record high of 10.61 million tonnes. Pulses production in the country has been stagnating around 8-14 million tonnes for the last 40 years. The production of pulses is expected to be about 13 million tonnes in 1997-98 compared to 13.19 million tonnes during 1995-96. The adverse agro-climatic conditions have had their impact on the production of commercial crops. The production of 9 major oilseeds in 1997-98 is expected to be 24 million tonnes, as compared to 25 million tonnes in 1996-97 and 22.4 million tonnes in ‘95-96. Among the nine oilseed crops grown in the country, groundnut and rasped/mustard together account for 62% of the total oilseeds production. The production of groundnut and rapeseed and mustard is expected to touch 8 million and 6 million tonnes compared to 9 million and 7 million tonnes in 1996-97. Q. What is the impact of increase in food and other agro-production, according to the passage?

Total elimination of rural poverty in the entire country

Haryana and Punjab have shown a decline in food production.

West Bengal has improved in food grains production.

Passage: The rapid and unprecedented changes in the external environment such as liberalization of the economy, globalization of international markets, and deregulation of the financial system and implications of various clauses under WTO exerted considerable pressure on the agricultural system. The inadequate levels of capital formation in the agricultural sector, distancing of farm technologies from requirements of the market, inadequate and untimely supply of credit and post-harvest losses are the worrying factors. Agricultural sector employs about 64% of the workforce, contributes 27.4% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and accounts for about 18% share of the value of the country‘s exports. It supplies bulk of wage goods required by non-agricultural sector and raw material for a large section of the industry. In terms of gross fertilizer consumption, India ranks 4th in the world after USA, Russia and China. The country has the largest area in the world under pulse crops while in the field of cotton; India is the first to evolve a cotton hybrid. In 1996-97, the per capital net availability of foodgrains touched 528.77gms, which was a mere 395gms at the time of India‘s independence. Therefore, it has a vital place in the economic development of the country. Significant strides have been made in agricultural production towards ensuring food security. There has been a significant improvement in agricultural productivity which has helped in reducing rural poverty. The trend in the growth of foodgrain production, particularly in high productivity areas like Haryana and Punjab, is on the decline. Agricultural productivity in the Eastern region, excepting West Bengal, is low, and it is mainly attributed to weak infrastructure. Indian agriculture is also on the threshold of becoming globally competitive and is in a position to make major gains in the export market. Foodgrains account for 63% of country‘s agricultural output and hence even a marginal production has ‘ripple effect‘on the rest of the economy. IN 1997, the foodgrains output was 199 million tones but in 1998 it was lowered by over 4 million tones owing to a fall in the pulse production. Initiatives for increasing the production and productivity of cereal crops on the basis of cropping systems approach continued during the year 1996-97. In 1997-98, 31.2 million tones of coarse cereals were produced. However, barring the record production of 69.3 million tonnes of wheat in 1996-97, the production of wheat at 66.5 million tonnes in 1997-98 and expected rice production at 83.5 million tones is said to be the highest ever. Procurement of wheat during the rabbi marketing season 1998-99 touched a record high of 10.61 million tonnes. Pulses production in the country has been stagnating around 8-14 million tonnes for the last 40 years. The production of pulses is expected to be about 13 million tonnes in 1997-98 compared to 13.19 million tonnes during 1995-96. The adverse agro-climatic conditions have had their impact on the production of commercial crops. The production of 9 major oilseeds in 1997-98 is expected to be 24 million tonnes, as compared to 25 million tonnes in 1996-97 and 22.4 million tonnes in ‘95-96. Among the nine oilseed crops grown in the country, groundnut and rasped/mustard together account for 62% of the total oilseeds production. The production of groundnut and rapeseed and mustard is expected to touch 8 million and 6 million tonnes compared to 9 million and 7 million tonnes in 1996-97. Q. What, according to the passage, is the ‘RIPPLE EFFECT‘?

Increase in foodgrains leads to over consumption and in effect generates pressure on economy

Substantial influence on certain things; slight decrease or increase in certain other things

Decrease in production of one commodity because of decrease in production of some other commodity

Increase in production of one commodity due to decrease in production of some other commodity.

Passage: The rapid and unprecedented changes in the external environment such as liberalization of the economy, globalization of international markets, and deregulation of the financial system and implications of various clauses under WTO exerted considerable pressure on the agricultural system. The inadequate levels of capital formation in the agricultural sector, distancing of farm technologies from requirements of the market, inadequate and untimely supply of credit and post-harvest losses are the worrying factors. Agricultural sector employs about 64% of the workforce, contributes 27.4% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and accounts for about 18% share of the value of the country‘s exports. It supplies bulk of wage goods required by non-agricultural sector and raw material for a large section of the industry. In terms of gross fertilizer consumption, India ranks 4th in the world after USA, Russia and China. The country has the largest area in the world under pulse crops while in the field of cotton; India is the first to evolve a cotton hybrid. In 1996-97, the per capital net availability of foodgrains touched 528.77gms, which was a mere 395gms at the time of India‘s independence. Therefore, it has a vital place in the economic development of the country. Significant strides have been made in agricultural production towards ensuring food security. There has been a significant improvement in agricultural productivity which has helped in reducing rural poverty. The trend in the growth of foodgrain production, particularly in high productivity areas like Haryana and Punjab, is on the decline. Agricultural productivity in the Eastern region, excepting West Bengal, is low, and it is mainly attributed to weak infrastructure. Indian agriculture is also on the threshold of becoming globally competitive and is in a position to make major gains in the export market. Foodgrains account for 63% of country‘s agricultural output and hence even a marginal production has ‘ripple effect‘on the rest of the economy. IN 1997, the foodgrains output was 199 million tones but in 1998 it was lowered by over 4 million tones owing to a fall in the pulse production. Initiatives for increasing the production and productivity of cereal crops on the basis of cropping systems approach continued during the year 1996-97. In 1997-98, 31.2 million tones of coarse cereals were produced. However, barring the record production of 69.3 million tonnes of wheat in 1996-97, the production of wheat at 66.5 million tonnes in 1997-98 and expected rice production at 83.5 million tones is said to be the highest ever. Procurement of wheat during the rabbi marketing season 1998-99 touched a record high of 10.61 million tonnes. Pulses production in the country has been stagnating around 8-14 million tonnes for the last 40 years. The production of pulses is expected to be about 13 million tonnes in 1997-98 compared to 13.19 million tonnes during 1995-96. The adverse agro-climatic conditions have had their impact on the production of commercial crops. The production of 9 major oilseeds in 1997-98 is expected to be 24 million tonnes, as compared to 25 million tonnes in 1996-97 and 22.4 million tonnes in ‘95-96. Among the nine oilseed crops grown in the country, groundnut and rasped/mustard together account for 62% of the total oilseeds production. The production of groundnut and rapeseed and mustard is expected to touch 8 million and 6 million tonnes compared to 9 million and 7 million tonnes in 1996-97. Q. Which of the following is FALSE in the context of this passage?

Farm technologies are not in contrast with market requirements.

Capital formation in agricultural sector is less than required.

The supply of credit to agro-sector is less and ill-timed

Mechanism of compensation for crop losses is not adequate

English MOCK Test (New Pattern) - 9 Free MCQ Practice Test with Solutions

EduRev

All Courses

Open App

Important Questions for English MOCK Test (New Pattern) - 9

Find all the important questions for English MOCK Test (New Pattern) - 9 at EduRev.Get fully prepared for English MOCK Test (New Pattern) - 9 with EduRev's comprehensive question bank and test resources. Our platform offers a diverse range of question papers covering various topics within the English MOCK Test (New Pattern) - 9 syllabus. Whether you need to review specific subjects or assess your overall readiness, EduRev has you covered. The questions are designed to challenge you and help you gain confidence in tackling the actual exam. Maximize your chances of success by utilizing EduRev's extensive collection of English MOCK Test (New Pattern) - 9 resources.

English MOCK Test (New Pattern) - 9 MCQs with Answers

Prepare for the English MOCK Test (New Pattern) - 9 within the CLAT exam with comprehensive MCQs and answers at EduRev. Our platform offers a wide range of practice papers, question papers, and mock tests to familiarize you with the exam pattern and syllabus. Access the best books, study materials, and notes curated by toppers to enhance your preparation. Stay updated with the exam date and receive expert preparation tips and paper analysis. Visit EduRev's official website today and access a wealth of videos and coaching resources to excel in your exam.

Online Tests for English MOCK Test (New Pattern) - 9

Practice with a wide array of question papers that follow the exam pattern and syllabus. Our platform offers a user-friendly interface, allowing you to track your progress and identify areas for improvement. Access detailed solutions and explanations for each test to enhance your understanding of concepts. With EduRev's Online Tests, you can build confidence, boost your performance, and ace English MOCK Test (New Pattern) - 9 with ease. Join thousands of successful students who have benefited from our trusted online resources.

Education Revolution