This is Questions Set #4, under our new segment ‘Clear IAS Mains High Value Answer Writing Test Series’. Mains High Value Answer Writing is a UPSC mains oriented program from ClearIAS.com that consists of 5 questions in each post, published around 8 pm every day. Each of the 5 questions are selected from 5 papers mentioned in UPSC Mains syllabus namely Essay, GS1, GS2, GS3 and GS4 (ethics). Selected questions of high probability to be asked UPSC mains are included in each of these mini tests. Aspirants can choose any question they wish to answer in the comment space provided below, specifying the question number and question topic.
Archives of Clear IAS Mains High Value Answer Writing Test Series
You can access archives of Clear IAS Mains High Value Answer Writing Test Series from the hyperlink. Aspirants are advised to check the model answers and feedback given for previous entries to write better answers.
Questions for Answer Writing – Selections for today:
- Essay Paper: If everybody is thinking alike, then somebody is not thinking. (1500 words)
- GS 1 Paper: [Indian History/Accession of Princely States] – Compare the accession of the three princely states – Kashmir, Junagarh and Hyderabad- to India. (200 words)
- GS 2 Paper: [Self Help Groups] – Analyze the success and failure of Self Help Groups (SHGs) in Indian perspective. (200 words)
- GS 3 Paper: [Internal Security] – Integration of North East Indian states with the Indian mainland is showing positive signs since last decade. Critically analyse. (200 words)
- GS 4 Paper: [Ethics] – Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have a right to do and what is right to do. Comment. (200 words)
Rules and Regulations: Clear IAS Mains High Value Answer Writing
Clear IAS Mains High Value Answer Writing is a free program from ClearIAS.com. Any UPSC aspirant, interested to polish his/her writing skills or to learn the art of writing high value answers to boost the score in UPSC Civil Services Mains can participate in it. The official team from ClearIAS.com may review selected answers, and guide aspirants to improve the answer structure. Fellow aspirants, experienced candidates or toppers can also comment and suggest improvements for each of the answers. The platform is free and open to public with a view of better sharing and learning. You can read more about the Clear IAS Mains High Value Answer Writing Test Series objectives and rules in the hyperlink.
PS: Aspirants can select any question they wish to answer in the comment space provided below specifying the question number and question topic. Answering 3-4 questions, does not take much of your time. But for those who engage regularly in answer writing, the resultant score improvement in actual UPSC exam would be exponential.
3. Self help group is the patha breaking initiative that can transform the lives of millions of poors.In our country poor people usually run to the door of money lenders at the time of financial emergency. To meet the emergency need, SHG evolved.The govt,ngo, corporate sector also involved themselves in SHG. It has emerged in 1980’s with the tremendous support from govt of india, state govt, NABARD, NGO,banking sector and even Indian govt budget oresentation has emphasized on SHG.We have seen many cases of success as it has changed the life of rural people especially women but at the same time failure of SHG points to a no. of causes-
1.We never take into account which gender among different community is the working force and who can be the entrepreneur and decision makers.
2. If we are trying to develop the poor, we must consider male also as the focus is always on women because poverty is similar to all.
3.most of the govt and non govt funds are channelised for the tribal develooment, emphasizes has not been given to different aspects of SHG.
Thus, it is quite necessary to train the workers effectively before making any linkage. Proper planning before utilising fund should be incorporated. Focus should also be given to male as to develop the whole rural India.
Nutan, a decent attempt, but you seem to deviate from the question. The questions was “Analyze the success and failure of Self Help Groups (SHGs) in Indian perspective”.
GS1 paper:
Q2 – [Indian History/Accession of Princely States] – Compare the accession of the three princely states – Kashmir, Junagarh and Hyderabad- to India. (200 words)
Ans – The Indian independence came with many great immediate challenges such as partition of the nation, Hindu-Muslim riots, migration, poor economy, etc. Among these, territorial integration and consolidation was among the most important challenges to deal with utmost priority. This was done with a major success under the leadership of Sardar Patel.
While most of the princely states and British territories had been integrated with relative ease, integration of Kashmir, Junagarh and Hyderabad were faced with greater difficulty and took longer time. Different experiences and circumstances of these states were tackled with different and able approach by the national leadership.
Along with Gandhi, Nehru was also in favour of giving time to Kashmir to decide on the accession issue. But invasion of Kashmir by Pakistan army and tribal insurgents led the Kashmiri king to seek help from India. India agreed to send her forces on the condition of signing of instrument of accession. Thus Kashmir became an integral part of India.
In case of Junagarh, the prince had signed an agreement with Pakistan government to merge Junagarh with Pakistan. However, a referendum was conducted in which people chose to go with India and therefore it was merged with India. Hyderabad state having its own paramilitary forces known as Razakars was acting against the will of the people and necessitated the use of military intervention and then was made part of India.
Raghu,
Altogether good attempt! But you can turn your mains answer into high value by keeping in mind a few things. Take this question as example. The entire first paragraph does not add any value to the question, and hence can be omitted. It helps you to save time. Instead, spend the saved time to add a few more points on the three keywords – Kashmir, Junagarh and Hyderabad. That can take the same answer to a higher class. Hope you got it.
GS1:\
At the time of independence there were more than 500 princely states.
Post independence, a mammoth task was done by Indian leaders under the leadership of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. He convinced all princely states but not Kashmir, Junagarh, hyderabad to accede their foreign realtions, defense and communication to the Indian union. The integration of these 3 states was done after independence by different means.
Jungarh- This was a small state of Saurasthra, not sharing boundary with Pakistan. The Nawab announced accession to Pakistan, even when the people of the state wanted to join India. Then, a popular movement forced the Nawab to flee, and plebscite was conducted there, which went in favour in India. Thus no force or army was used here, public support was sufficient.
Kashmir-Hari Singh was a Hindu ruler and 75% of population was Muslim. Earlier, he declared to be independent of India and Pakistan. But the very next year Pathani tribes leaded by Pakistani extremists entered forcefully towards Srinagar. And he called India for assistance, in return he signed Instrument of Accession with India. Indian army in return pushed the extremists away. Here, force was used,but there was no public support as such.
Hyderabad- Hyderabad was under Nizam. He also declared the state to be independent. And inspired from Pakistan militants, he prepared military army to expand. A standstill agreement was signed with government,and meanwhile he worked to expand military. There was rapid growth in Muslim communal organization, Razkars(militant officers) attacked thousands of people which later took shelter in temporary relief camps by India. And Indian army intruded there and defeated Nizam. Also communists led Telangna farmers helped from inside. This here, both public support and army was used in tandem.
Thanks very much for the feedback. After reading your comment I re-read my answer and realized that the first para is irrelevant in a 200 words answer. Eliminating it also bring the answer within given words limit 🙂
SHGs are the informal associations(especially women) formed with the motive for self empowerment with the power of collective efforts. It has been working since 90’s and achieved mixed results as follows:
Success
1. Increased income per household and spirit of savings
2. Reduced dependency on informal moneylenders who use to charge unreasonable rates
3. Step towards Financial inclusion- via collective guarantee credits with credibility. It is a passage to the formal banking.
4. Gender equality tool- social empowerment and upliftment of women by making them self dependent financially
5. Boost to local works like agarbatti making, handicrafts, artisans work
6. Poverty alleviation tool
Failure
1. Lack of techincal expertise, skills, low scale of production and capital reduces the business unprofitable and less attratice
2. Products formed are not competitive as less value addition is done and adequate marketing is not done
3. Limited to rural areas- need to extend it to urban and peri-urban areas
4. Most of the individuals engaged are poor, and banks are reluctant to give loans making the process with hassles. Bank reach is also not sufficient
5. Lack of institutional and financial sustainability
Thus SHGs have performed well in the past, but much has been left desired. Corporate and SHG link is one such step.
4. The seven sister states as they are popularly called comprising of arunachal pradesh,meghalaya,manipur,mizoram,nagaland and tripura are called north eadt of india.
Since the last decade there has many new proj have been introduced to improve the transport network, roadways, development in the communication infrastructure sector so as to make it an attractive hub for the southeast asian and chinese traders.National highways authority of india under min of road transport and highway has introduced NS-EW corridor.EW corridor will connect northeast to its mainland through higway.From the last decade we have seen many policies and projects have been undertaken for improvement of these areas, earlier it was the backward region.Government has also thought of railways, airways and also waterways.Although these are long term projects but it will enhance and improve trade activities and tourism.Also to facilitate growth of border trade the govt has introduced an export development fund (EDF) fot the northeast traders.
There are many new projects are undergoing but there is a need to improve upon the existing one.road connectivity is extremely poor in the remote areas.National highways are negligible.our govt has taken up many proj to develop NE but still there is a need to utilise the funds allocated and developing the backward areas.
Q. GS 1 Paper: [Indian History/Accession of Princely States] – Compare the accession of the three princely states – Kashmir, Junagarh and Hyderabad- to India. (200 words).
Ans. Junagarh- The Muslim rulers of Junagarh state(Hindu majority population), was willing to go with Pakistan however the in the referendum, carried out on the insistence of India and local demand, majority favored merger with India, so it was annexed to India. No force was used.
Hyderabad- The Nizam, Muslim rulers of Hyderabad( Hindu Majority state) wanted to be a free nation or to annex with Pakistan. However the majority wanted to go with India. The then Indian Govt. asked it to sign the treaty of accession, or to face the military action. While Nehru was out of the country on foreign tour, Sardar Patel exerted military pressure and Nizams signed the treaty of accession. Telangana farmers and public were also vehemently demanding to be part of India.
Kashmir- Kashmir state with majority Muslim population and Hindu Raja(Hari Singh) wanted to be a free nation, however there was pressure from Pakistan to accede. Pakistan moved its army and local tribe to invade Kashmir, Kashmir King asked India for help, India agreed for help and in turn treaty of accession was signed. This was against the local sentiments.
Summarily, in Junagarh only public support was for India and no force was used, in Hyderabad only public support was for India and force was used and in the case of Kashmir public support was not for India only King’s support was there and force was used not against the state but against the invading Pakistan forces.
Q. GS 3 Paper: [Internal Security] – Integration of North East Indian states with the Indian mainland is showing positive signs since last decade. Critically analyse. (200 words)
Ans. Effort for integration of NE Region(NER) States with the Indian mainland was taken by different governments however it got major thrust during Vajpayee era when a separate Dept for NE region was made and mandatory 10% of development expenditure was to be earmarked this region. Afterwards a separate ministry for NER has been formed. All these efforts have started to deliver positive result. New IIT, IIM at Shilong, AIIMS, new benche of Guwahati High Court has been established. faster means of communications are developed. Domestic flights connecting Guwahati airports have increased. Now the longest train of India runs from Northeast to Kerala. However, all these are positive signs are marred by discrimination with NE people in othe mainland cities Delhi etc. Barua committee has also indicated in its report for appropriate legislative major be taken for protection of NE people. Their representation in govt jobs are increasing but at the same time more job opportunities are required to be created.
The integration will be incomplete with the AFSPA being in force so it’s assessment is required. More action is required to check HIV spread, drug abuse.
Amrit, though you have covered most aspects, on Hyderabad and Kashmir there can be better framing of answer. Also some key terms like Pathan tribe, Razakars etc could be added to avoid being too generalized. But overall a nice attempt.
Dear Random, a good answer covering the comparison part within each paragraph. Well done.
Thanks for your continuous guidance.
Good, even though a well balanced answer even now, you can make in a high value answer if you can site some statistics to support. Keep thinking. 🙂
Dear np,
As the question word was “critically analyse”, we would say, you have understood the question well and gave a balanced answer. Good. You have added 2 main points ie. EW corridor and EDF. We suggest to add more points like this so that your answer will stand out as a high value one. All the best!
Lot of good points amrit as always…Keep it up. Definitely a high value answer. We suggest to break the answer into two halves – the first paragraph showing the steps which resulted in better integration, the other half highlighting the existing backwardness. That would make your answer really wonderful, and provide justice to the question word “critically analyse”. All the best
The law provides clear responsibilities andlomits to officials and other individuals responsible for planning and in the case of non-complaince they may be questioned also.
But true dilema comes when an official gets stuck between what is legal and what is ethical. Following skeptical lines may not solve the issue and will lead to m9re complex situation in the long run.
To address this issue, communities often adopt a code of ethical standards which they agree to abide by while serving the public in their official capacity for the common good.
Many organisations and individuals adopt an ethical line not among the employs but also witht he people they interact and ensure that all habe understand it in the true sense.
India is suffering from the policy paralyaia due to weak ethical lines and understanding among the think tanks. Thay’s why a clear code of ethics becomes vital and necessary in addition to assurance and mutual understanding.
Please help this is my first ever attempt for high value question. I need your opinion f9r improvement.
What is the meaning of If everybody is thinking alike, then somebody is not thinking