English Language Quiz For IBPS & SBI Exam | 25-12-2021

 

Dear Readers,

Mahendras has started special quizzes for IBPS & SBI Exam so that you can practice more and more to crack the examination. This IBPS & SBI Exam special quiz series will mold your preparations in the right direction and the regular practice of these quizzes will be really very helpful in scoring good marks in the Examination. Here we are providing you the important question of reasoning ability for the IBPS & SBI Exam.

1-10. Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it. Certain words have been given in bold to help you locate them while answering some questions.

We saw MLAs of a party and some independents negotiating big money — Rs 5 to 10 crore — for each vote. Of course, they were not being dishonest; just demanding reimbursement of their own election to the Vidhan Sabha! Their party leaders were heard justifying it — “after all, they have to fight an election.”

Anchors and experts were heard advising the Election Commission on what is to be done. Many called the EC toothless and wanted the elections postponed or even cancelled at once, just on the basis of TV reports. “What more proof do you need?” they asked the EC. They referred to a similar case of Jharkhand in 2012 when elections to two RS seats were countermanded.

It’s important to refer to the Jharkhand case as this is the only precedent we have. On a complaint brought by three senior political leaders about rampant horse-trading among MLAs, the EC countermanded the poll. It may be recalled that Jharkhand had become notorious for rich people from outside the state queuing up to buy RS membership.

It was not an easy case for the EC. The biggest concern was that there is no model code of conduct for the RS election as the nature of the election is different. There are no public meetings, rallies, door-to-door canvassing or media campaigns. The constituency is confined to a small electoral college consisting of MLAs. The voting is open so the party MLAs are subject to party discipline but the independents are hot property.

The legal dilemma before the EC in the Jharkhand case was how to prove that the Rs 215 crore that was caught was meant for the election. We thought we would face judicial reprimand if our stand was taken as hasty and conjectural. We decided to bite the bullet. Our gamble paid off.

The Jharkhand HC not only dismissed the writ petition against the order but hailed it as the most decisive action against corruption in 60 years and imposed a fine of Rs one lakh on one of the petitioners.

If the EC concludes that there is prima facie evidence that corruption has vitiated a free and fair election, it has to act. What action is possible? One, order an FIR immediately. Two, postpone the election till the inquiry is sufficiently complete. Three, countermand the election till a conducive atmosphere for a free and fair election is achieved and notify a fresh poll. An unintended consequence of the countermanding will be that the three other seats where the numbers are clear (and the candidates are stalwarts) will also be put on hold. Can this be turned into an opportunity? It may force the two biggest national parties to debate the evil of money power and consider the electoral reforms they have been avoiding.

What are the desirable reforms? Foremost is the amendment of Section 58 of the Representation of the People Act to make abuse of money a ground to countermand the poll, as the EC has demanded. In the Jharkhand case, we had resorted to the plenary power granted by Article 324 of the Constitution. This is a weapon the EC uses sparingly. It’s important that an enabling legal provision is made.

Two, political parties must discuss the overall problem of money power vitiating the election process and carry out necessary electoral reforms. Three, there must be a ceiling on the expenditure by political parties for candidates. Political parties spend crores. And when they spend crores, they need to collect crores.

Four, state funding of political parties, not elections, must be considered while banning private fund collection totally. Based on the number of votes obtained, Rs 100 per vote can be given. Five, domicile condition for candidates that was done away with in 2003 must be restored to stop wealthy candidates from outside the state from jumping into the fray. Six, to prevent cross-voting by horse-trading, the anti-defection law should be amended to declare the violation of the party whip as defection.

It’s a defining moment for India’s democracy. Let’s seize the opportunity. When people lose faith in democracy, the consequences are disastrous. We have enough examples in the neighbourhood.

1 Give a suitable title to the passage?

01. Dilemma before the EC

02. The Jharkhand case

03. Desirable reforms of Jharkhand

04. Seize the scam

05. Electoral reforms

2 Why was it not an easy case for the election commission?

01. The biggest concern was that there is no model code of conduct.

02. There are no public meeting, rallies, door to door canvasing or media campaigns.

03. The constituency is confined to a small electoral college consisting of MLA’s

04. Both 1 and 2

05. All 1, 2 and 3

3 What according to the author is legal dilemma before the election commission in the Jharkhand?

01. The corruption has vitiated a free and fair election.

02. How to prove that? 215 crore that was caught was meant for election

03. Refer to Jharkhand case as this is the only precedent.

04. People losing faith in democracy

05. All of the above

4 Which of the following statement is/are true in context to the passage?

01. Political parties must discuss the overall problem of money power vitiating the election process.

02. There must be a ceiling or the expenditure by political parties for candidates

03. Amendment of section 58 of the representation of the people to make abuse of money

04. Anti-defection law should be amended to declare the violation of the party.

05. All of the above

5 Which of the following options best expresses the phrase ‘bite the bullet’ in context to the passage?

01. Refuse something difficult

02. Back stab a friend

03. Break a promise

04. Accept something difficult

05. Tit for tat

6 How much fine was imposed by Jharkhand HC on one of the petitioners?

01. 5 lakh

02. 1 crore

03. 2 lakh

04. 1 lakh

05. 1 million

7 Which of the following is the most opposite in meaning to the word ‘reprimand’ as given in the passage?

01. Compliment

02. Rebuke

03. Admonish

04. Blame

05. Censure

8 Which of the following is the most opposite in meaning to the word ‘plenary’ as given in the passage?

01. Partial

02. Entire

03. Absolute

04. Part

05. Limited

9 Which of the following is the most similar in meaning to the word ‘countermand’ as given in the passage?

01. Approve

02. Meet

03. Enforce

04. Allow

05. Annul

10 Which of the following is the most similar in meaning to the word ‘sparingly’ as given in the passage?

01. Roughly

02. Carelessly

03. Difficult

04. Heavily

05. Freely

Answers:-

Q.1 (4)

Q.2 (5)

Q.3 (2)

Q.4 (5)

Q.5 (4)

Q.6 (4)

Q.7 (1)

Q.8 (2)

Q.9 (5)

Q.10 (5)