Question

Which region showed the highest growth in number of households in all the income categories for the period?

• A. North
• B. South
• C. West
• D. None of these
• A. Rs. 50 lakh
• B. Cannot be determined
• C. Rs. 300 million
• D. Rs. 500 million
• A. 100%
• B. Cannot be determined
• C. 240%
• D. 200%
• A. Rs. 75,000
• B. Rs. 25,000
• C. Rs. 2,25,000
• D. Cannot be determined
• A. Rs. 37,727
• B. Rs. 37,277
• C. Rs. 35,000
• D. Cannot be determined

Answer 1

The Correct Option is B

To determine which region showed the highest growth in the number of households in all income categories, we need to consider the percentage growth in each region for the three categories (middle income, upper-middle income, and high income).
From the bar chart, we can see that South has the highest percentage growth in all three categories:
- For the middle income category, the growth is over 300%.
- For the upper-middle income category, the growth is also the highest in South.
- For the high income category, South again has the highest growth.
Thus, the correct answer is South.

Answer 2

Step 1: Read the data:
Upper-middle class: 10 thousand households in 1987-88, average household income Rs. 50,000 in 1987-88, growth in average income 60% (1994-95 over 1987-88). The bar chart shows that the number of upper-middle-class households in the North grew by 200%.

Step 2: Work out the total income in each year:
1987-88: \(10{,}000 \times 50{,}000 = \text{Rs. } 500\) million.
1994-95: households \(= 10{,}000 \times 3 = 30{,}000\); average income \(= 50{,}000 \times 1.6 = 80{,}000\); total \(= 30{,}000 \times 80{,}000 = \text{Rs. } 2400\) million.

Step 3: Decide:
The two years give different totals (Rs. 500 million and Rs. 2400 million), and the question does not name the year. Rs. 300 million and Rs. 50 lakh do not arise in either year. So the total household income cannot be determined from the information given.

Final Answer:
The correct option is (2): Cannot be determined

Answer 3

Step 1: Know what the chart shows:
The bar chart gives the percentage growth in the number of households between 1987-88 and 1994-95, for each income category and region.

Step 2: Read the North, upper-middle-class bar:
The orange bar (Upper Middle Income Category) for the North stands at the 200 gridline, so the number of such households increased by 200%.

Step 3: Check the other options:
The 60% in the table is the growth in average income, not in the number of households, so it is not to be used here. 100% is the North middle-income bar and 240% matches no bar for the North. As the value is read directly from the chart, the answer can be determined.

Final Answer:
The correct option is (4): 200%

Answer 4

The average household income of the high-income group in 1987-88 is provided directly in the table: \[ \text{Average income of high-income group} = Rs. 75,000 \] Thus, the correct answer is Rs. 75,000.

Answer 5

Step 1: Collect the 1987-88 data from the table:
Middle income: 40 thousand households, average income Rs. 30,000.
Upper-middle: 10 thousand households, average income Rs. 50,000.
High income: 5 thousand households, average income Rs. 75,000.

Step 2: Find the total income and total households:
Total households \(= 40 + 10 + 5 = 55\) thousand.
Total income \(= 40 \times 30{,}000 + 10 \times 50{,}000 + 5 \times 75{,}000 = 1{,}200{,}000 + 500{,}000 + 375{,}000 = 2{,}075{,}000\) (in thousands of rupees).

Step 3: Divide:
Average income \(= \dfrac{2{,}075{,}000}{55} = 37{,}727.27 \approx \text{Rs. } 37{,}727\).

Step 4: Check the options:
Rs. 37,277 is the same digits transposed and is a common slip. Rs. 35,000 does not arise from any correct method (the simple average of the three category incomes is 51,667, and the weighted average must be weighted by households). The household numbers are given, so the average can be determined.

Final Answer:
The correct option is (1): Rs. 37,727