Comprehension
Rule A: When a State undertakes any measure, the effects of the measure must be the same for all those who are affected by it.
Facts: 100 mountaineers embarked on an extremely risky climbing expedition in Leh. Weather conditions worsened five days into the expedition and the mountaineers are trapped under heavy snow. The government received information of this tragedy only two weeks after the unfortunate incident and has only 24 hours in which to send rescue helicopters. Weather stations across the world confirm that this particular region of Leh will experience blizzards of unprecedented intensity for almost two weeks after this 24 hour window, rendering any helicopter activity in the region impossible and certain death for anyone left behind. The government has only five rescue helicopters with a maximum capacity of 50 people (excluding pilots and requisite soldiers) and these helicopters can fly once in 24 hours to such altitudes.
As the Air Force gets ready to send the helicopters, an emergency hearing is convened in the Supreme Court to challenge this measure as this would leave 50 people to die.
Question: 1
If you were the judge required to apply Rule A, you would decide that:
If you were the judge required to apply Rule A, you would decide that:
Show Hint
When a law requires equal treatment, partial rescue—even if well-intended—may still be unlawful if it treats people differently under the same measure.
Updated On: Aug 11, 2025
- As many lives must be saved as possible.
- If everyone cannot be rescued, then everyone must be left behind.
- A measure cannot be upheld at the cost of 50 lives.
- It must be left to those who are trapped to decide if they want half amongst them to be saved and leave the rest to die.
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
Step 1: Analyze Rule A
Rule A says: When a State undertakes any measure, the effects of the measure must be the same for all those who are affected by it.}
This implies a principle of uniformity and non-discrimination in execution of government measures.
No individual or group should be treated differently from others when the same rule is applied to all.
Step 2: Apply the Rule to the Facts
There are 100 mountaineers stranded.
Only 50 can be rescued due to helicopter limitations.
If only 50 are rescued, the measure (rescue) does not equally affect all; it divides the group arbitrarily.
According to Rule A, such a rescue operation would be legally unjustified, as its benefit (rescue) is not extended equally.
Step 3: Eliminate Incorrect Options
(a) Violates Rule A — saving "as many as possible" treats only part of the group equally, not all.
(c) Violates the equality principle — it focuses on consequence, not fairness.
(d) Delegating the decision to the trapped mountaineers is not a legal solution under Rule A — the State must apply the law equally.
% Final Answer \[ \boxed{\text{(b)}} \]
Rule A says: When a State undertakes any measure, the effects of the measure must be the same for all those who are affected by it.}
This implies a principle of uniformity and non-discrimination in execution of government measures.
No individual or group should be treated differently from others when the same rule is applied to all.
Step 2: Apply the Rule to the Facts
There are 100 mountaineers stranded.
Only 50 can be rescued due to helicopter limitations.
If only 50 are rescued, the measure (rescue) does not equally affect all; it divides the group arbitrarily.
According to Rule A, such a rescue operation would be legally unjustified, as its benefit (rescue) is not extended equally.
Step 3: Eliminate Incorrect Options
(a) Violates Rule A — saving "as many as possible" treats only part of the group equally, not all.
(c) Violates the equality principle — it focuses on consequence, not fairness.
(d) Delegating the decision to the trapped mountaineers is not a legal solution under Rule A — the State must apply the law equally.
% Final Answer \[ \boxed{\text{(b)}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2
As the government prepares to send in rescue helicopters, which option would be acceptable only under Rule B and not Rule A:
As the government prepares to send in rescue helicopters, which option would be acceptable only under Rule B and not Rule A:
Show Hint
Any policy that pre-selects beneficiaries or excludes others from a rescue lottery \textbf{fails Rule B}, which requires \textbf{equal chance} for all.
Updated On: Aug 11, 2025
- A lottery to choose the 50 survivors excluding those diagnosed with terminal illnesses from participating in the lottery.
- A lottery to decide the 50 survivors with single parents of children below five years of age automatically qualifying to be rescued.
- The 50 youngest people should be rescued.
- None of the above.
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is D
Solution and Explanation
Step 1: Understand the Rules
Rule A: All affected persons must be treated equally in the effect of the measure.
Rule B: All affected persons must have an equal chance to benefit from the State's measure.
Step 2: Analyze Each Option
(a) Excludes terminally ill persons — this violates Rule B because not everyone has an equal chance. Also violates Rule A due to unequal impact.
(b) Gives automatic priority to one group — hence, not all have equal chance. Violates both Rule A and Rule B.
(c) Choosing based on age clearly discriminates by age — violates Rule A (not equal effect) and Rule B (not equal chance).
Step 3: Conclusion
None of the above satisfies Rule B without violating Rule A.
Therefore, the only correct choice is (d).
\[ \boxed{\text{(d)}} \]
Rule A: All affected persons must be treated equally in the effect of the measure.
Rule B: All affected persons must have an equal chance to benefit from the State's measure.
Step 2: Analyze Each Option
(a) Excludes terminally ill persons — this violates Rule B because not everyone has an equal chance. Also violates Rule A due to unequal impact.
(b) Gives automatic priority to one group — hence, not all have equal chance. Violates both Rule A and Rule B.
(c) Choosing based on age clearly discriminates by age — violates Rule A (not equal effect) and Rule B (not equal chance).
Step 3: Conclusion
None of the above satisfies Rule B without violating Rule A.
Therefore, the only correct choice is (d).
\[ \boxed{\text{(d)}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 3
Choosing 50 survivors exclusively by a lottery would be:
Choosing 50 survivors exclusively by a lottery would be:
Show Hint
A lottery treats everyone \textbf{fairly} (equal chance) but not \textbf{equally} (equal treatment). Rule B accepts fairness; Rule A demands equality.
Updated On: Aug 11, 2025
- Permissible under Rules A and B.
- Impermissible under Rule A and B.
- Permissible only under Rule B.
- Permissible only under Rule A.
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is C
Solution and Explanation
Step 1: Understand the Nature of Lottery Selection
A lottery provides equal chance to all — this aligns with Rule B.
However, Rule A demands equal treatment — i.e., either everyone is saved or no one.
A lottery divides people unequally — some are saved, some are not — violating Rule A.
Step 2: Apply the Rules to the Scenario
Since a lottery maintains equal opportunity (everyone has an equal chance), it is valid under Rule B.
It does not satisfy Rule A’s condition of uniform benefit — hence not permissible under Rule A.
Step 3: Conclusion \[ \boxed{\text{(c)}} \]
A lottery provides equal chance to all — this aligns with Rule B.
However, Rule A demands equal treatment — i.e., either everyone is saved or no one.
A lottery divides people unequally — some are saved, some are not — violating Rule A.
Step 2: Apply the Rules to the Scenario
Since a lottery maintains equal opportunity (everyone has an equal chance), it is valid under Rule B.
It does not satisfy Rule A’s condition of uniform benefit — hence not permissible under Rule A.
Step 3: Conclusion \[ \boxed{\text{(c)}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 4
If the government decides that it will either save everyone or save none, it would be:
If the government decides that it will either save everyone or save none, it would be:
Show Hint
When everyone is treated the same — whether all saved or none — it satisfies both equal treatment (Rule A) and equal opportunity (Rule B).
Updated On: Aug 11, 2025
- Permissible under Rules A and B.
- Impermissible under Rules A and B.
- Permissible only under Rule A.
- Permissible only under Rule B.
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
Step 1: Understand the Proposed Government Action
The government says: Either save all or save none.
This means uniform effect on all — satisfying Rule A.
All affected persons are treated equally and identically.
Step 2: Apply Rule B as well
Rule B wants equal chance for all to benefit.
In this decision, no subgroup is given preference — hence, equal chance exists.
Therefore, it also complies with Rule B.
Step 3: Conclusion \[ \boxed{\text{(a)}} \]
The government says: Either save all or save none.
This means uniform effect on all — satisfying Rule A.
All affected persons are treated equally and identically.
Step 2: Apply Rule B as well
Rule B wants equal chance for all to benefit.
In this decision, no subgroup is given preference — hence, equal chance exists.
Therefore, it also complies with Rule B.
Step 3: Conclusion \[ \boxed{\text{(a)}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Top CLAT Questions
- In the realm of contemporary literature, the interplay between character and setting is a nuanced dance that shapes the narrative’s essence. The setting, often described with painstaking detail, becomes more than a backdrop; it becomes a character, influencing the plot and character development.
Consider, for instance, the barren expanse of the desert in Jhumpa Lahiri’s The Namesake. The arid landscape mirrors the sense of isolation felt by the protagonist, Gogol, as he navigates his identity crisis in a foreign land. The relentless sun and vast sands are not mere descriptions; they are the silent witnesses to his inner turmoil.
On the other end of the literary spectrum, there is Arundhati Roy’s The God of Small Things. The lush, vibrant Kerala backwaters are not just the setting; they are a character woven into the fabric of the story. The teeming, humid landscape reflects the complex web of human relationships and secrets that unravel in the narrative. This interplay is not confined to contemporary literature alone. In Shakespeare’s timeless tragedy Macbeth, the eerie and foreboding setting of the Scottish moors casts a dark shadow over the characters’ actions. The moors, shrouded in mist and mystery, serve as an ever-present omen of the impending tragedy. - The crisis of justice that is the subject matter of discussion in the media today is in fact the crisis of “justice for the middle class”. The main difference between India and the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries is that whereas the middle class in these countries has reasonable access to justice, in India it does not. A vocal and powerful middle class has emerged in India since 1991. It is demanding reasonable access to justice. Much of the judicial reform effort will help meet this demand…
The question of justice for the poor is, however, an altogether different challenge. No country in the world has been able to secure justice for the poor. Most of the jails of the richest countries are filled with the poorest. The “masses” are more often victims of the criminal justice system than of crime. In India as well, jails are almost exclusively filled with the poor. The civil justice system is hardly accessible to them. They are often victimised by lawyers, touts and court staff. They are docket-excluded, a new type of untouchability. The language and the logic—and the colonial and feudal culture—of the judicial system are alien to them. It rarely takes cognisance of their needs and interests.
Their main concern, therefore, is to escape the attention of the justice system, criminal and civil. A landless Dalit person in the interior of Madhya Pradesh once gave me an insightful definition of a court from the perspective of the masses: “A court is a place where you are forcibly taken by the police to be punished; no one goes to a court.” In contrast, many lawyers and judges colloquially define a court as “a temple of justice where rights are protected”.
These sharply divergent visions mean that justice for one section is often injustice for another. Protecting the livelihood of traditional taxi and auto drivers from predatory pricing by corporate app-based taxi providers by imaginatively using the available tools of law to delay their incursion would be seen by the rich and by sections of the middle class as a failure of the judicial system, and possibly as also resulting in a downgrading of the “ease of doing business” measure. However, the masses would see such a judicial intervention as strong evidence of a good justice system. Although the conflict over competing visions of the nation and conflicting demands from social and economic segments have confined judicial reform of judicial administration mainly to “neutral” areas such as process reform, procedural law, technology, planning and court and case management, judge strength, and the workload of judges, there has been considerable improvement in these areas, and the judicial system has improved its performance.
[Extracted, with edits, from “Justice and the Two Ideas of India”, by G. Mohan Gopal, Frontline] - Everything she wanted was here, at Carignano, in Kasauli. Here, on the ridge of the mountain, in this quiet house. It was the place, and the time of life, that she had wanted and prepared for all her life-as she realized on the first day at Carignano, with a great, cool flowering of relief - and at last she had it. She wanted no one and nothing else. Whatever else came, or happened here, would be an unwelcome intrusion and distraction. This she tried to convey to the plodding postman with a cold and piercing stare from the height of the ridge onto his honest bull back. Unfortunately, he did not look up at her on the hilltop but stared stolidly down at the dust piling onto his shoes as he plodded on. A bullock-man, an oafish ox, she thought bitterly. She stepped backwards into the garden and the wind suddenly billowed up and threw the pine branches about as though to curtain her. She was grey, tall and thin and her silk sari made a sweeping, shivering sound and she fancied she could merge with the pine trees and be mistaken for one. To be a tree, no more and no less, was all she was prepared to undertake.
What pleased and satisfied her so, here at Carignano, was its barrenness. This was the chief virtue of all Kasauli of course-its starkness. It had rocks, it had pines, it had light and air. In every direction there was a sweeping view - to the north, of the mountains, to the south, of the plains. Occasionally an eagle swam through this clear unobstructed mass of light and air, that was all. And Carignano, her home on the ridge, had no more than that. Why should it? The sun shone on its white walls. Its windows were open the ones facing north opened on to the blue waves of the Himalayas flowing out and up to the line of ice and snow sketched upon the sky, while those that faced south looked down the plunging cliff to the plain stretching out, flat and sere to the blurred horizon.
Yes, there were some apricot trees close to the house. There were clumps of iris that had finished blooming. There was the kitchen with a wing of smoke lifting out of its chimney and a stack of wood outside its door. But these were incidental, almost unimportant.
[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from “Fire on the Mountain” by Anita Desai] - English literature is a vast and diverse field that has left an indelible mark on the world of letters. From the eloquent plays of William Shakespeare to the complex novels of Jane Austen and the profound poetry of William Wordsworth, English literature offers a window into the human experience. One of the luminaries of English literature is William Shakespeare, often hailed as the greatest playwright in the history of English language. His works, including Hamlet, Macbeth, and Romeo and Juliet, are celebrated for their exploration of human nature, love, ambition, and tragedy. His characters, such as the tormented Hamlet and the star-crossed lovers Romeo and Juliet, continue to captivate readers and audiences worldwide.
The 19th century ushered in a new era of literary giants. Jane Austen’s novels, such as Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility, provide incisive social commentary through the lens of wit and romance. Austen’s heroines, like Elizabeth Bennet and Elinor Dashwood, remain beloved literary figures known for their intelligence and resilience. The Romantic era brought forth poets like William Wordsworth and Samuel Taylor Coleridge, who celebrated * 8 UG the beauty of nature and the emotional intensity of the individual. Wordsworth’s ‘‘I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud’’ and Coleridge’s ‘‘The Rime of the Ancient Mariner’’ are testament to the power of the written words to evoke profound emotions and imagery. Moving towards 20th century, English literature continued to evolve. Virginia Woolf’s ground-breaking novel Mrs. Dalloway explored the inner thoughts and lives of its characters with a modernist narrative style. Dystopian visions, as seen in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four provided stark warnings about the dangers of totalitarianism and the erosion of individual freedom.
Today, English literature is a global phenomenon, transcending borders and languages. Indian authors like Arundhati Roy, with her novel The God of Small Things, have won prestigious international literary awards. The book not only explores intricate family dynamics but also delves into the broader socio-political landscape of India. In summary, English literature is a testament to the enduring power of storytelling and the written word. It encompasses an array of authors, themes, and styles that continue to captivate and inspire readers across the world. - On the evening of the 10th, General Dyer arrived at Amritsar, and the Deputy-Commissioner handed over the civil power to him. He issued a proclamation by word of mouth that no meetings should be held. Two days later, after there had been no sort of riot, nor murder, General Dyer heard that a meeting was to be held at the Jallianwala Bagh. He proceeded there with about fifty troops, half British, half Indian, and a certain number of Ghurkas, armed with their kukris. The Jallianwala Bagh is an open space, half a mile square, which has one entry wide enough for three persons. The troops got in and lined up on a mound of debris. The walls, seven feet high, and the surrounding houses enclosed the people. There were, too, three alleys through which the people might have been able to pass. Within thirty seconds of the troops getting in, General Dyer gave orders to fire, and the crowd of people, estimated at anything from 5,000 to 20,000, who were sitting on the ground peacefully listening to the mob oratory, were fired on. The result of the troops’ fire into the mass of people we do not know. But we do know that Dyer’s own estimate of the casualties resulting from ten minutes continual individual firing, was 400 to 500 killed and 1,500 wounded. The people were not able to escape. They were people who had not offered any violence and who had not been warned. These people were shot down. After ten minutes, the ammunition was exhausted and the troops marched off, and they left 1,500 wounded there. There were men lying there for two days, dying of thirst, eating the ground, bleeding to death and nobody to look after them. Those who lived nearby came and carried away some of the wounded from the heap of dead and dying, but the unfortunate country people died there miserably of their wounds. This is what is done in 1919 in British India…
Centuries hence you will find Indian children brought up to this spot, just as they visit now the Cawnpore Well, and you can imagine the feelings of these Indians for generations over this terrible business.
[Col. Wedgwood, MP, speaking in the British Parliament, 22 December 1919]
View More Questions