General Studies 2023 GS Paper II 10 marks 150 words Compulsory Assess

Q2

Who are entitled to receive free legal aid? Assess the role of the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) in rendering free legal aid in India. (Answer in 150 words) 10

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

निःशुल्क कानूनी सहायता प्राप्त करने के हकदार कौन हैं? निःशुल्क कानूनी सहायता के प्रतिपादन में राष्ट्रीय विधि सेवा प्राधिकरण (एन.ए.एल.एस.ए.) की भूमिका का आकलन कीजिए। (150 शब्दों में उत्तर) 10

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2023 General Studies questions

Directive word: Assess

This question asks you to assess. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

The directive 'assess' requires a judgment-based evaluation of NALSA's effectiveness, not mere description. Structure: brief intro citing Article 39A → first part listing eligible categories under Section 12 of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 → second part critically evaluating NALSA's performance with achievements and gaps → concise conclusion on impact.

Key points expected

List of entitled persons: SC/ST, women/children, victims of trafficking, mentally/physically disabled, victims of mass disaster/ethnic violence, industrial workmen, persons in custody, those with annual income below prescribed limit (varies by state)
NALSA's institutional framework: national, state, district, taluk legal services authorities and Lok Adalats
Quantitative achievements: number of beneficiaries, cases settled through Lok Adalats, compensation disbursed
Critical gaps: quality of legal aid lawyers, awareness in rural areas, pendency, underutilization of para-legal volunteers
Recent initiatives: Nyaya Bandhu (pro bono lawyers), legal aid clinics, tele-law services

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	2	Correctly interprets 'assess' as evaluative judgment, not mere listing; balances both parts (entitlement + NALSA role) with clear analytical stance on effectiveness	Partially understands 'assess' as description; covers both parts but without evaluative depth or one part dominates	Treats question as purely descriptive; misses either entitlement criteria or NALSA evaluation; no judgment offered
Content depth & accuracy	20%	2	Accurately cites Section 12 of 1987 Act for eligibility; mentions specific NALSA schemes with recent data; identifies systemic challenges like quality control and last-mile delivery	Mentions major categories (SC/ST, women, poor) and basic NALSA functions; some factual gaps or outdated information; limited critical insight	Incorrect or incomplete eligibility list; conflates NALSA with judiciary; factual errors on legal framework; no mention of Lok Adalats or Nyaya Bandhu
Structure & flow	20%	2	Clear two-part structure within 150 words; seamless transition from entitlement to assessment; logical progression with signposting; no repetition	Recognizable structure but parts unbalanced; some abrupt transitions; minor repetition; word limit slightly exceeded or underutilized	Disorganized or merged parts causing confusion; no clear paragraphing; significantly exceeds word limit or grossly incomplete
Examples / case-law / data	20%	2	Cites specific NALSA annual report data (e.g., cases settled, beneficiaries); references landmark cases like Hussainara Khatoon (1979) establishing right to free legal aid; mentions Nyaya Bandhu or tele-law with statistics	General reference to Lok Adalats without data; mentions Article 39A or 1987 Act without case law; vague 'millions benefited' without specifics	No examples, data or case law; generic statements like 'NALSA helps poor people'; irrelevant examples from other schemes
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	2	Sharp conclusion synthesizing assessment: acknowledges NALSA's scale while flagging quality/awareness gaps; suggests concrete improvement (e.g., strengthening PLV network, digital outreach) in 1-2 lines	Summary conclusion restating points; mild critique without specificity; no forward-looking suggestion	No conclusion or abrupt ending; purely descriptive closing; irrelevant philosophical statement unrelated to legal aid

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →