General Studies 2024 GS Paper I 15 marks 250 words Compulsory Comment

Q18

Despite comprehensive policies for equity and social justice, underprivileged sections are not yet getting the full benefits of affirmative action envisaged by the Constitution. Comment. (Answer in 250 words) 15

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

समानता और सामाजिक न्याय की व्यापक नीतियों के बावजूद, अभी तक वंचित वर्गों को संविधान द्वारा परिकल्पित सकारात्मक कार्रवाई का पूरा लाभ नहीं मिल रहा है। टिप्पणी कीजिए। (उत्तर 250 शब्दों में दीजिए)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2024 General Studies questions

Directive word: Comment

This question asks you to comment. 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 'comment' requires a balanced, opinionated analysis that goes beyond mere description to critically assess the gap between constitutional intent and ground reality. Structure as: brief introduction acknowledging constitutional vision → body analysing implementation gaps with causes → conclusion with forward-looking suggestions. Avoid being purely descriptive or purely critical; maintain analytical balance.

Key points expected

Constitutional basis: Articles 15, 16, 17, 46, and Preamble's promise of equality and justice
Implementation gaps: creamy layer exclusion, inadequate representation in higher judiciary/PSUs, private sector exclusion
Structural barriers: inadequate educational infrastructure, digital divide, caste-based discrimination persistence
Judicial interventions: Indra Sawhney, Nagaraj, Jarnail Singh cases and their mixed impact
Way forward: creamy layer refinement, private sector reservation debate, effective monitoring mechanisms

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	3	Demonstrates clear grasp that 'comment' requires evaluative judgment, not mere listing; balances constitutional ideals with critical assessment of outcomes; avoids extreme positions (complete failure vs. complete success)	Partially understands directive but drifts into description or becomes one-sided; either overly optimistic about policies or dismissive without nuance	Treats as 'describe' or 'explain' question; purely narrative without analytical stance; or makes sweeping unsupported claims about reservation failure
Content depth & accuracy	20%	3	Covers multiple dimensions: constitutional provisions, policy instruments, implementation failures, structural barriers; accurate on Articles and commissions; distinguishes between SC/ST/OBC/EWS challenges	Covers constitutional basis and some implementation issues but lacks specificity; conflates categories or misses key distinctions between groups	Superficial treatment with factual errors; confuses Articles 15 and 16; ignores constitutional vision entirely; focuses only on one aspect like creamy layer
Structure & flow	20%	3	Logical progression from constitutional promise → policy framework → implementation gaps → structural causes → conclusion; smooth transitions; each paragraph advances the argument	Basic structure present but uneven; some sections overdeveloped (long constitutional history) while others underdeveloped (contemporary challenges); abrupt shifts	Disorganised or bullet-point dump without integration; no clear thesis; conclusion disconnected from body; exceeds word limit significantly or falls far short
Examples / case-law / data	20%	3	Specific citations: Indra Sawhney (1992), Nagaraj (2006), Jarnail Singh (2018); Sachar Committee or SECC data; specific statistics on representation gaps (e.g., higher judiciary, IAS, PSUs); state-level examples like Tamil Nadu's 69% or Maratha reservation	Mentions some cases or committees without specifics; general references to 'Supreme Court judgments' or 'various reports' without naming; lacks quantitative backing	No examples or case law; or incorrect citations; purely theoretical treatment; irrelevant examples from unrelated policy domains
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	3	Synthesises analysis into forward-looking, balanced conclusion; offers specific, actionable suggestions (creamy layer recalibration, private sector incentives, intersectional approach); acknowledges complexity without paralysis	Generic conclusion restating points; vague suggestions like 'better implementation' or 'political will'; or purely critical ending without constructive element	No conclusion or abrupt ending; extreme position (abolish all reservation / expand without limit); irrelevant digression into unrelated social issues

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 →