General Studies 2024 GS Paper II 15 marks 250 words Compulsory Explain

Q11

What are the aims and objects of recently passed and enforced, The Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 ? Whether University/State Education Board examinations, too, are covered under the Act ? (Answer in 250 words). 15

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

अभी हाल में पारित तथा लागू किये गये, लोक परीक्षा (अनुचित साधनों की रोकथाम) अधिनियम, 2024 के लक्ष्य तथा उद्देश्य क्या हैं ? क्या विश्वविद्यालय/राज्य शिक्षा परिषद की परीक्षायें भी इस अधिनियम के अंतर्गत आती हैं ? (उत्तर 250 शब्दों में लिखिए)

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

Directive word: Explain

This question asks you to explain. 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 'explain' requires a clear exposition of the Act's aims and objects followed by a precise clarification on coverage of university/state board examinations. Structure as: brief introduction citing the Act's enactment (February 2024) → body with two distinct parts (aims/objects in 120 words; coverage analysis in 100 words) → balanced conclusion on legislative intent vs. federal concerns.

Key points expected

Mention the Act's enactment date (February 12, 2024) and its origin from Article 246(1) of Seventh Schedule Entry 66
Enumerate core aims: preventing leakage of question papers, use of unfair means, organized cheating by mafias, ensuring fair competition
Specify the 5 categories of 'public examinations' listed in Section 2(k): UPSC, SSC, RRB, IBPS, and examinations in Schedule (to be notified)
Clarify that university examinations and state education boards are NOT automatically covered; require specific notification under Schedule
Distinguish between 'public examination' definition and actual coverage—potential for future inclusion via notification
Note the federal structure tension: education is Concurrent List subject, but this Act uses Union List Entry 66 (higher education institutions of national importance)

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	3	Answer addresses BOTH parts of the question with equal weightage—clearly delineates aims/objects from coverage question; recognizes 'explain' requires elaboration not mere listing	Addresses both parts but treats coverage superficially or conflates aims with coverage; directive partially understood	Misses one part entirely (typically coverage analysis) or misinterprets 'explain' as 'list'; treats as single composite question
Content depth & accuracy	20%	3	Precise statutory references: Section 2(k) definition, Schedule mechanism, specific mention of 5 named bodies; accurate distinction that universities require notification; mentions Article 246/Entry 66 constitutional basis	Generic description of 'preventing cheating' without statutory specifics; vague on coverage stating 'may include' without explaining notification mechanism	Factually incorrect stating universities are covered; confuses with RPA 1950 or other election laws; no constitutional/statutory references
Structure & flow	20%	3	Clear bipartite structure with visual/paragraph separation; logical progression from legislative context → substantive aims → coverage analysis → federal implications; maintains 250-word discipline	Merged narrative without clear part demarcation; some structural attempt but coverage analysis buried or rushed	Disorganized stream-of-consciousness; no discernible parts; exceeds word limit significantly or severely underwrites
Examples / case-law / data	20%	3	References specific incidents motivating the Act: NEET-UG 2022 paper leak, UPPSC RO/ARO 2024 cancellation, Bihar constable exam 2023; mentions comparable laws (Bihar Public Examination Act 2024, Uttarakhand Act 2023)	Vague reference to 'recent paper leaks' without specificity; or mentions only one generic incident	No examples whatsoever; completely decontextualized from contemporary examination malpractices
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	3	Critical insight on federalism tension—why universities excluded (state autonomy concerns); suggests need for harmonized framework or cooperative federalism; evaluates effectiveness of Schedule notification mechanism	Summary restatement of aims without analytical depth; generic optimism about Act's success	No conclusion or abrupt ending; purely descriptive closure without synthesis; factually wrong conclusion on coverage

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 →