Daily Static Quiz Prelims Practice 2027
The correct sequence is: Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms (1919), which introduced Dyarchy in provinces → Simon Commission (appointed 1927, arrived 1928), an all-British body appointed to review the 1919 Act → Round Table Conferences (1930, 1931, 1932), held in London to discuss constitutional reform based on Simon Commission recommendations → Government of India Act, 1935, which drew directly upon those discussions and the White Paper (1933). Options (a), (b), and (d) each misplace at least one event, testing whether students confuse the cause-and-consequence chain across these closely linked milestones.
- "Reserved" subjects were administered by the Governor with the help of Executive Councillors, without responsibility to the legislature.
- "Transferred" subjects were administered by Ministers responsible to the elected legislature.
- Finance and Law and Order were classified as "Transferred" subjects under this scheme.
Statements 1 and 2 are correct — "Reserved" subjects (finance, law and order, revenue) remained under the Governor and his Executive Councillors with no legislative accountability, while "Transferred" subjects (education, health, local self-government) were handed to Indian Ministers answerable to the legislature, forming the core of the Dyarchy experiment. Statement 3 is incorrect and is a deliberate reversal trap: Finance and Law and Order were firmly "Reserved" subjects, retained under British bureaucratic control precisely because the colonial government was unwilling to cede the most sensitive levers of power to elected Indian legislators.
Reason (R): The All-India Federation envisaged under the Act actually came into existence in 1937 and functioned until Independence in 1947.
The Assertion is correct — the Government of India Act, 1935 did envisage an All-India Federation uniting British Indian provinces and Princely States that chose to accede. The Reason is incorrect — the Federation never actually materialised, as it required accession by a specified number of Princely States who remained reluctant and apprehensive about losing autonomy. Only the provincial autonomy provisions of the Act came into effect from 1937 (leading to Congress ministries in several provinces); the federal scheme remained a dead letter throughout — a critical and frequently tested distinction between what the Act proposed and what was actually implemented.
The Communal Award, announced by British Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald in August 1932, extended separate electorates to Muslims, Sikhs, Indian Christians, Anglo-Indians, and — most controversially — the Depressed Classes (Dalits). Option (a) is a baseless distractor with no historical grounding. Option (c) describes the opposite outcome: the Poona Pact (1932), signed after Gandhi's fast-unto-death against the Communal Award, replaced separate Dalit electorates with joint electorates and reserved seats — a classic Communal Award–Poona Pact confusion trap. Option (d) is also incorrect; the 1935 Act retained and even extended communal electorates rather than abolishing them.
Option (a) is correct — the Government of India Act, 1935 ended Dyarchy at the provincial level and introduced Provincial Autonomy, with Ministers fully responsible to elected provincial legislatures, implemented from 1937 leading to Congress ministries forming in several provinces. Option (b) is incorrect: the post of Secretary of State for India continued and was not abolished until Independence in 1947. Option (c) is incorrect: the Federal Court was established at Delhi, not Calcutta — it served as the precursor to today's Supreme Court of India. Option (d) is incorrect: the Act stopped well short of Dominion Status — a key Congress demand — and instead retained extensive Viceregal discretionary powers, which is precisely why Congress rejected it as inadequate.
