Legacy IAS Academy · Daily Quiz
Daily Current Affairs Quiz — 25 July 2026
Assam Floods · AI & Nuclear · ABSS · CWG 2026 · Jagannath Trademarks
Q01
With reference to India's constitutional framework for flood and water management, consider the following statements:
- Water, drainage, and embankments are subjects under the State List (Entry 17) of the Seventh Schedule.
- Regulation and development of inter-State rivers falls under the Union List (Entry 56) of the Seventh Schedule.
- The River Boards Act, 1956, was enacted to enable integrated river basin management across State boundaries.
- Flood Plain Zoning in India is currently mandated by a Central law applicable to all States.
Explanation
✓Statement 1: CORRECT. Entry 17 of the State List assigns water, water supplies, irrigation, canals, drainage, embankments, water storage, and water power to States.
✓Statement 2: CORRECT. Entry 56 of the Union List empowers Parliament to regulate and develop inter-State rivers and river valleys to the extent declared by Parliament to be expedient in the public interest.
✓Statement 3: CORRECT. The River Boards Act, 1956 was enacted under Entry 56 to constitute River Boards for inter-State rivers and river valleys for flood control, irrigation, navigation, and power — though no effective River Board has been operationalised.
✗Statement 4: INCORRECT. The Central Water Commission circulated a Model Flood Plain Zoning Bill in 1975, but it is a model bill only — no Central law mandates flood plain zoning on all States. Adoption remains at State discretion and most States have not enacted it.
Approach & Trap
TRAP: Statement 4 exploits the existence of the 1975 Model Bill — the word 'model' signals it is advisory, not mandatory. ELIMINATION: S1 and S2 are standard constitutional facts; once confirmed, narrow to options containing both. S4's 'mandated by a Central law' is the tell.
HOOK: Entry 17 (State) vs Entry 56 (Union) bifurcation is the root cause of India's fragmented flood governance — a recurring UPSC theme in both Prelims and Mains.
Source
Constitution of India, Seventh Schedule; River Boards Act, 1956; CWC Model Flood Plain Zoning Bill, 1975
Q02
With reference to the Brahmaputra river system and flood vulnerability of Assam, which of the following statements is/are correct?
- The Brahmaputra enters India through the State of Arunachal Pradesh, where it is locally known as the Siang.
- Assam's flood-prone area constitutes approximately 40% of its geographical area, which is nearly four times the national average.
- The Kosi river, often called the 'Sorrow of Bihar', is a tributary of the Brahmaputra.
Explanation
✓Statement 1: CORRECT. The Brahmaputra originates in Tibet (as the Yarlung Tsangpo), enters India through Arunachal Pradesh where it is called the Siang (and also Dihang), before flowing into Assam as the Brahmaputra and then into Bangladesh as the Jamuna.
✓Statement 2: CORRECT. Nearly 39.58% of Assam's geographical area is flood-prone — approximately four times India's national average — making annual inundation structurally inevitable.
✗Statement 3: INCORRECT. The Kosi is a tributary of the Ganga, not the Brahmaputra. It originates in Tibet, flows through Nepal, and enters Bihar before joining the Ganga. The Brahmaputra's major tributaries include the Subansiri, Kameng, Manas, and Teesta.
Approach & Trap
TRAP: Statement 3 exploits the fact that both Kosi and Brahmaputra are major Himalayan rivers prone to causing Bihar/Assam floods — mixing the two is a classic distractor. ELIMINATION: S1 is a well-known river geography fact; S3 can be ruled out with basic GS knowledge of the Ganga tributary system.
HOOK: UPSC frequently tests river tributary classification — Kosi is Ganga, not Brahmaputra.
Source
ASDMA Flood Reports; NCERT Geography; National Water Mission documentation
Q03
The Dam Safety Act, 2021 established an institutional framework for dam surveillance and maintenance in India. Which of the following bodies is designated as the apex body for dam safety under this Act?
Explanation
The Dam Safety Act, 2021 establishes a two-tier structure: the National Committee on Dam Safety (NCDS) at the apex level, chaired by the Chairperson of the Central Water Commission, and the National Dam Safety Authority (NDSA) as the regulatory body. The CWC (Option A) is the technical body whose Chairperson leads the NCDS, but CWC itself is not the apex dam safety body under the Act. NDMA (Option B) is a disaster management body, not a dam safety regulator. River Boards (Option D) have never been operationalised.
Approach & Trap
TRAP: CWC is the most familiar water-sector institution — candidates often confuse 'Chairperson of CWC chairs the NCDS' with 'CWC is the apex body.' ELIMINATION: The Act specifically created new institutions — the NCDS and NDSA — for dam safety; pre-existing bodies (CWC, NDMA) are roles, not the apex body.
HOOK: When an Act creates a named committee/authority, that named body — not the pre-existing regulator — is the answer to 'apex body under this Act.'
Source
Dam Safety Act, 2021; Ministry of Jal Shakti
Q04
With reference to global frameworks on Artificial Intelligence ethics and governance, consider the following statements:
- The UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence (2021) is the first global normative instrument on AI ethics adopted by member states.
- The Bletchley Park Declaration (2023) was signed exclusively by members of the G7 grouping.
- India is a founding member of the Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence (GPAI) and hosted the GPAI Summit in 2023.
- The EU Artificial Intelligence Act (2024) adopts a risk-based approach and bans AI applications classified as posing unacceptable risk.
Explanation
✓Statement 1: CORRECT. The UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI, adopted in November 2021 by all 193 UNESCO member states, is the first global normative framework on AI ethics.
✗Statement 2: INCORRECT. The Bletchley Park Declaration was signed by 28 countries — not exclusively G7 members. Signatories included the US, UK, EU, China, India, Australia, Japan, and others. India was a signatory.
✓Statement 3: CORRECT. India is a founding member of GPAI (launched 2020) and hosted the GPAI Leaders' Summit in New Delhi in December 2023.
✓Statement 4: CORRECT. The EU AI Act (2024) is the world's first comprehensive AI law; it adopts a four-tier risk classification — unacceptable risk (banned), high risk (strict obligations), limited risk, and minimal risk.
Approach & Trap
TRAP: Statement 2 uses 'exclusively by G7 members' — a classic scope-narrowing trap. The Bletchley Declaration included 28 countries, many outside the G7 (China, India, etc.). ELIMINATION: S1 is widely cited; S4 is a landmark regulation — both likely correct. S2's 'exclusively G7' collapses under basic knowledge that China and India signed. Key = options containing 1, 3, 4 but not 2.
HOOK: Always check 'exclusive/only' qualifiers — UPSC routinely traps on scope words.
Source
UNESCO 2021; Bletchley Park AI Safety Summit Declaration; GPAI official records; EU AI Act 2024
Q05
The Rome Declaration for an Unarmed and Disarming Peace (July 2026) calls for an international treaty on autonomous weapons and nuclear command. Which of the following best describes the philosophical foundation cited by the Declaration?
Explanation
The Rome Declaration explicitly draws its philosophical grounding from Pope Leo XIV's encyclical Magnifica Humanitas, which issued what the Declaration describes as a 'clarion call' to protect human dignity against technological overreach. Options A, C, and D — while legitimate ethical frameworks — are not cited by the Declaration. The Declaration's central argument is that allowing autonomous software to govern nuclear hardware is an existential gamble, and that human ethical responsibility cannot be delegated to machines regardless of their intelligence.
Approach & Trap
TRAP: Options A, C, and D are genuine philosophical frameworks that could plausibly underpin an AI ethics document — the trap is selecting a 'better-sounding' framework over the one actually cited. ELIMINATION: This is a specific attribution question — only one source is named in the Declaration.
HOOK: For attribution/foundation questions, the exam tests reading precision — the specific document cited, not the most famous ethical framework.
Source
Rome Declaration for an Unarmed and Disarming Peace, July 2026; The Hindu, 23 July 2026
Q06
With reference to the Amrit Bharat Station Scheme (ABSS), which of the following statements is/are correct?
- The scheme was launched by the Ministry of Railways in December 2022.
- The scheme targets the redevelopment of 1,340 railway stations across India in a phased manner.
- The scheme mandates a uniform architectural template for all stations to ensure standardisation.
Explanation
✓Statement 1: CORRECT. ABSS was launched in December 2022 by the Ministry of Railways as a long-term, phased master-planning initiative.
✓Statement 2: CORRECT. The scheme targets 1,340 railway stations in a phased redevelopment programme.
✗Statement 3: INCORRECT. ABSS explicitly rejects uniform templates — each station is developed with architecture reflecting its local heritage, culture, and regional identity (e.g., Badami draws on cave temple motifs; Sanchi on Buddhist heritage; Jaisalmer on desert fort architecture). Standardisation in amenities coexists with culturally specific design.
Approach & Trap
TRAP: Statement 3 exploits the assumption that a government infrastructure scheme would standardise design for efficiency. ABSS does the opposite — it mandates culturally specific design as a core principle. ELIMINATION: S1 and S2 are straightforward scheme facts. S3's 'uniform architectural template' directly contradicts the scheme's stated design philosophy.
HOOK: When a scheme emphasises local/regional identity, 'uniform template' is always the trap statement.
Source
PIB · Ministry of Railways · ABSS scheme guidelines · 18 July 2026
Q07
With reference to India's trademark registration framework, consider the following statements:
- India's Trade Marks Registry was established in 1940 and administers the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
- Publication of a trademark application in the Trademark Journal constitutes final registration of the trademark.
- A Geographical Indication (GI) tag and a trademark registration serve identical legal purposes and cannot co-exist for the same product.
Explanation
✓Statement 1: CORRECT. The Trade Marks Registry was established in 1940. The current governing legislation is the Trade Marks Act, 1999, supported by the Trade Marks Rules, 2017.
✗Statement 2: INCORRECT. Publication in the Trademark Journal is a preliminary step — not final registration. After publication, any person may file an opposition within three months. Final registration certificate is issued only if no valid opposition is sustained or the opposition period lapses without challenge.
✗Statement 3: INCORRECT. GI tags and trademark registrations serve different but complementary legal purposes and can co-exist. A GI protects a product's association with a specific geographic origin (e.g., Mahaprasad from Puri); a trademark protects a name/logo as a distinctive identifier of a specific entity. The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999 operates independently of the Trade Marks Act.
Approach & Trap
TRAP: Statement 2 exploits unfamiliarity with the opposition window — 'publication' sounds like the final step but is actually preliminary. Statement 3 exploits confusion between GI and trademark. ELIMINATION: S1 is an institutional fact easily confirmed. Both S2 and S3 contain absolutist language ('constitutes final', 'identical', 'cannot co-exist') — UPSC uses such language to mark incorrect statements.
HOOK: 'Publication = final registration' is a recurring IP law trap; always remember the three-month opposition window.
Source
Trade Marks Act, 1999; Trade Marks Rules, 2017; GI of Goods Act, 1999; Trade Marks Registry
Q08
With reference to India's anti-doping framework and the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), consider the following statements:
- India's National Anti-Doping Act was enacted in 2022 and aligns with the World Anti-Doping Code.
- WADA is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland.
- The UNESCO International Convention against Doping in Sport (2005) is the key international legal instrument binding governments on anti-doping obligations.
- Under Commonwealth Games qualification rules, an anti-doping rule violation by an athlete support personnel of a CGA can also reduce that CGA's athlete quota.
Explanation
✓Statement 1: CORRECT. The National Anti-Doping Act, 2022 is India's first standalone anti-doping legislation; it explicitly aligns with the World Anti-Doping Code and the UNESCO Convention.
✗Statement 2: INCORRECT. WADA is headquartered in Montreal, Canada — not Geneva. It was established in 1999 with its headquarters in Montreal.
✓Statement 3: CORRECT. The UNESCO International Convention against Doping in Sport (2005) is the first universal international treaty in the field of sport — it is the instrument through which governments formally bind themselves to the World Anti-Doping Code.
✓Statement 4: CORRECT. Under CWG Clause 2.4 of the qualification system, ADRVs committed by both athletes AND athlete support personnel (coaches, doctors, trainers) from a CGA within the qualification window reduce that CGA's maximum athlete slots — which is why support personnel violations directly penalise the entire national team.
Approach & Trap
TRAP: Statement 2 uses Geneva — plausible because many international bodies (WHO, WTO, IOC) are Geneva-based. WADA is the exception, headquartered in Montreal. ELIMINATION: S1 is a recent legislative fact; S3 is foundational international sports law; S4 is directly reported in today's news. Geneva vs Montreal is the only trap — isolate it and the answer falls to 1, 3, 4.
HOOK: For international body HQs, Montreal-based organisations (ICAO, WADA) are a favourite UPSC Prelims trap against Geneva.
Source
National Anti-Doping Act, 2022; WADA official documentation; UNESCO Convention 2005; CWG 2026 Qualification Rules
Q09
With reference to the Jagannath Temple in Puri and its associated sacred traditions, consider the following statements:
- Puri is one of the four Char Dhams in Hindu sacred geography, the others being Badrinath, Dwarka, and Rameswaram.
- The Nilachakra is the sacred food offered to Lord Jagannath and distributed to devotees at the Ananda Bazaar.
- The Nabakalebara ceremony involves the ritual replacement of the Jagannath deities with new ones carved from sacred Daru wood.
- The Shree Jagannath Temple Administration (SJTA) is a statutory body that administers the 12th-century temple at Puri.
Explanation
✓Statement 1: CORRECT. The four Char Dhams are Badrinath (north), Dwarka (west), Puri (east), and Rameswaram (south) — one at each cardinal point of the Indian subcontinent, as defined by Adi Shankaracharya.
✗Statement 2: INCORRECT. The Nilachakra is the eight-spoked metal wheel (Sudarshana Chakra) mounted atop the main temple tower — not the food offering. The sacred food offered to Lord Jagannath is called Mahaprasad, prepared and distributed at the Ananda Bazaar.
✓Statement 3: CORRECT. The Nabakalebara ('new body') ceremony is a rare ritual in which new deities are carved from specially identified Daru (sacred neem) wood logs, the divine essence (Brahma) is transferred from old to new, and the old deities are interred in the Koili Vaikuntha garden.
✓Statement 4: CORRECT. The SJTA is indeed a statutory body established under the Shree Jagannath Temple Act, 1954 (Odisha), to manage the administration of the Puri temple.
Approach & Trap
TRAP: Statement 2 deliberately swaps 'Nilachakra' and 'Mahaprasad' — both are sacred elements of Jagannath tradition but they are entirely different things. This is a classic definition-swap trap. ELIMINATION: S1 (Char Dham) and S4 (SJTA) are confirmable facts; S3 (Nabakalebara) is a distinctive ceremony unlikely to be fabricated. S2 fails on the Nilachakra/Mahaprasad swap.
HOOK: In cultural questions, watch for attribute-swapping between two terms from the same tradition — the exam tests whether you know which name attaches to which concept.
Source
Shree Jagannath Temple Act, 1954 (Odisha); Jagannath cultural records; Trade Marks Registry filings
Q10
Consider the following statements about the Commonwealth Games and choose the correct answer:
- The Commonwealth Games were first held in 1930 in Hamilton, Canada, under the name 'British Empire Games'.
- The Games were formally renamed 'Commonwealth Games' in 1978.
- The Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) is the governing body responsible for the direction and control of the Games.
- India first participated in the Commonwealth Games in 1934.
Explanation
✓Statement 1: CORRECT. The first British Empire Games were held in 1930 in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
✓Statement 2: CORRECT. The Games were renamed Commonwealth Games in 1978 (having been called the British Commonwealth Games from 1954–1966, and the British Empire and Commonwealth Games from 1954).
✓Statement 3: CORRECT. The Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) is the governing body with responsibility for the direction, organisation, and control of the Commonwealth Games.
✓Statement 4: CORRECT. India first participated in the Commonwealth Games in 1934 at the British Empire Games in London.
Approach & Trap
TRAP: Statements 2 and 4 carry specific dates (1978, 1934) that candidates may be uncertain about — the trap is eliminating them due to uncertainty rather than knowledge. All four statements are correct here; 'all of the above' phrasing is avoided by listing the option as '1, 2, 3 and 4'. ELIMINATION: S1 and S3 are foundational facts. Confirm S2 (1978 renaming) and S4 (1934 India debut) to reach D.
HOOK: When all statements appear correct and the 'all four' option exists, do not eliminate it by default — verify each statement independently.
Source
Commonwealth Games Federation; India at CWG official records
Legacy IAS Academy · Daily CA Quiz
25 July 2026 · UPSC CSE Prelims
