UPSC Static Quiz – History : 10 July 2026

Solution: C

• Statement 1 is correct. The Mughal jagirdari crisis, particularly during the later years of the reign of Aurangzeb, was marked by an acute shortage of productive jagirs (assignable revenue-yielding lands). The number of mansabdars increased substantially, while the availability of suitable jagirs failed to keep pace, creating intense competition for revenue assignments.
• Statement 2 is incorrect. Although Aurangzeb’s conquests in the Deccan significantly expanded the territorial extent of the empire, they did not resolve the jagirdari crisis. The newly annexed regions were politically unstable, militarily contested, and administratively difficult to integrate. Revenue realization remained uncertain, while prolonged warfare imposed enormous financial burdens on the imperial treasury, thereby aggravating rather than eliminating the structural crisis.
• Statement 3 is correct. Frequent transfers of jagirdars, intended to prevent the emergence of local power bases, encouraged them to maximize revenue collection during their short tenure. This often led to excessive assessment, coercive extraction, and exploitation of peasants, contributing to agrarian distress, declining agricultural productivity, and growing rural unrest.

Solution: D

• Statement 1 is incorrect. The Regulating Act of 1773 created the office of the Governor-General of Bengal, assisted by a four-member Executive Council. Decisions were taken by majority vote, and the Governor-General did not possess a veto power over the Council. In fact, the first Governor-General, Warren Hastings, was frequently outvoted by the Council during the early years of the Act’s operation.
• Statement 2 is incorrect. Although the Act established the Supreme Court of Judicature at Fort William in Calcutta, it did not clearly define the boundaries between the Court’s judicial jurisdiction and the executive authority of the Governor-General in Council. This ambiguity led to prolonged conflicts between the judiciary and the executive, necessitating clarification through the Act of Settlement 1781.

Statement 3 is incorrect. The Act subordinated, rather than liberated, the Presidencies of Bombay and Madras. Their Governors were required to obey the Governor-General in Council of Bengal in matters relating to war and diplomacy, making Bengal the supreme presidency within the Company’s administration.

Solution: C

• Statement 1 is correct. The Permanent Settlement of 1793 recognized zamindars as hereditary proprietors of land. They were made the legal owners responsible for paying a fixed amount of land revenue to the colonial government, fundamentally altering the traditional agrarian structure.
• Statement 2 is incorrect. The Permanent Settlement did not grant peasants complete security of tenure. Ryots remained subordinate to zamindars and were vulnerable to arbitrary rent enhancement, eviction, and various forms of exploitation. The settlement primarily protected the interests of zamindars rather than cultivators.
• Statement 3 is correct. The Sunset Law required zamindars to pay the assessed land revenue by the prescribed date. Failure to do so by sunset on the due date resulted in the auction of their estates to recover the government’s revenue, reflecting the rigid revenue collection policy of the colonial administration.

Solution: C

• Statement I presents a well-established historical interpretation of the Battle of Plassey, suggesting it was not a straightforward military victory.
• Statement II is correct and provides the primary explanation for Statement I. The decisive factor at Plassey was the conspiracy orchestrated by Robert Clive. He secured the secret allegiance of Mir Jafar (the Nawab’s commander-in-chief), Rai Durlabh, and other influential nobles. As a result of this treachery, the bulk of the Nawab’s army, under Mir Jafar’s command, stood inactive during the battle, leading to the easy defeat of the loyalist forces. This confirms that the battle was won through political machination rather than pure military prowess.
• Statement III is incorrect. The British forces at Plassey were, in fact, numerically vastly inferior to the Nawab’s army. Clive commanded a force of about 3,000 soldiers (including Europeans and Indian sepoys), whereas Siraj-ud-Daulah’s army numbered around 50,000. The British did not have a numerical advantage; their victory was achieved despite their numerical inferiority, reinforcing the importance of the conspiracy.
• Therefore, only Statement II is correct, and it is the direct and accurate explanation for the assertion made in Statement I.

Solution: C

• Statement I accurately describes the complex position of the Nawabs of Awadh. They were simultaneously building their own autonomous state while remaining deeply enmeshed in the politics of the Mughal court in Delhi, often acting as kingmakers or key nobles.
• Statement II is incorrect. While they carved out their own autonomy, they did not consistently side with foreign invaders against the emperor. For example, Saadat Khan fought against Nadir Shah at the Battle of Karnal (1739) on behalf of the Mughal emperor. Later, Shuja-ud-Daula of Awadh allied with Ahmad Shah Durrani at Panipat (1761), but this was part of a complex alignment of Indian powers, not a simple anti-Mughal move to help a foreigner.
• Statement III is correct. The Nawabs of Awadh were major players at the imperial court. Saadat Khan was a key noble, and his successor and nephew, Safdar Jang, served as the Wazir of the Mughal Empire for several years. Their participation in imperial affairs, such as battles and holding high office, was a key way they exercised their influence and power, which supports the description in Statement I.
• Therefore, only Statement III is correct, and it serves as a direct explanation and evidence for the dual role described in Statement I.