Pratidin

UPSC current affairs quiz, 3 October 2026

30 Prelims-style questions on the day's news, in the formats UPSC uses (statement-based, How many, Statement-I and II), each with the answer and an explanation. Try each one before you open the answer.

Read 3 October 2026 first2 October 2026 quiz4 October 2026 quizTimed test in the app

Captive-bred Great Indian Bustards to be released into the wild for the first time

  1. With reference to the Great Indian Bustard, consider the following statements:
    1. It is listed as Critically Endangered on the IUCN Red List.
    2. The first release of captive-bred bustards into the wild is taking place in Desert National Park.
    3. Its conservation breeding in India is being carried out by the Zoological Survey of India.
    Which of the statements given above are correct?

    1. 1 and 2 only
    2. 2 and 3 only
    3. 1 and 3 only
    4. 1, 2 and 3
    Show answer

    Answer: (a) 1 and 2 only. Statement 1 is correct: the GIB has been Critically Endangered since 2011. Statement 2 is correct: two radio-tagged male chicks are being released in Desert National Park near Jaisalmer. Statement 3 is wrong: the birds have been bred by the Wildlife Institute of India at centres in Jaisalmer.

  2. Consider the following statements about the first release of captive-bred Great Indian Bustards:
    1. Two male chicks are being released.
    2. The birds will carry radio tags.
    3. The release is taking place in Kutch, Gujarat.
    How many of the statements given above are correct?

    1. Only one
    2. Only two
    3. All three
    4. None
    Show answer

    Answer: (b) Only two. Statement 1 is correct: two male chicks aged four to six months. Statement 2 is correct: each is radio-tagged. Statement 3 is wrong: the release is in Desert National Park near Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.

  3. Consider the following statements:
    Statement-I: The Supreme Court has ordered renewable energy power lines outside Desert National Park to be laid underground by December 2027.
    Statement-II: Collision with overhead power lines is a threat to the Great Indian Bustard.
    Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?

    1. Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I
    2. Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II does not explain Statement-I
    3. Statement-I is correct but Statement-II is incorrect
    4. Statement-I is incorrect but Statement-II is correct
    Show answer

    Answer: (a) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I. Both are correct. The undergrounding order exists because birds die by flying into overhead lines, so Statement-II explains Statement-I.

  4. Consider the following:
    1. Desert National Park lies in Jaisalmer and Barmer districts.
    2. The Great Indian Bustard is in Schedule I of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.
    3. Project Great Indian Bustard was launched by the Government of Gujarat in 2013.
    4. The Great Indian Bustard is the state bird of Rajasthan.
    How many of the above are correct?

    1. Only one
    2. Only two
    3. Only three
    4. All four
    Show answer

    Answer: (c) Only three. 1, 2 and 4 are correct. 3 is wrong: Project Great Indian Bustard was launched by Rajasthan on World Environment Day 2013.

  5. Which one of the following best describes ex situ conservation?

    1. Declaring a grassland a national park
    2. Breeding a species in a centre outside its natural habitat
    3. Burying power lines inside a protected area
    4. Notifying an eco-sensitive zone around a park
    Show answer

    Answer: (b) Breeding a species in a centre outside its natural habitat. Ex situ means outside the natural habitat, such as captive breeding centres, zoos and gene banks. The other three options are in situ measures that protect the habitat itself.

  6. Consider the following statements:
    1. The Wildlife Institute of India is located in Dehradun.
    2. The Supreme Court has set December 2027 as the deadline for laying renewable energy power lines outside Desert National Park underground.
    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    1. 1 only
    2. 2 only
    3. Both 1 and 2
    4. Neither 1 nor 2
    Show answer

    Answer: (c) Both 1 and 2. Both are correct: WII is in Dehradun, Uttarakhand, and the Court has fixed December 2027 for undergrounding renewable energy lines outside the park.

Centre resumes appraising pending post facto green clearances after Supreme Court ruling

  1. Consider the following statements:
    1. The Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006 was issued under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
    2. Public consultation is one of the stages of the environmental clearance process under the EIA Notification, 2006.
    3. In July 2026 the Supreme Court struck down the 2017 notification that allowed projects in violation to seek clearance.
    Which of the statements given above are correct?

    1. 1 and 2 only
    2. 2 and 3 only
    3. 1 and 3 only
    4. 1, 2 and 3
    Show answer

    Answer: (a) 1 and 2 only. Statements 1 and 2 are correct: the 2006 notification was issued under the 1986 Act, and its stages are screening, scoping, public consultation and appraisal. Statement 3 is wrong: in Vanashakti v Union of India (29 July 2026) the Court upheld the 2017 notification and quashed the 2021 Office Memorandum.

  2. Consider the following statements about the Supreme Court's ruling of 29 July 2026 in Vanashakti v Union of India:
    1. It upheld the 2017 notification on violation cases.
    2. It quashed the 2021 Office Memorandum on violation cases.
    3. It barred the processing of all pending post facto applications.
    How many of the statements given above are correct?

    1. Only one
    2. Only two
    3. All three
    4. None
    Show answer

    Answer: (b) Only two. Statements 1 and 2 are correct. Statement 3 is wrong: the Court allowed pending applications to be processed, which is why the Ministry has resumed appraisal.

  3. Consider the following statements:
    Statement-I: The Environment Ministry will now process only post facto proposals that were pending, rejected or returned.
    Statement-II: The Supreme Court held that prior environmental clearance remains mandatory unless the rules are formally amended.
    Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?

    1. Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I
    2. Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II does not explain Statement-I
    3. Statement-I is correct but Statement-II is incorrect
    4. Statement-I is incorrect but Statement-II is correct
    Show answer

    Answer: (a) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I. Both are correct. Because prior clearance remains the rule and the Court only allowed pending applications to proceed, the Ministry is not accepting new post facto proposals; Statement-II explains Statement-I.

  4. Consider the following:
    1. Screening
    2. Scoping
    3. Public consultation
    4. Appraisal
    How many of the above are stages of the environmental clearance process under the EIA Notification, 2006?

    1. Only one
    2. Only two
    3. Only three
    4. All four
    Show answer

    Answer: (d) All four. All four are stages. Screening is the first check of a proposal; scoping fixes the terms of reference; public consultation includes a hearing; appraisal is by an expert committee. The Supreme Court listed public hearing, screening, scoping and appraisal as parts of the decision-making process in Alembic Pharmaceuticals (2020).

  5. The Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006 was issued under which law?

    1. Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
    2. Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
    3. National Green Tribunal Act, 2010
    4. Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972
    Show answer

    Answer: (b) Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. The EIA Notification, 2006 was issued under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. The Water Act, 1974 and the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 are older laws on other subjects, and the NGT Act, 2010 set up an adjudicating body.

  6. Consider the following statements:
    1. In Alembic Pharmaceuticals v Rohit Prajapati, the Supreme Court held ex post facto environmental clearances to be contrary to the precautionary principle.
    2. The Environment (Protection) Act was enacted in 1986.
    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    1. 1 only
    2. 2 only
    3. Both 1 and 2
    4. Neither 1 nor 2
    Show answer

    Answer: (c) Both 1 and 2. Both are correct. In Alembic (1 April 2020) the Court set aside a 2002 circular allowing ex post facto clearances and called them contrary to the precautionary principle and sustainable development. The Environment (Protection) Act was enacted in 1986.

Centre issues rules creating a National Tribunals Commission to select tribunal members

  1. With reference to tribunals in India, consider the following statements:
    1. Articles 323A and 323B were part of the Constitution as originally adopted.
    2. In L. Chandra Kumar v Union of India, the Supreme Court held the power of judicial review of the High Courts and the Supreme Court to be part of the basic structure.
    3. Under the 2026 rules, the chairperson of the National Tribunals Commission must be a retired Supreme Court judge or a retired Chief Justice of a High Court.
    Which of the statements given above are correct?

    1. 1 and 2 only
    2. 2 and 3 only
    3. 1 and 3 only
    4. 1, 2 and 3
    Show answer

    Answer: (b) 2 and 3 only. Statement 1 is wrong: Articles 323A and 323B form Part XIVA, inserted by the 42nd Amendment in 1976. Statement 2 is correct: a seven-judge bench held so in 1997. Statement 3 is correct as per the rules dated 30 September 2026.

  2. Consider the following statements about the National Tribunals Commission rules, 2026:
    1. The Commission is headquartered in Delhi.
    2. It has two judicial members and two technical members besides the chairperson.
    3. The chairperson must be a sitting judge of the Supreme Court.
    How many of the statements given above are correct?

    1. Only one
    2. Only two
    3. All three
    4. None
    Show answer

    Answer: (b) Only two. Statements 1 and 2 are correct. Statement 3 is wrong: the chairperson must be a retired Supreme Court judge or a retired Chief Justice of a High Court.

  3. Consider the following statements:
    Statement-I: The Supreme Court has insisted that tribunals be insulated from executive control over appointments.
    Statement-II: The government is itself a party in many disputes decided by tribunals.
    Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?

    1. Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I
    2. Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II does not explain Statement-I
    3. Statement-I is correct but Statement-II is incorrect
    4. Statement-I is incorrect but Statement-II is correct
    Show answer

    Answer: (a) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I. Both are correct. Because the government litigates before tribunals on tax, service and regulatory matters, control over who sits on them threatens independence; that is the reason for the Court's insistence.

  4. Consider the following statements about the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 and the Supreme Court's judgment of 19 November 2025:
    1. The Act abolished several appellate tribunals and shifted their cases to High Courts and other bodies.
    2. The Act fixed the tenure of tribunal members at four years.
    3. The Court found that the Act repackaged provisions of a 2021 ordinance that it had already invalidated.
    4. The Court held the minimum age of 50 years for members to be arbitrary.
    How many of the statements given above are correct?

    1. Only one
    2. Only two
    3. Only three
    4. All four
    Show answer

    Answer: (d) All four. All four are correct. The Act abolished several appellate tribunals, fixed a four-year tenure and a minimum age of 50; the Court found it re-enacted provisions of the invalidated 2021 ordinance and called the age limit arbitrary.

  5. Consider the following statements:
    1. L. Chandra Kumar v Union of India was decided by a seven-judge bench.
    2. The Supreme Court first directed the setting up of a National Tribunals Commission in its judgment of 19 November 2025.
    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    1. 1 only
    2. 2 only
    3. Both 1 and 2
    4. Neither 1 nor 2
    Show answer

    Answer: (a) 1 only. Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is wrong: the Court had already directed a National Tribunals Commission in Madras Bar Association v Union of India in November 2020; the 2025 judgment repeated the direction and set a four-month deadline.

  6. In its judgment of 19 November 2025 on the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021, within what time did the Supreme Court direct the Centre to set up a National Tribunals Commission?

    1. Two months
    2. Four months
    3. Six months
    4. One year
    Show answer

    Answer: (b) Four months. The Court directed the Centre to establish the Commission within four months, as a structural safeguard for independence, transparency and uniformity in tribunal appointments.

Op-ed: Split verdict on the Election Commissioners Act exposes how the Supreme Court sits

  1. Consider the following statements:
    1. Article 145(3) of the Constitution requires at least five judges to decide a case involving a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution.
    2. Under the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, the Chief Justice of India is a member of the selection committee.
    3. Before March 2023, Election Commissioners were appointed by the President on the recommendation of the Prime Minister.
    Which of the statements given above are correct?

    1. 1 and 2 only
    2. 2 and 3 only
    3. 1 and 3 only
    4. 1, 2 and 3
    Show answer

    Answer: (c) 1 and 3 only. Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is wrong: the 2023 Act's committee is the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister; the Chief Justice was on the interim committee set by Anoop Baranwal. Statement 3 is correct: that was the practice until the Anoop Baranwal ruling of March 2023.

  2. Consider the following statements about the selection of Election Commissioners:
    1. Under the 2023 Act, the Prime Minister heads the selection committee.
    2. Under the 2023 Act, the Chief Justice of India chairs the selection committee.
    3. The Anoop Baranwal committee was to apply only until Parliament made a law.
    How many of the statements given above are correct?

    1. Only one
    2. Only two
    3. All three
    4. None
    Show answer

    Answer: (b) Only two. Statements 1 and 3 are correct. Statement 2 is wrong: the Chief Justice is not on the committee under the 2023 Act, which is headed by the Prime Minister with the Leader of the Opposition and a Union Cabinet Minister.

  3. Consider the following statements:
    Statement-I: The challenge to the 2023 Election Commissioners Act was referred to the Chief Justice of India after a two-judge bench split.
    Statement-II: Article 145(3) requires every challenge to a central law to be heard by at least five judges.
    Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?

    1. Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I
    2. Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II does not explain Statement-I
    3. Statement-I is correct but Statement-II is incorrect
    4. Statement-I is incorrect but Statement-II is correct
    Show answer

    Answer: (c) Statement-I is correct but Statement-II is incorrect. Statement-I is correct. Statement-II is wrong: Article 145(3) applies to cases involving a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution (and Article 143 references), not to every challenge to a law. That was exactly the point on which the judges differed.

  4. Consider the following:
    1. Article 324
    2. Article 145(3)
    3. Article 143
    4. Article 50
    How many of the above deal with the Supreme Court's benches or its advisory jurisdiction?

    1. Only one
    2. Only two
    3. Only three
    4. All four
    Show answer

    Answer: (b) Only two. Article 145(3) sets the minimum bench size and Article 143 is the President's power to seek the Court's advisory opinion. Article 324 concerns the Election Commission, and Article 50 is the directive to separate the judiciary from the executive. So only two.

  5. Consider the following statements:
    1. The Chief Election Commissioner can be removed from office only through a process of impeachment in Parliament.
    2. The Law Commission's 229th Report proposed regional benches of the Supreme Court for ordinary appeals.
    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    1. 1 only
    2. 2 only
    3. Both 1 and 2
    4. Neither 1 nor 2
    Show answer

    Answer: (c) Both 1 and 2. Both are correct. The CEC can be removed only through impeachment, needing a two-thirds majority in both Houses, while other Election Commissioners can be removed by the President on the CEC's recommendation; the 229th Report (2009) proposed a Constitution Bench in Delhi with regional benches for ordinary appeals.

  6. In which case did the Supreme Court hold, in 2018, that the Chief Justice of India is the Master of the Roster, with power over the assignment of cases?

    1. Anoop Baranwal v Union of India
    2. Shanti Bhushan v Supreme Court of India
    3. L. Chandra Kumar v Union of India
    4. S.R. Bommai v Union of India
    Show answer

    Answer: (b) Shanti Bhushan v Supreme Court of India. Shanti Bhushan (2018) upheld the roster power. Anoop Baranwal (2023) concerned Election Commissioners; L. Chandra Kumar (1997) concerned tribunals; S.R. Bommai (1994) concerned President's Rule.

Explained: First official Indian visit to Pakistan since Operation Sindoor

  1. Consider the following statements about the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO):
    1. India and Pakistan became full members of the SCO in 2017.
    2. The SCO's Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure is headquartered in Tashkent.
    3. Pakistan holds the SCO presidency for 2026-27.
    How many of the statements given above are correct?

    1. Only one
    2. Only two
    3. All three
    4. None
    Show answer

    Answer: (c) All three. All three are correct. India and Pakistan joined as full members at the 2017 Astana summit; RATS is based in Tashkent, Uzbekistan; Pakistan took over the presidency after the Bishkek summit of 2026 and hosts the 2027 summit.

  2. Consider the following statements about India's recent engagement with Pakistan:
    1. An MEA Additional Secretary attended an SCO national coordinators' meeting in Islamabad.
    2. This was India's first official visit to Pakistan since Operation Sindoor.
    3. The meeting was held in Pakistan because it hosted the 2026 SCO summit.
    How many of the statements given above are correct?

    1. Only one
    2. Only two
    3. All three
    4. None
    Show answer

    Answer: (b) Only two. Statements 1 and 2 are correct. Statement 3 is wrong: the 2026 summit was in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan; Pakistan holds the presidency after that summit and hosts the 2027 summit.

  3. Consider the following statements:
    Statement-I: India attends SCO meetings hosted by Pakistan even while it avoids bilateral dialogue with Pakistan.
    Statement-II: India treats attendance at SCO meetings as an obligation of membership, separate from bilateral talks.
    Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?

    1. Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I
    2. Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II does not explain Statement-I
    3. Statement-I is correct but Statement-II is incorrect
    4. Statement-I is incorrect but Statement-II is correct
    Show answer

    Answer: (a) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I. Both are correct, and the second explains the first: India sees multilateral attendance as a membership duty that does not amount to bilateral engagement.

  4. Consider the following countries:
    1. Iran
    2. Belarus
    3. Afghanistan
    4. Turkmenistan
    How many of the above are full members of the SCO?

    1. Only one
    2. Only two
    3. Only three
    4. All four
    Show answer

    Answer: (b) Only two. Iran (2023) and Belarus (2024) are full members. Afghanistan is not a member, and Turkmenistan, which follows a policy of neutrality, has not joined. So only two.

  5. The Simla Agreement of 1972 is significant for India's present policy toward Pakistan mainly because it:

    1. Created the Line of Actual Control with China
    2. Committed both countries to settle differences bilaterally
    3. Set up the Indus Waters Treaty
    4. Made India and Pakistan members of the SCO
    Show answer

    Answer: (b) Committed both countries to settle differences bilaterally. The Simla Agreement bound India and Pakistan to resolve differences through bilateral negotiations and turned the ceasefire line into the Line of Control. The LAC concerns China, the Indus treaty dates to 1960, and SCO membership came in 2017.

  6. Consider the following statements:
    1. The SCO's permanent Secretariat is in Beijing.
    2. The SCO's Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure is headquartered in Beijing.
    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    1. 1 only
    2. 2 only
    3. Both 1 and 2
    4. Neither 1 nor 2
    Show answer

    Answer: (a) 1 only. Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is wrong: the Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure is headquartered in Tashkent, Uzbekistan.