Instructions:-
1. Attempt all the questions.
2. Once you have completed all the questions of a particular section click on the submit button for scores and explanations then move to the next sections.
3. For each correct answer, you receive 1 mark. For this mock, there is no negative marking.
English Language
Each set of questions in this section is based on a single passage. Please answer each question based on what is stated or implied in the corresponding passage. In some instances, more than one option may be the answer to the question; in such a case, please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has become a critical aspect of contemporary business practices. The concept emphasises that companies should not only focus on maximising profits but also address the social, economic, and environmental issues that affect their stakeholders. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in CSR among businesses of all sizes. While some view CSR initiatives as a public relations tool, others believe they can provide tangible benefits to both the company and society.
Proponents of CSR argue that these initiatives can help companies build brand loyalty and enhance their reputation, thereby contributing to increased sales and revenue. For example, a company that engages in sustainable practices or supports social causes may be seen as socially responsible and ethical by its customers. This perception can translate into increased customer loyalty and a willingness to pay a premium for products or services from such a company.
Additionally, CSR initiatives can also help companies attract and retain employees, particularly younger generations who prioritise social and environmental responsibility. Employees are more likely to remain loyal to an organisation that demonstrates a commitment to social responsibility and ethical practices. Furthermore, CSR can create a positive workplace culture, boost employee morale and engagement, and attract top talent, resulting in a more productive and effective workforce.
Companies that prioritise CSR may also enjoy long-term financial benefits. Studies have shown that companies with strong CSR reputations tend to outperform their peers in terms of financial performance and long-term sustainability. Such companies often have a lower cost of capital, as investors view them as less risky investments. These companies are also more likely to be supported by governments, regulators, and other stakeholders, providing a favorable operating environment and reducing the potential for reputational risks.
Critics of CSR argue that a company’s primary responsibility is to maximise profits for its shareholders, and that any efforts to prioritise social and environmental concerns are ultimately detrimental to the company’s bottom line. They contend that the costs of CSR initiatives are often too high and detract from a company’s core mission of generating profits.
In conclusion, CSR initiatives have become essential for companies that want to remain competitive and sustainable in today’s business environment. These initiatives can help companies build brand loyalty, attract and retain employees, reduce risks, and enhance their financial performance in the long run.
Quantitative Techniques
A person owns 5 hotels A, B, C, D and E all over India. He collects data for the year 2021 regarding the money coming from these hotels. It is found that the total amount received from all the five hotels is Rs. 20 million. There are total of 3,000 rooms in all the 5 hotels. The hotel charges remain same for all the rooms in a specific hotel. Further, the data is analysed and it is found that 20% of the total amount is received from hotel A and there are 15% of the total number of rooms in hotel A. 15% and 35% of the total amount is received from hotel B and hotel C, respectively. 12% of the total number of rooms are in hotel B and 28% of the total number of rooms are in hotel C. 17% of the total amount is received from hotel D and 25% of the total number of rooms are in hotel D. 13% of the total amount is received from hotel E and 20% of the total number of rooms are in hotel E.
Logical Reasoning
Traffic in India is a famously untameable beast. Its unmistakable call is the loud, angry honking of all manner of vehicles. On a busy street, during office hours, the honking can go up to what has scientifically been proven to be a health hazard. It is this issue of noise pollution that the Mumbai Police have found a novel way to curb. They appear to have decided that if we won’t learn to honk less on our own, tough love is the most viable solution. In at least three busy intersections in Mumbai, they went about installing “punishing signals”. Essentially, they attached a decibel meter to the traffic signal to measure sound when the traffic light is red. As soon as the level reached 85 decibels, the signal resets the red light, making the wait even longer.
The innovative idea was made into an advertisement-length video. Tweeting “Horn not okay, please!” and using the hashtag #HonkResponsibly, the Mumbai Police posted the video. “Feel free to honk,” the voiceover tells us as the video ends, “that is, if you don’t mind waiting.” The video is clever and funny, and addresses the real problem of noise pollution in our cities. The World Health Organization has shown that noise can contribute to diseases, with effects such as increases in stress hormones, hypertension, obesity, and cardiac disease. Prolonged or repeated exposure to loud sounds (especially above 85 decibels) can even cause hearing loss. And in urban areas, it isn’t just noise from traffic that causes problems. Construction noises, machines, exhaust fans, non-honking traffic sounds, aircraft, and even indoor noises contribute to the pollution. It has become impossible to find a quiet corner in cities. The Mumbai Police have taken on an uphill task to reduce at least one kind of noise pollution.
The idea that it is only punishment that can teach us to be self-conscious of our honking is an interesting one. The idea, of course, as the video shows us, is to encourage others to control the urge to honk while driving.
Legal Reasoning
The offences of hurt and assault might sound similar, but there are some basic differences between them. While enacting these provisions, the authors of IPC deliberately kept these offences separate. This is because bodily hurt can take place even by acts which are not assaults. For example, a person may dig a hole and conceal it to make somebody fall and get hurt, but this is not an assault. According to Section 319, a person causes hurt if he causes bodily pain, disease or infirmity to somebody. In other words, the victim must suffer some physical harm or pain due to the actions of the offender.
The main requirements of hurt are bodily pain, disease or infirmity. There are many ways in which this offence can take place. For example, a person may hit somebody or even poison him. If a person hits somebody without intention to cause his death, the offence of hurt will apply and not homicide. In this case, the act should be such that it is not likely to cause the victim’s death.
When a person does an act with the intention of causing hurt to somebody or with the knowledge that he is likely to cause hurt, he is guilty of causing hurt voluntarily. When a person voluntarily causes hurt to somebody, the court can punish him with imprisonment up to 1 year. The court can also levy a fine of maximum Rs. 1,000 in addition to the imprisonment.
Grievous hurt under Section 320 is basically an aggravated form of simple hurt under Section 319. The following eight kinds of hurt only can be grievous hurt: 1) Causing hurt by emasculation; 2) Permanent privation of one’s eyesight; 3) Permanent privation of one’s hearing; 4) Privation of one’s members or joints; 5) Destruction or permanent impairing of the powers of one’s members or joints; 6) Permanent disfiguration of one’s head or face; 7) Fracturing or dislocating one’s bones or teeth; 8) Causing any hurt which endangers one’s life or causes him to suffer severe bodily pain for 20 days or makes him unable to follow his ordinary pursuits. Whenever hurt amounts to any of these eight kinds of injuries, it becomes grievous hurt. The prosecution or victim must be able to prove the existence of these injuries. If an offender intentionally and voluntarily causes grievous hurt, Section 325 punishes him with imprisonment up to 7 years. The punishment may also include a fine.
Current Affairs & General Knowledge
The just denial of Saudi Arabia’s bid to a seat on the United Nations Human Rights Council represents a sharp reflection of shifting geopolitics and shifts in the global discourse on human rights. It showed the kingdom finishing in a distant sixth place, by which international concerns over its human rights practice remain and even intensify, despite whatever reform this steps to perfect its global image. Yes, the vote does reflect deep discontent; more importantly, it further casts a critical question into the credibility of a state in whose actions and conducts toward other states during peacetime and, even more so, amidst any conflict continue to be at crossroads with the ideals that UNHRC is supposed to represent. It is worth noting that Saudi Arabia under the Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s leadership initiated ambitious reforms as part of the Vision 2030 initiative aimed at modernizing the economy, reducing dependence on oil, and opening up society. Progress, however, has been scarred by large-scale crackdowns on political dissent, free speech, and human rights activists. Murder incidents of public figures, such as the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018, continue to hang over the kingdom’s attempt to integrate itself into the world’s human rights architecture. Although various efforts are being put in place to distance themselves from the incidence, it remains an essential point of focus for various international watchdogs and governments.
Failure to seat on UNHRC is a broader rejections by the international community as countries become unwilling to close their eyes in regards to the violations of human rights in the kingdom. The military involvement in Yemen by Saudi Arabia, roundly condemned as having triggered one of the worst humanitarian crises ever witnessed in modern history, further heightens these concerns. Further, obnoxious anti-terrorism laws used to hush critics and the subjugation of women, no matter the recent cosmetic reforms, have only added to the perception that this is an entrenched autocratic regime. Interestingly, Saudi Arabia’s strong diplomatic and economic influence—especially its status as one of the world’s top oil exporters—did not tip the scales in its favour. In the past, such clout has often enabled it to shoo away criticism and maintain an appearance of international support for its stance on issues. However, exclusion of the kingdom from the UNHRC marked an important shift in international expectations as it conveyed the message that economic power alone would no longer suffice for protecting a country from moral accountability when issues involved basic human rights.