MPSC 2026 Prelims Paper-I · Question 1 of 100

Correct — option (2), which carries statements (a), (b) and (d). The British Indian Association was founded at Calcutta in 1851, drawing its membership from the landholders and the English-educated professional men of the Bengal Presidency, and its first major intervention came when the East India Company's charter fell due for renewal. In 1852 it petitioned the British Parliament, and the demands recorded in that petition are exactly the material this question is built from: the establishment of a separate legislature possessing a popular character; the separation of the executive from the judicial functions of government; a reduction in the salaries of high-ranking officers; and the abolition of the salt duty, abkari (excise) and stamp duties. Statement (a) is the separation-of-powers demand, statement (b) is the salary demand, and statement (d) is the tax demand — all three are in the petition, and the only choice that carries precisely those three is (2). Statement (c) is where the question turns, and it turns on a distinction worth learning rather than resenting. The petition asked for a legislature of a popular character; the further claim that Indians should be represented in it is a separate proposition, and the Commission's final key does not count it among the 1852-53 demands. What Parliament actually conceded in the Charter Act of 1853 was six additional members added to the Governor-General's Council for legislative business — a legislative wing, not Indian membership of it — and the door to non-official Indians sitting on a legislative council was opened later, by the Indian Councils Act of 1861. Notice also what the paper does not offer you: there is no 'all four' choice here. The live combinations are (a)+(d), (a)+(b)+(d) and (a)+(b)+(c), so even a candidate carrying the demand list as one undifferentiated block could reason a way home — (3) drops the tax demand, which is the best-attested item on the whole list, while (2) drops only the one statement that goes beyond what the petition is recorded as asking.

• (1)Only (a) and (d) — Two of the petition's demands, correctly identified — separation of the executive from the judiciary, and abolition of the salt, abkari and stamp duties — but the combination is incomplete. It silently drops the demand for a reduction in the salaries of high-ranking officers, which is one of the most frequently quoted items in the standard account of the 1852 petition and is stated plainly in statement (b). In a 'which of these' item that offers overlapping bundles, a choice that is right as far as it goes is still wrong: MPSC is asking you to draw the full boundary of the list, not to name a couple of members of it. Since statement (b) survives scrutiny, any bundle that leaves it out fails.
• (3)(a), (b) and (c) — This is the trap the item was built around, and it is the choice that separates a candidate who has read the petition from one who has read a summary of it. It keeps the two safe statements, (a) and (b), and then swaps the fiscal demand for statement (c). But the abolition of the salt duty, abkari and stamp duties is squarely in the record of what the Association asked for in 1852, while statement (c)'s specific claim — a new legislature with Indian representation in it — goes past what the petition is recorded as demanding, which was a separate legislature of a popular character. Discarding a well-attested demand in favour of a contested one is the wrong trade, and it is what makes this option fail.
• (4)None of the above — An escape option is only ever correct when every named choice can be shown to fail, and here one of them plainly survives: statements (a), (b) and (d) all correspond to demands in the Association's petition, so option (2) stands and 'None of the above' collapses with it. This is the habit to build for the whole paper — 'None of the above' is offered six times in this booklet, and each time it is a definite claim that all three named combinations are defective, not a hedge you can retreat to when you are unsure. Test the named options first; reach for the escape only after all of them are dead.

The British Indian Association, founded in Calcutta in 1851, belongs to the first phase of organised Indian political activity — the era of the pre-Congress associations, before the Indian National Congress was founded in 1885. It was formed by the merger of the Landholders' Society and the Bengal British India Society, and its membership was drawn largely from the zamindars and the English-educated professional class of Bengal. Its method was constitutional and its instrument was the petition: rather than agitate, it collected grievances, drafted them in the language of British constitutional practice, and sent them to Parliament in London, on the theory that Parliament, not the Company, was the sovereign that could be persuaded. The renewals of the East India Company's charter — 1793, 1813, 1833, 1853 — were the natural moments for such petitions, because Parliament had to re-legislate for India each time and so was obliged to listen. Sister bodies formed in the other presidencies on the same model, notably the Madras Native Association and the Bombay Association, both founded in 1852, and all three petitioned Parliament ahead of the 1853 renewal.

Read this question as a test of one habit: matching a demand list to what a body actually asked for, rather than to what you would expect it to have asked for. Modern readers assume any nineteenth-century Indian association must have demanded Indian membership of the legislature, and that assumption is what makes statement (c) so attractive. The petition's recorded demand was narrower and more characteristic of its moment — a separate legislature of a popular character, a separated judiciary, cheaper administration and lighter indirect taxes. The distinction matters historically too: the Charter Act of 1853 answered the legislative demand by adding six members to the Governor-General's Council for legislative purposes and by throwing the covenanted civil service open to competitive examination, while Indian membership of a legislative council had to wait for the Indian Councils Act of 1861. In the hall, the arithmetic is also worth noting. MPSC deducts one quarter of the marks for a wrong answer, which on this two-mark paper means −0.5 against +2, so a candidate who can eliminate even one bundle with confidence is usually better off answering than leaving it blank.

• The British Indian Association was founded at Calcutta in 1851 by the merger of the Landholders' Society and the Bengal British India Society; its members were mainly the zamindars and English-educated professionals of the Bengal Presidency, and its method was the constitutional petition to Parliament rather than agitation.
• Its 1852 petition to the British Parliament, sent ahead of the Company's charter renewal, asked for a separate legislature of a popular character, separation of the executive from the judicial functions, a reduction in the salaries of high-ranking officers, and the abolition of the salt duty, abkari (excise) and stamp duties.
• The Charter Act of 1853 gave a partial answer: six additional members were added to the Governor-General's Council for legislative purposes, creating for the first time a separate legislative wing, and recruitment to the covenanted civil service was thrown open to competitive examination.
• The Charter Act of 1853 was also the last of the charter renewals — it did not fix a term of years for Company rule, leaving Parliament free to end it at any time, which it did through the Government of India Act of 1858 after the Revolt of 1857.
• Non-official Indians were first brought into legislative councils by the Indian Councils Act of 1861, as nominated members — which is why the demand for Indian representation belongs to a later stage of the story than the 1852 petition.
• The Madras Native Association and the Bombay Association, both founded in 1852, were the parallel presidency bodies, and they too petitioned Parliament before the 1853 renewal.

• Assuming a mid-nineteenth-century association must have demanded Indian representation in the legislature — the 1852 petition's recorded demand was for a legislature of popular character, and the two are not the same claim
• Confusing what the petition asked for with what the Charter Act of 1853 granted; the Act's six additional legislative members were a legislative wing of the Council, not seats for Indians
• Picking a bundle that is correct as far as it goes: in an overlapping-combination item, dropping one true statement makes the whole option wrong
• Treating 'None of the above' as a safe hedge instead of a definite claim that all three named bundles are defective

MPSC's modern-history block leans on organisations, their founding years and their programmes, and it very often presents them as a statement bundle — three or four demands, and four overlapping combinations to choose between. That format rewards a precise memory of a list and punishes a general impression of it, which is the opposite of what a 'both statements are true' pair rewards. UPSC handles the same syllabus area differently: it prefers to name the association and ask what it was, or to pair an association with a person or a year and ask how many pairs match, so a UPSC aspirant tends to carry founder-and-year while an MPSC aspirant needs the demand list itself. Both examiners like the Charter Act of 1853 because it carries three separate hooks — the legislative wing, open competition for the civil service, and the absence of a fixed term for Company rule.

No directly related past PYQ was found.

• practice — not a real PYQ

  Which one of the following was NOT among the provisions introduced by the Charter Act of 1853 for the government of British India ?

  • (a)Six additional members were added to the Governor-General's Council for legislative purposes
  • (b)Recruitment to the covenanted civil service was thrown open to competitive examination
  • (c)Indians were admitted as nominated non-official members of the legislative council
  • (d)No fixed term of years was laid down for the continuance of Company rule

  Answer(c) Indians were admitted as nominated non-official members of the legislative council — this came only with the Indian Councils Act of 1861, not with the Charter Act of 1853. The 1853 Act did add six members to the Governor-General's Council for legislative business, did open the covenanted civil service to competition, and did pointedly omit any fixed term for Company rule, leaving Parliament free to end it whenever it chose.

• practice — not a real PYQ

  The British Indian Association of 1851 was formed by the merger of which two earlier bodies of the Bengal Presidency ?

  • (a)The Bangabhasha Prakashika Sabha and the Zamindari Association
  • (b)The Landholders' Society and the Bengal British India Society
  • (c)The British India Society and the Madras Native Association
  • (d)The Bombay Association and the Bengal British India Society

  Answer(b) The Landholders' Society and the Bengal British India Society — the two merged in 1851 to form the British Indian Association at Calcutta, which then petitioned Parliament in 1852 before the Company's charter came up for renewal. The Madras Native Association and the Bombay Association were separate presidency bodies founded in 1852, not constituents of the Calcutta merger.