MPSC 2026 Prelims Paper-I · Question 40 of 100

Correct — option (1), 'Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrect.' Statement-I gives the projected population of Maharashtra as on 1 March 2026 as about 12.93 crore, and that is the figure carried by the Economic Survey of Maharashtra for 2025-26. It represents a rise from the 11.24 crore actually enumerated in the Census of 2011, and it is a projection rather than a count — no census has been taken since 2011, so every current population figure for the state is an estimate carried forward from that base. Statement-I is correct. Statement-II claims that the urban population of Maharashtra now exceeds its rural population. On the same projection it does not: of the 12.93 crore, about 6.55 crore is rural and about 6.38 crore urban, so the rural population still leads by roughly 17 lakh and the urban share works out at a little over 49 per cent. Statement-II is therefore incorrect, and option (1) is the answer. What makes this a good question rather than a mere number check is how narrow the margin is. Maharashtra is one of the most urbanised of the large Indian states — 45.2 per cent of its population was urban at the 2011 Census, well above the national figure — and it is close enough to the halfway mark that a candidate reasoning from Mumbai, Pune, Nagpur, Nashik and Thane will assume the crossover has already happened. It has not, on this projection, and the reason is that Maharashtra contains, alongside its metropolitan corridor, large and populous rural districts across Marathwada, Vidarbha and the Khandesh belt. The lesson for the exam is to distinguish 'highly urbanised' from 'majority urban': the first is a comparison with other states, the second is a comparison within the state, and a statement can be true on one and false on the other.

• (2)Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correct. — Inverts both judgements. It rejects the projected total of 12.93 crore, which is the figure the Economic Survey of Maharashtra for 2025-26 itself carries, and accepts the claim of an urban majority, which the same projection contradicts — about 6.55 crore rural against about 6.38 crore urban. A candidate arrives here by reasoning from the state's metropolitan image rather than from its figures, and by assuming that a total population figure quoted in a question paper must be the altered element.
• (3)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct. — Accepts the correct total but also accepts the urban majority. The crossover has not occurred on this projection: the urban share stands a little over 49 per cent, so the rural population remains the larger by roughly 17 lakh. This is the most attractive wrong option in the set, because Maharashtra genuinely is among the most urbanised large states and the gap is small enough to be invisible to intuition. It is a reminder that 'more urbanised than most states' and 'more urban than rural' are two different propositions.
• (4)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are incorrect. — Rejects the projected total as well as the urban-majority claim. The rejection of Statement-II is right, but the rejection of Statement-I is not: 12.93 crore is the projection for 1 March 2026 published in the state's own Economic Survey. A candidate who reaches this option has probably anchored on the 11.24 crore of the 2011 Census and judged 12.93 crore too large, which underestimates fifteen years of growth — the projection also raises population density from 365 persons per square kilometre in 2011 to about 420.

Between two censuses, every population figure in circulation is a projection. A projection takes the last enumerated base — for India, the Census of 2011 — and carries it forward using assumptions about fertility, mortality and migration, which is why projected figures are always quoted with a reference date, here 1 March 2026, and why they are revised as new survey evidence arrives. Reading a projection properly means reading its components, not just its total. Maharashtra's projection for 2026 records a population of about 12.93 crore against 11.24 crore in 2011, a density rising from 365 to about 420 persons per square kilometre, and about 6.73 crore males against 6.20 crore females. It also records a demographic transition in progress: the share of children aged 0-14 falls from 26.7 per cent in 2011 to about 19.6 per cent in 2026, while the working-age group of 15-59 rises from 63.3 per cent to about 67.3 per cent. That combination — a shrinking child population, an expanding working-age population and a slowly rising elderly share — is the demographic dividend phase, and it is time-limited: the same falling fertility that produces it will, in due course, produce an ageing population.

Maharashtra's urban-rural balance is the specific fact this question is built on, and it is worth holding precisely because it is so often assumed wrongly. At the 2011 Census 45.2 per cent of the state's population was urban, a figure far above the national average and second only to a small number of states and union territories on that measure. The projection for 2026 puts the urban share a little above 49 per cent — closer to half than any large state has been, but not yet across it. The distribution behind that number is extremely uneven: urban Maharashtra is concentrated in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region, the Pune-Pimpri belt, Nagpur, Nashik and a handful of district headquarters, while much of Marathwada, Vidarbha and the northern districts remains predominantly rural with agriculture as the principal occupation. That contrast is the basis of the state's regional imbalance debate and of the statutory development boards created to address it, and it is the reason a question about a statewide urban share can be answered correctly only from the figure and not from an impression of the state.

• The Economic Survey of Maharashtra for 2025-26 projects the state's population as on 1 March 2026 at about 12.93 crore, against 11.24 crore enumerated in the Census of 2011. It is a projection carried forward from the 2011 base, not an enumeration.
• On the same projection the rural population is about 6.55 crore and the urban population about 6.38 crore, so the rural population still exceeds the urban by roughly 17 lakh and the urban share stands a little over 49 per cent.
• Maharashtra's urban share at the 2011 Census was 45.2 per cent, well above the national figure, making it one of the most urbanised of the large states — but 'most urbanised' is a comparison across states and does not imply an urban majority within the state.
• Other components of the 2026 projection: population density rising from 365 persons per square kilometre in 2011 to about 420; males about 6.73 crore and females about 6.20 crore.
• The age structure is shifting: the share of the 0-14 age group falls from 26.7 per cent in 2011 to about 19.6 per cent in 2026, while the working-age group of 15-59 rises from 63.3 per cent to about 67.3 per cent — the classic profile of a demographic dividend phase produced by declining fertility.

• Treating 'highly urbanised' as equivalent to 'majority urban'. Maharashtra ranks among the most urbanised large states while its rural population remains the larger of the two, and the question is built precisely on that distinction.
• Confusing a projection with a census figure. No enumeration has taken place since 2011, so any current total is an estimate with a reference date attached; a statement giving a figure 'as per projection on 1st March 2026' is making a claim about a published projection, not about a count.
• Answering a state-level statistical question from an impression of the state's biggest cities. Mumbai, Pune, Nagpur and Nashik dominate Maharashtra's public image, but the populous rural districts of Marathwada, Vidarbha and Khandesh are what decide a statewide urban-rural comparison.

State statistics reach MPSC Paper-I chiefly through the Economic Survey of Maharashtra, and in four shapes: the headline figure, such as projected population or per capita income; the comparison, such as urban against rural or one region against another; the rank, such as Maharashtra's position among states on a given indicator; and the trend, such as the change in density or in age structure between the 2011 Census and the current projection. The two-statement format used here is the Commission's preferred vehicle for the second and fourth, because it lets one true figure be paired with one plausible but false comparison. Prepare by reading the current Economic Survey's population and human development chapters and noting the headline number, the rural-urban split and one trend for each indicator — and in the hall, settle each statement independently before reading the options, since three of the four options in this format differ only in which statement they endorse.

No directly related past PYQ was found.

• practice — not a real PYQ

  As per the Economic Survey of Maharashtra 2025-26, the projected population of the state as on 1 March 2026 is about :

  • (a)11.24 crore
  • (b)12.93 crore
  • (c)13.85 crore
  • (d)14.60 crore

  Answer(b) 12.93 crore — the projection carried in the state's Economic Survey, made up of roughly 6.55 crore rural and 6.38 crore urban residents. The figure of 11.24 crore is the state's actual population at the Census of 2011, which is the base from which the projection is carried forward.

• practice — not a real PYQ

  According to the Census of 2011, the proportion of Maharashtra's population living in urban areas was about :

  • (a)35.2 per cent
  • (b)42.4 per cent
  • (c)45.2 per cent
  • (d)52.6 per cent

  Answer(c) 45.2 per cent — well above the national urban share at the same census, which places Maharashtra among the most urbanised of the large states. The share has continued to rise and stands a little above 49 per cent on the 2026 projection, so the state is approaching but has not crossed an urban majority.