View answer copy →Answered a very similar question
Their question: “Tribunals as dispute redressal mechanisms; steps to enhance effectiveness”
The topper's pendency data and effectiveness framing for tribunals directly serve the demand to assess the need for administrative tribunals and steps to improve them.
Key learnings from their answer
- ›He converts vague claims into hard numbers tied to the exact question: RBI study that only ~1% of local-body revenue is own-source for the decentralisation/devolution question (Q2), NJDG ~4.7 crore pending cases for the tribunals-effectiveness question (Q6), and Kerala's full devolution of all 29 Schedule XI subjects via the People's Plan Campaign as a model state example (Q2). -> Keep a small bank of one killer statistic + one model-state/best-practice per high-frequency theme so every body paragraph carries verifiable substance, not assertion.
- ›Every answer runs Introduction -> Body -> Conclusion closing with 'Thus...', and the body sub-headers are written to mirror the question's verb, 'Federal features include', 'Safeguards in SR Bommai Case', 'Role of Tribunals in dispute redressal', 'Way forward'. -> Make your sub-headings echo the exact words of the directive (examine/safeguards/measures) so the examiner sees demand-coverage at a glance; reserve a standing 'Way forward' box for any 'measures/steps' question.