Loading...
Track every question where coaching institutes disagree on the correct answer. We compare answer keys from all major institutes, trace each dispute to primary sources, and provide evidence-based analysis.
Our evidence-based breakdown of the GS Paper 1 (Set D) questions aspirants are debating — one genuinely defective question and the rest where the key holds on closer reading.
Updated 27 May 2026 with the official provisional answer key. These are UnlockIAS's assessed answers, traced to primary and official sources only (ILO NORMLEX, the UN Treaty Collection, ICRC, PIB, NCERT and the relevant rule books / statutes). The UPSC official provisional answer key has been released — see our coaching key vs official key comparison for mismatches. Candidates can file objections via the QPRep portal until 6:00 PM, 31 May 2026.
“Which of the following international conventions have not been ratified by India ? 1. Employment Policy Convention 2. Abolition of Forced Labour Convention 3. International Convention on the…”
| Convention | India's status | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Employment Policy Convention (ILO C122) | Ratified — 17 Nov 1998 | ILO NORMLEX |
| Abolition of Forced Labour Convention (ILO C105) | Ratified — 18 May 2000 | ILO NORMLEX |
| Migrant Workers Convention (ICRMW), 1990 | Not ratified | UN Treaty Collection, Ch. IV-13 |
| Geneva Convention IV (Civilians), 1949 | Ratified — 9 Nov 1950 (Geneva Conventions Act, 1960) | ICRC IHL database |
| Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, 1961 | Not ratified | UN Treaty Collection, Ch. V-4 |
Only items 3 (Migrant Workers Convention, ICRMW 1990) and 5 (Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, 1961) are unratified by India. No option lists exactly {3, 5}: (a) and (b) name only ratified conventions; (c) wrongly drops 5 and adds 4; (d) carries both 3 and 5 but wrongly adds 4. So there is no correct answer. The likely error is confusing Geneva Convention IV (Civilians, 1949), which India ratified in 1950, with its Additional Protocols of 1977 and 2005, which India has not ratified. The question should be dropped. On UPSC practice the two marks are then redistributed proportionally across the remaining valid questions (the paper is rescaled), not handed out as a flat two marks to everyone.
(d) — it is the only option that carries both genuinely unratified conventions (3 and 5), though it wrongly adds the ratified Geneva Convention IV.
These are the questions being argued over online. On the evidence, each has a defensible answer — here is the trap and why the key holds.
Statement 2 (Amaravati "next only to Sanchi in size") tempts a "1, 2 and 3" answer.
Statement 2 is false: Amaravati's dome (about 53 m across) was larger than Sanchi, and NCERT calls it among India's largest stupas — not "next only to Sanchi." Statements 1 and 3 stand, so (b).
Statement 3 ("the Communists did not support Bose") is the trap that pulls answers towards (a) or (c).
Statement 3 is the trap: the Communists did back Bose, who won the 1939 Congress presidency 1,580–1,377 with Congress Socialist and Communist support. So statements 1, 2 and 4 are the contributing factors — (b).
The masculine kshetrapati is Rigvedic, so the Rigveda (a) looks plausible.
The masculine kshetrapati ("lord of the field") is Rigvedic (RV 4.57). But the feminine kshetrasya patni ("mistress of the field"), which the question asks for, occurs in the Atharvaveda (Śaunaka 2.12.1) and the Vajasaneyi Samhita (16.18) — not in the Rigveda. So (b).
Whether sixth-century-BCE coinage attaches to "second urbanisation" or to a "money economy" splits answers.
Sixth-century-BCE coinage marks both the second urbanisation and the money economy; R.S. Sharma treats the Pali coin terms and silver punch-marked coins in that combined context. Both statements hold — (c).
The Mankani-plate dating is debated in scholarship, making one statement look shaky.
The Mankani-plate dating is debated in scholarship, but on the textbook position all three statements stand and are mutually consistent — so (d).
Whether relationship 3 is correctly matched is the swing point.
Relationship 2 is clearly right and 3 clearly wrong, so only (b) fits. From PIB: India’s LT-LEDS targets net-zero by 2070; BUR-4 (Dec 2024) recorded a 7.93% fall in emissions in 2020 over 2019.
Easy to over-read Rajasthan’s border length and Sikkim’s single neighbour as correct.
Statement 1 (Uttar Pradesh borders the most states) is correct. Statement 2 is wrong: Rajasthan has the longest stretch of the India–Pakistan border but not the longest international border among Indian states (West Bengal and others are longer). Statement 3 is wrong: Sikkim is not the only state with a single Indian neighbour, since Meghalaya too borders only Assam. So the "not correct" pair is 2 and 3 — (c).
Which agency leads each NIRANTAR work-stream is easy to mismatch (statement 2).
On MoEFCC's NIRANTAR portal: Ecosystem Survey and Analysis is led by BSI Kolkata (1 true); Research and Management of Ecosystem Service by ICFRE Dehradun, not the Central Zoo Authority (2 false); Capacity Development Support by IIFM Bhopal (3 true). So 1 and 3 — (b).
Pairing institutions/cities to the German Chancellor visit outcomes is easy to get wrong.
From the PIB List of Outcomes of the German Chancellor's visit (12–13 January 2026): the Ayurveda MoU was with Charité, Berlin, not the University of Hamburg (1 wrong), and the Honorary Consul was opened in Ahmedabad, not Lucknow (4 wrong). The Youth Hockey MoU (2) and the Indo-Pacific dialogue mechanism (3) are listed outcomes. So the “not correct” pair is 1 and 4 — (b).
The wild-card and ranking-entry statements read plausibly true.
The Grand Slam Rule Book 2025 states there is "no limitation" on the wild cards a player may receive (3 false), and main-draw entry needs a ranking of 500 or better, not "all players above 14" (2 false). Only statement 1 holds — (c).
All four statements read as true, so "all of the above" looks tempting.
All four statements read as true, which makes it look open. But the MeitY National Blockchain Framework classifies a consortium blockchain as a type of blockchain, not a feature, so statement 3 falls outside what the question asks ("features"). That leaves 1, 2 and 4 — (c).
Statement 1 plausibly places the terahertz band on the command-centre link.
Terahertz in drone networks is used for drone-to-drone links, not the command-centre link, which runs on RF/satellite; so statement 1 misplaces the band. Statements 2 and 3 hold — (b). (DRDO D-4, for context, uses GPS spoofing.)
An ethics-judgement case where (b) and (c) both look defensible.
A judgement case, so no external source. The allegations are legally unproven: going public (1) risks defamation and dropping the contractor (2) prejudges him, while limited disclosure to an oversight committee (3) keeps transparency without acting publicly on unproven claims. Hence (b) over (c).
The three "no Article" claims sound plausible if the commencement/repeal Articles are misremembered.
All three "no Article" claims are false: Article 394 fixes 26 January 1950 as the commencement, Article 393 names the Constitution, and Article 395 repeals the 1935 and 1947 Acts. So (b).
Statement 3 ("cover all public places by 2035") looks like overreach.
Statement 3 is doubted as overreach, but it holds. The Prime Minister's Independence Day address (PIB, 15 August 2025) states the shield will, by 2035, cover the nation's important places — including civilian sites such as hospitals, railways and places of faith — and frames Mission Sudarshan Chakra as both defensive and able to strike back. So all three statements hold — (a).
The Zero-FIR scope and electronic-filing statements read as plausibly true.
Under BNSS Section 173: a Zero FIR is for cognizable offences only, so "cognizable/non-cognizable" is wrong (1); preliminary enquiry is allowed with DSP-rank permission (2 true); electronic filing is optional, not obligatory (3 false). Only statement 2 holds — (d).
Understanding why coaching keys differ and what it means for your score.
Our methodology for identifying, analyzing, and resolving disputed questions.
Within hours of the exam, we gather official answer keys from Vision IAS, Vajiram and Ravi, Forum IAS, Insights IAS, and UnlockIAS.
We run an automated comparison across all keys to flag every question where at least two institutes differ on the correct option.
For each disputed question, our team traces the answer back to primary sources — NCERTs, official government publications, standard reference texts.
Each disputed question is published with the split across institutes, evidence for each option, and our assessed correct answer with reasoning.
Institutes compared: Vision IAS, Vajiram and Ravi, Forum IAS, Insights IAS, and UnlockIAS. We add more sources as they become available on exam day.
Even a few disputed questions can significantly impact the cutoff and your result.
Even 1-2 disputed questions can shift the Prelims cutoff by 2-4 marks. With the exact UPSC marking scheme (+2 for correct, −2/3 for wrong), the swing per question is 8/3 ≈ 2.67 marks. For borderline candidates, this is the difference between clearing Prelims and missing out.
From 2026, UPSC allows candidates to formally challenge answers on the provisional key. If your analysis of a disputed question is backed by strong evidence, you can submit an objection. Valid objections may lead to answer changes or the question being dropped entirely.
Disputed questions make score estimation uncertain. We recommend calculating a best-case and worst-case score range. Our score calculator lets you flag disputed questions and automatically computes both scenarios to give you a realistic range.
Whether you cleared or fell short, the next stage is practice under exam conditions — full-length Prelims tests with Sherlocking analysis, or the Mains programme if you are through.
Neil Sir goes live on Telegram on exam night — a free meet to walk through the paper, flag controversial questions, and discuss expected cutoffs the moment the dust settles.
Join @UPSCneil to see moreExplore more tools and analysis for UPSC Prelims 2026.
Complete GS Paper 1 answer key (Set A, B, C, D) with detailed solutions and coaching institute comparison.
Step-by-step guide to filing objections on the QPRep portal.
UPSC official provisional answer key 2026 — now released. Compare with coaching keys.
Free UPSC Prelims 2026 marks calculator with exact negative marking and category-wise cutoff comparison.
Calculate your Prelims score with dispute-aware best/worst case scenarios.
Side-by-side comparison of answer keys from all major coaching institutes.
Category-wise expected cutoff analysis factoring in disputed questions.
Common questions about UPSC Prelims disputed questions and how they affect your score.
Use our score calculator to get best-case and worst-case estimates, with dispute-aware scoring that accounts for questions where coaching keys disagree.
Open Score Calculator