17th May 2025

Explanation:
Statement 1 is correct. Chandrayaan-3 achieved what Chandrayaan-2 could not by successfully soft-landing a rover on the lunar surface. Chandrayaan-2's lander (Vikram) crashed during its landing attempt, though its orbiter continued to function successfully.

Statement 2 is incorrect. The Chandrayaan-5/LUPEX (Lunar Polar Exploration) mission is not designed as a sample return mission. It will focus on studying lunar volatile materials, especially lunar water ice in the Permanently Shadowed Regions (PSRs) near the lunar south pole. Chandrayaan-4 (upcoming) is the mission aimed at lunar sample return, not Chandrayaan-5.

Statement 3 is correct. For the Chandrayaan-5/LUPEX mission, the lunar lander will be developed by ISRO, while the rover will be developed by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI), Japan. This reflects the collaborative nature of the mission between ISRO and JAXA.

Statement 4 is correct. The Chandrayaan series has progressively expanded India's lunar exploration capabilities: Chandrayaan-1 focused on orbital lunar mapping and discovered water molecules; Chandrayaan-2 included an orbiter and attempted a lander-rover mission; Chandrayaan-3 achieved successful soft landing and rover deployment; Chandrayaan-4 is planned for lunar sample return; and Chandrayaan-5/LUPEX will target lunar volatile analysis at the South Pole.

Explanation:
Statement 1 is correct. The NOTA option was introduced as a result of the 2013 Supreme Court judgment in the PUCL vs Union of India case, establishing it as a symbol of voter discontent and allowing voters to reject all contesting candidates while maintaining the secrecy of their choice.

Statement 2 is incorrect. Even if NOTA receives the highest number of votes in an election, the candidate with the second-highest valid votes is declared elected. NOTA votes are counted but treated as invalid votes, and they do not trigger a re-election with new candidates.

Statement 3 is incorrect. The Election Commission of India has opposed making NOTA mandatory in all elections. The EC argued that uncontested elections are infrequent (only 6 cases since 1971 in Lok Sabha elections and 9 cases since 1952 where candidates were elected unopposed), and making NOTA compulsory would require legislative amendments to the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961.

Statement 4 is correct. NOTA was first implemented in the 2013 Assembly elections in Chhattisgarh, Mizoram, Rajasthan, Delhi, and Madhya Pradesh, and later extended to the 2014 General Elections.

Explanation:
Option (a) is incorrect. The Account Aggregator framework is not regulated solely by the RBI but is a multi-regulatory initiative led by RBI, SEBI, IRDAI, PFRDA, and the Ministry of Finance. Conversely, the DPDP Act establishes a broader data protection framework under the Data Protection Board, not specifically a multi-regulatory financial framework.

Option (b) is partially correct but incomplete. While Consent Managers under the DPDP Act can operate across all sectors (health, education, employment, digital commerce, etc.), Account Aggregators are not limited to sharing only banking data. They enable secure sharing of various financial data including banking, loans, tax, investment, and pensions.

Option (c) is incorrect. Account Aggregators are specifically designed to be "data blind" and neither see nor store the financial data shared by Financial Information Providers. This is a key feature of the AA framework, not a difference from the DPDP Act.

Option (d) is correct. Both frameworks establish consent-based data sharing models that prioritize user empowerment, transparency, and interoperability. However, they differ in their sectoral scope (AA focuses on financial data while DPDP covers all personal data across sectors) and regulatory oversight (AA is overseen by financial regulators while DPDP will be overseen by the Data Protection Board).

Explanation:
Statement 1 is correct. The IAEA is an autonomous organization within the United Nations system that reports to both the United Nations General Assembly and the UN Security Council, particularly regarding instances of members' noncompliance with safeguard and security obligations.

Statement 2 is incorrect. The IAEA applies mandatory comprehensive safeguards in non-nuclear weapon States (NNWS) Parties to the NPT, not only to nuclear weapon states. In fact, the primary focus of IAEA safeguards is to verify that non-nuclear weapon states are not diverting nuclear material from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.

Statement 3 is correct. The IAEA's Board of Governors comprises 35 members who meet about five times a year to approve safeguards agreements, carry out statutory functions, and appoint the Director General.

Statement 4 is correct. The IAEA Statute was approved on October 23, 1956, and came into force on July 29, 1957. It is popularly referred to as the "Atoms for Peace and Development" organization within the UN framework, reflecting its mandate to promote the peaceful use of nuclear science and technology.

Explanation:
Statement 1 is correct. The Supreme Court has interpreted Article 21 to include the Right to Digital Access as a fundamental right, emphasizing that digital exclusion violates the right to life with dignity. In its April 30, 2025 judgment, the Court affirmed that the Right to Digital Access is a component of the fundamental Right to Life and Personal Liberty under Article 21.

Statement 2 is incorrect. The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 adopts a 'social barrier' approach to disability, not a 'medical model'. It views disability not only as impairment but also as exclusion due to societal and infrastructural challenges, shifting focus from individual limitations to societal barriers.

Statement 3 is correct. The Supreme Court's ruling on digital access as a fundamental right aligns with India's obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), which emphasizes accessibility, non-discrimination, and equal participation in society.

Statement 4 is incorrect. The Supreme Court did not find the KYC framework under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 constitutionally invalid. Instead, it directed the RBI, SEBI, and DoT to revise their KYC norms and digital infrastructures to align with principles of accessibility and substantive equality, acknowledging the need for inclusive digital verification methods.

Explanation:
Statement 1 is incorrect. Presidential references under Article 143 do not have binding precedential value equivalent to regular judgments. The Supreme Court has held that while advisory opinions are significant, they are not to be considered as binding law. The Court's advisory jurisdiction is distinct from its regular jurisdiction, and opinions rendered under Article 143 do not create binding precedents in the same way as judgments delivered under Articles 32, 131-136.

Statement 2 is correct. Under Article 143(1), the President can refer questions of both law and fact to the Supreme Court. The Court is bound by the recitals in the order of reference and accepts the statements of facts set out in the reference without inquiring into their truth or otherwise.

Statement 3 is correct. The advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 143 was indeed modeled after Section 213 of the Government of India Act, 1935, which conferred similar powers on the Federal Court of India.

Statement 4 is correct. In the Gujarat Elections case of 2002, the Supreme Court ruled that Article 174 (which requires that six months shall not intervene between the last sitting of the Assembly and its first sitting in the next session) applies only to existing ("live") Assemblies and not to dissolved ones.