Daily Current Affairs Quiz for UPSC Prelims 2027 — 6 August 2026

A recent study on strengthening India's Universal Immunisation Programme (UIP) has renewed attention on combination vaccines. The hexavalent (six-in-one) vaccine under study differs from the pentavalent vaccine currently used in the UIP by additionally protecting against which one of the following?

Why this answer

The correct answer is Poliomyelitis (via Inactivated Polio Vaccine). The pentavalent vaccine already used in the UIP protects against Diphtheria, Pertussis, Tetanus, Hepatitis B and Hib. The hexavalent vaccine adds Inactivated Polio Vaccine (IPV) to this same combination, making it a single-injection six-in-one shot. Hepatitis B, Hib, and Pertussis are therefore not the differentiator — they are already delivered through the existing pentavalent vaccine, so adding them again would not distinguish the hexavalent formulation.

The static concept

Universal Immunisation Programme (UIP) — vaccine schedule and combination-vaccine composition (pentavalent vs hexavalent).

The Governor's power to fill a vacancy in a State's upper house, and the constitutional clock that runs on any Minister who is not yet a legislator, have recently drawn renewed attention. With reference to Articles 164(4) and 171 of the Constitution of India, which one of the following statements is correct?

Why this answer

The correct statement is that a non-legislator Minister automatically ceases to hold office after six consecutive months without securing legislative membership, and the Governor cannot sidestep this by repeatedly reappointing the same person — this is a mandatory constitutional consequence under Article 164(4), reinforced by the Supreme Court in S.R. Chaudhuri v. State of Punjab (2001), which held the provision cannot be manipulated through successive appointments. The statement claiming the Governor may extend the six-month window on the Chief Minister's recommendation is wrong because Article 164(4)'s language is unequivocal and confers no such discretion on the executive. The statement listing 'Literature, Science, Art and Sports' as the Governor's nomination fields is wrong — Article 171(5) specifies Literature, Science, Art, Co-operative Movement and Social Service, not Sports. The statement claiming nominated members form one-fourth of the Council's strength is wrong on the fraction — Article 171(3)(e) fixes the nominated share at one-sixth of the total membership.

The static concept

Article 164(4) — six-consecutive-month rule for a non-legislator Minister; Article 171(3)(e)/(5) — Governor's nomination of Legislative Council members.

The Supreme Court's directions on mining restrictions near wetland conservation reserves in India have recently drawn attention to the actual legal basis on which such wetlands are protected. In this context, which one of the following statements is correct?

Why this answer

The correct statement is that Ramsar-site protection in India rests on domestic legal instruments — chiefly the Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017 notified under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 — with courts sometimes layering on specific directions (as the Supreme Court did for the Asan Wetland Conservation Reserve and then extended, for parity, to all similarly notified reserves). The claim that a Ramsar tag itself creates an automatic statutory buffer is wrong: a Ramsar designation commits India to maintaining the wetland's ecological character, it does not by itself create a separate statutory protection regime. The claim that wetland conservation reserves have buffer zones identical to national parks/sanctuaries is wrong — the Himachal Pradesh government's own submission to the Court was that such reserves lack statutory buffer zones, unlike national parks and sanctuaries. The claim that only the state government can permit mining near such a reserve is wrong — the Supreme Court's directions route this permission through the Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife and/or the MoEFCC, not the state alone.

The static concept

Ramsar Convention, 1971 (India a Contracting Party since 1982) and its domestic implementation via the Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017 under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.

The mainland clouded leopard (Neofelis nebulosa), whose conservation has drawn renewed attention amid recent State-level and national initiatives in Northeast India, offers a useful lens on how India layers domestic law, global assessment, and international trade regulation onto a single species. With reference to its current legal and conservation status, which one of the following statements is correct?

Why this answer

The correct statement is the one pairing 'Vulnerable' (its actual IUCN Red List category, reaffirmed 2021) with Schedule I of the amended Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 (the Act's highest protection tier, prohibiting hunting, trade and possession). The 'Endangered'-plus-Schedule-II option is wrong on both counts — the species is Vulnerable, not Endangered, and Schedule I, not Schedule II, applies. The CITES Appendix II option is wrong because the clouded leopard sits in Appendix I, which bars commercial international trade rather than 'permitting regulated trade for scientific and breeding purposes'. The Project Tiger/ex-situ option is wrong because the species' actual recovery mechanism is in-situ, run through the Species Recovery Programme under the Centrally Sponsored Scheme for Integrated Development of Wildlife Habitats (IDWH), not ex-situ breeding under the tiger-specific Project Tiger.

The static concept

Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 — Schedule I species protection (post-2022 amendment, four schedules); IUCN Red List categories; CITES Appendices; in-situ conservation via the Species Recovery Programme under IDWH.

The mainland clouded leopard, whose conservation has recently drawn renewed state-level attention in Northeast India, is a protected species under Indian and international wildlife law. In this context, consider the following statements:

1. 1.The mainland clouded leopard (Neofelis nebulosa) is listed in Schedule I of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, which accords it the highest degree of legal protection under the Act.
2. 2.Species listed under Schedule I of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 can never be hunted under any circumstances, even with the express permission of a government wildlife official.
3. 3.The mainland clouded leopard has been designated the State Animal of Meghalaya, and the State's dedicated conservation mission for the species emphasises habitat protection, scientific research, and community participation.
4. 4.The IUCN Red List currently classifies the mainland clouded leopard as 'Endangered'.

How many of the above statements are correct?

Why this answer

The answer is 'Only two' — statements 1 and 3 are correct. Statement 1 is correct: the mainland clouded leopard is a Schedule I species under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, the schedule carrying the strictest penalties for hunting/trade. Statement 3 is correct: it is Meghalaya's State Animal, and the State's newly launched conservation mission does centre on habitat protection, research, protection measures, and community participation. Statement 2 is wrong — Schedule I protection is not absolute; Section 11 of the Act empowers the Chief Wildlife Warden to permit hunting in narrow, defined circumstances (e.g., an animal that has become dangerous to human life or is disabled/diseased beyond recovery). Statement 4 is wrong — the IUCN Red List classifies the mainland clouded leopard as 'Vulnerable', not 'Endangered'; conflating the two adjacent threat categories is a common error.

The static concept

Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 — Schedule I species protection and its Section 11 hunting exceptions; IUCN Red List threat categories.

The debate over how India's digital payment systems should be funded — and whether the Reserve Bank of India's own surplus could absorb the cost instead of a new merchant charge — has renewed attention on the statutory architecture underpinning RBI's regulatory and monetary functions. With reference to the following Acts/Sections and the specific function each is meant to govern, consider the following pairs:

1. 1.Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007 — Empowers the RBI to authorise, regulate and supervise payment systems in India, including UPI
2. 2.Section 47 of the RBI Act, 1934 — Provides the statutory basis for constituting the Monetary Policy Committee
3. 3.Section 42(1) of the RBI Act, 1934 — Prescribes the Cash Reserve Ratio (CRR) that scheduled banks must maintain with the RBI
4. 4.Section 24 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 — Prescribes the Statutory Liquidity Ratio (SLR)
5. 5.Section 45ZB of the RBI Act, 1934 — Provides the statutory basis for transferring RBI's surplus profits to the Central Government

How many of the above pairs are correctly matched?

Why this answer

The answer is 'Only three pairs' — pairs 1, 3 and 4 are correctly matched; pairs 2 and 5 have their sections cross-swapped. Pair 1 is correct: the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007 is the law under which RBI authorises and regulates payment systems, including UPI/NPCI. Pair 2 is wrong: Section 47 of the RBI Act, 1934 deals with 'Allocation of Surplus Profits' (the annual RBI-to-government transfer), not the Monetary Policy Committee. Pair 3 is correct: Section 42(1) of the RBI Act, 1934 is the CRR provision. Pair 4 is correct: Section 24 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 is the SLR provision. Pair 5 is wrong: Section 45ZB of the RBI Act, 1934 (inserted by the Finance Act, 2016) is what constitutes the MPC — the surplus-transfer power actually sits in Section 47, not 45ZB. Pairs 2 and 5 essentially swap the two sections between the two functions.

The static concept

RBI Act, 1934 & Banking Regulation Act, 1949 — statutory architecture of RBI's monetary and regulatory functions (MPC constitution under Sec. 45ZB, surplus-profit transfer under Sec. 47, CRR under Sec. 42(1)), alongside the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007 governing digital payment regulation.

India's hosting of a forthcoming BRICS Summit has put the grouping's New Development Bank back in focus. With reference to India's rupee convertibility since the 1991 reforms and the multilateral financial institutions that have followed, consider the following statements:

1. 1.The BRIC acronym was originally coined by a Goldman Sachs economist in 2001, with South Africa joining the grouping only in 2010 to form BRICS.
2. 2.India's acceptance of IMF Article VIII obligations in 1994 made the rupee fully convertible on both the current account and the capital account.
3. 3.The New Development Bank, set up by the BRICS grouping as an alternative funding channel to the World Bank and IMF, is headquartered in New Delhi.
4. 4.India's current account convertibility, achieved as part of the 1991-93 reforms, was a specific recommendation of the Narasimham Committee on banking-sector reforms.
5. 5.Capital Account Convertibility for India was formally mapped out by the Tarapore Committee (1997), but has still not been fully implemented.

How many of the above statements are correct?

Why this answer

The answer is 'Only two' — only statements 1 and 5 are correct; statements 2, 3 and 4 are wrong. Statement 1 is correct: the BRIC acronym was coined by Goldman Sachs economist Jim O'Neill in 2001, and South Africa joined only in 2010 to make it BRICS. Statement 5 is correct: the Tarapore Committee (1997) mapped out a roadmap for full Capital Account Convertibility, which India has still not implemented even decades later. Statement 2 is wrong — India's 1994 acceptance of IMF Article VIII obligations made the rupee convertible only on the current account; the capital account remains merely partially convertible, not 'fully' convertible on both accounts. Statement 3 is wrong — the New Development Bank is headquartered in Shanghai, not New Delhi; India hosts no head office of the bank. Statement 4 is wrong — current account convertibility flowed from India's IMF Article VIII commitment during the 1991-93 reforms, not from the Narasimham Committee, which dealt with banking-sector and financial-sector reform, not currency convertibility.

The static concept

Economic Reforms of 1991 — Balance of Payments crisis, LPG measures, rupee convertibility (Article VIII, Tarapore Committee on Capital Account Convertibility), and India's post-reform embrace of new multilateral institutions (BRICS/NDB) alongside the Bretton Woods system.

Recent judicial scrutiny of search-and-seizure powers exercised under special enactments has renewed attention on how India's statutory framework assigns specific investigative and cyber-security powers to specific agencies. With reference to the following pairs of statutory provisions and the power or mandate each establishes, consider:

1. 1.Section 69, Information Technology Act, 2000 — Power to intercept, monitor, or decrypt information transmitted through a computer resource
2. 2.Section 69A, Information Technology Act, 2000 — Power to direct blocking of public access to information through a computer resource
3. 3.Section 70A, Information Technology Act, 2000 — CERT-In, designated as India's national nodal agency for cyber incident response
4. 4.Section 17, Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 — Enforcement Directorate's power of search and seizure, exercised as part of an ongoing criminal investigation

How many of the above pairs are correctly matched?

Why this answer

Three of the four pairs are correctly matched. Section 69 does grant the power to intercept, monitor, or decrypt information — correct. Section 69A does grant the power to block public access to information — correct. Section 17 of the PMLA does empower the Enforcement Directorate to search and seize as part of a criminal investigation, not as a standalone civil act — correct, and this is the exact principle the Karnataka High Court reaffirmed. The mismatch is the CERT-In pairing: Section 70A of the IT Act establishes the National Critical Information Infrastructure Protection Centre (NCIIPC) to protect Critical Information Infrastructure — CERT-In's mandate as the national nodal agency for cyber incident response instead flows from Section 70B. So the answer is 'Only three pairs'.

The static concept

Institutional and statutory architecture for cyber security and investigative search powers — IT Act, 2000 Sections 69 (interception), 69A (blocking), 70A (NCIIPC) and 70B (CERT-In), read alongside analogous search-and-seizure powers under special enactments such as PMLA Section 17.

Why this answer

The answer is 'A is true but R is false'. Assertion A is correct: the New Development Bank was established by the BRICS grouping in 2014 (Fortaleza Declaration) precisely to offer developing countries financing for infrastructure and sustainable development as an alternative to Bretton Woods institutions like the World Bank. Reason R is false: the NDB has since expanded its membership beyond the original five founders — Bangladesh, Egypt, and the UAE have already joined as new member countries, and further expansion has been actively discussed alongside BRICS' own enlargement. So the NDB's membership is NOT restricted exclusively to the original five, and R does not correctly describe the Bank's institutional trajectory.

The static concept

BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) — expansion, objectives, and the New Development Bank as its development-finance arm.

Why this answer

The answer is 'A is true, but R is false'. Assertion (A) is correct: courts examining Tenth Schedule disputes (including the Subhash Desai/Shiv Sena matter) have held that a faction cannot claim to BE the political party merely because it commands a majority of MLAs/MPs inside the House — the original party's own structures must sanction such authority. Reason (R) is false: the Tenth Schedule's Paragraph 1 defines the 'legislature party' as the elected members of a House belonging to a party, but this is explicitly a DIFFERENT entity from the 'political party' itself (the extra-legislative organisation with its own constitution and office-bearers) — the two are not legally identical or interchangeable, which is precisely the distinction the Supreme Court's observation turns on. Since R misstates the very doctrine that makes A true, R cannot be its explanation and is itself false.

The static concept

Tenth Schedule (Anti-Defection Law) — distinction between 'political party' and 'legislature party'.