Odisha Judicial Service Civil Judge – English – 2013
Odisha Judicial Service Civil Judge – English – 2013 Question Paper
Total marks – 100 Duration – 1 hour 30 minutes
1. Translate the following into English:
Click here for the question
2. Translate the following into Odia:
Unfortunately, education at present is aimed at making you conform, fit into and adjust yourself to this acquisitive society. That is ail your parents, your teachers and your books are concerned with. As long as you conform, as long as you are ambitious, acquisitive, corrupting and destroying others in the pursuit of power and position, you are considered a respectable citizen. You are educated to fit into society ; but that is not education, it is merely a process which conditions you to conform to a pattern. The real function of education is not to turn you out to be a Clerk, or a Judge, or a Prime Minister, but to help you understand the whole structure of this rotten society and allow you to grow in freedom, so that you will break away and create a different society, a new world.
3. Write a short essay in about 150 words on any one of the following:
(a) Defining Culture in the 21st Century
(b) inflation and Sustainable Growth
(c) Riding a Bicycle in a Moon-lit Night
(d) Capital Punishment
(e) Land Acquisition and Industrial Expansion
4. Make a precis of the following passage in about 100 words:
If one may point out, we are probing together, questioning, doubting, asking and this is not a lecture. We are together enquiring, taking a walk together into the whole field of existence, not dealing with a particular problem, but the problem of man, the problem of human existence. One of the factors of our existence is that we live in disorder. Apparently, after thirty, forty thousand years or more, we have not been able to live in total order in the universe ; not relative order, but to have order within, under all circumstances, wherever we live – socially, politically and so on. What is important is that we, you and I the speaker, should unfold the causes of disorder, not merely to listen to the explanation or the description which the speaker might offer, but together think, observe, go into ourselves, not in any way selfishly or self-centredly, but look at our lives, look at what we have made of the world ; why man, the human being, lives in perpetual disorder outwardly and inwardly. To enquire if it is possible to live in order inwardly first, then outwardly, not the other way round. But first, inwardly, deep within ourselves one can live in complete order. Also, we should be able to discuss, talk over together this evening, the problem of suffering and this enormous mystery of death.
Beauty is complete order. But most of us have not that sense of beauty in our lives. We may be great artists, great painters, expert in various things, but in our own daily life, with all the anxieties and miseries, we live unfortunately, a very disordered life. It is a fact. You may be a great scientist, you may be a great expert in a subject, but you have your own problems, struggles, pain, anxieties and the rest of it. We are asking together, is it possible to live in complete order within, not to impose discipline, control, but to enquire into the nature of this disorder, what are the causes and to dispel, move away, wash away the cause ? Then there is a living order in the universe. Order is not following a particular pattern of life, or following certain systems blindly or openly but to enquire into ourselves and discover for ourselves; not to be told, not to be guided, but to unfold in ourselves the real causes of this disorder.
5. Read the following passage and answer the questions given below, in not more than 25 or 30 words each:
The French sociologist and columnist Raymond Aron had pointed out that in English there are two different terms, “Politics” and “Policy” whereas in his own language there is only one single term, “La politique”, to cover both. It is the same in German as in French, for the same German word, politik”, covers both policy and politics. We should make use of the resources of the English language to reflect on a distinction that has acquired crucial importance in the present phase of our democratic system.
The central concern of politics, as I understand it, is the pursuit of power. In a democracy the contest for power is never free from uncertainty and anxiety, and Indian politics is now marked by increasing turmoil. Those who make politics their career become accustomed to its turbulence and some even take a peculiar pleasure in it.
Policy, on the other hand, is a matter of setting clear goals and working methodically towards their attainment. It is, in Max Weber’s famous phrase, “a slow boring of hard boards”. Policymaking requires a calm and settled environment, and a clear and even temper in the policymaker. Politicians are expected to play to the galleries and to gather public applause for their eloquence. Policy cannot be made under continuous public gaze, although it can hardly be effective without passing the test of political approval.
Although politics, and policy follow distinct compulsions and have different orientations, they need not act against each other. In the last 10 to 15 years politics has taken such a turn in India that it not only unsettles the environment required for making viable policies but openly subverts attempts to reach workable solutions to difficult practical probjems.
The relations between government and opposition have become increasingly acrimonious over the years. Even where there is broad agreement over, let us say, foreign policy or economic policy, each side maintains an adversarial relationship with the other, fearing that there will be a loss of face if not loss of support from its constituents if it appears conciliatory. The habitually confrontationist conduct of both government and opposition is complicated by the fact that neither the one nor the other speaks in a v. single voice. This may be a good thing where it senses to defuse tension but it is not conducive to deliberations on policy.
The present system in India has settled into operating as a kind of duumvirate with its own distinctive features. It has done so without starting any dear plan to be what it has become. A division of responsibility and power has emerged between the Prime Minister and the head of the ruling party who is also the head of the ruling coalition. It corresponds neither to the Westminster model nor to the Leninist model favoured by Communist parties throughout the world. In the former the Prime Minister enjoys dear pre-eminence while in the latter power rests with the head of the party. Should we be disheartened that Indian democracy is following a path of its own?
The general belief among both allies and J opponents Is that the relationship between the Prime Minister and the head of the Congress party is an unequal relationship in which the former has to act at the behest of the latter, which would make it closer to the Leninist than the Westminster model.
(a) What similarity or dissimilarity do you find among the Germans, the English and the French with regard to the use of the terms ‘Politics’’ and “Policy”?
(b) How does the author characterize the present Indian politics and Indian politicians?
(c) Why does the author describe the policy as “a slow boring of hard boards”?
(d) How does the passage justify that the positron of the Prime Minister is at present getting closer to the Leninist model?
(e) What happens when politics and policy are not in harmony with each other?