Environmental laws, bodies & conventions

Answer: (c) 3 only

Only statement 3 is correct. The 2010 Wetlands Rules were made under India's own Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, and their definition of a wetland expressly takes in the drainage area or catchment region determined by the authority. The Ramsar Convention imposes no duty to protect every wetland.

• ✗ 1. Article 3 of the Convention asks parties to promote conservation of the wetlands on the Ramsar List and, only 'as far as possible', the wise use of wetlands generally. It is not a mandatory duty to protect all wetlands.
• ✗ 2. The 2010 Rules were framed by the Central Government under Section 25 read with Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. Ramsar is only recalled in their preamble; they are domestic rules, not a set of Ramsar recommendations.
• ✓ 3. The Rules define a wetland to include the zone of direct influence, that is the drainage area or catchment region of the wetland as determined by the authority.
• • Since then The Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017 (G.S.R. 1203(E), 26 September 2017) superseded the 2010 Rules, and now speak of a 'zone of influence' within the wetland's catchment.

Remember · India's wetland rules come from the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, not from Ramsar; the 2010 definition of wetland included its drainage area or catchment.

Question and answer: UPSC's official GS Paper I (2019, Series A) — paper ↗ · answer key ↗. Explanation: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify). Permalink · Report an error

Answer: (b) 2 and 3 only

Statements 2 and 3 are correct. The Forest Rights Act, 2006 lists bamboo as minor forest produce and gives forest dwellers ownership of such produce. The 2017 amendment to the Indian Forest Act only freed bamboo grown on non-forest land; it gave forest dwellers no right to fell bamboo in forests.

• ✗ 1. The Indian Forest (Amendment) Act, 2017 removed 'bamboos' from the definition of 'tree' so that bamboo grown in non-forest areas needs no felling or transit permit. Bamboo in forest areas stays under the Indian Forest Act, 1927.
• ✓ 2. Section 2(i) of the Forest Rights Act, 2006 defines minor forest produce to include all non-timber forest produce of plant origin, naming bamboo among them.
• ✓ 3. Section 3(1)(c) recognises ownership of minor forest produce by forest dwellers, with rights to collect, use and dispose of it, wherever it has traditionally been gathered, inside or outside village boundaries.

Remember · FRA 2006: bamboo is minor forest produce and forest dwellers own it; the 2017 Forest Act amendment freed only bamboo grown outside forests.

Question and answer: UPSC's official GS Paper I (2019, Series A) — paper ↗ · answer key ↗. Explanation: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify). Permalink · Report an error

Answer: (b) 2 only

Only statement 2 is correct: section 3(2)(iv) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 lets the Central Government lay down standards for emission or discharge of pollutants from various sources. The list of measures in section 3(2) has no item that requires the Government to prescribe public participation.

• ✗ 1. Section 3(2) lists the measures the Centre may take (coordination, standards, restriction of areas, safeguards, research, laboratories, information and so on). Prescribing a requirement of public participation is not one of them; public hearings arise from separate subordinate notifications, not from this section.
• ✓ 2. Section 3(2)(iv) names 'laying down standards for emission or discharge of environmental pollutants from various sources whatsoever', and allows different standards for different sources.

Remember · Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 gives the Centre wide powers, including emission and discharge standards; it does not itself prescribe public participation.

Question and answer: UPSC's official GS Paper I (2019, Series A) — paper ↗ · answer key ↗. Explanation: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify). Permalink · Report an error

Answer: (c) The Rules provide for exact and elaborate criteria for the identification of sites for landfills and waste processing facilities.

Option (c) is correct because Schedule I of the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 gives detailed site-selection criteria for sanitary landfills, such as minimum distances from rivers, ponds, highways, habitations and airports. The other three options misstate the rules.

• ✗ (a) Rule 4 asks every waste generator to segregate waste into three streams: bio-degradable, non bio-degradable and domestic hazardous waste. There is no five-way split.
• ✗ (b) Rule 2 applies the Rules far more widely than 'only' urban local bodies, notified towns and industrial townships. It also covers census towns, outgrowths of urban agglomerations, railways, airports, ports, defence establishments, SEZs and more.
• ✓ (c) Schedule I lays down criteria such as a landfill 100 metres from a river, 200 metres from a pond, highways, habitations, public parks and water supply wells, and 20 km from airports.
• ✗ (d) The Rules contain no ban on moving waste between districts. They say the State Pollution Control Board regulates inter-State movement of waste.
• • Since then The Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 have since been superseded by the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2026, notified in January 2026 and in force from 1 April 2026. The new Rules make four-stream segregation (wet, dry, sanitary and special care waste) mandatory (PIB).

Remember · Under the 2016 Rules, waste is segregated into three streams and Schedule I fixes landfill siting distances; the 2026 Rules replaced these with four-stream segregation.

Question and answer: UPSC's official GS Paper I (2019, Series A) — paper ↗ · answer key ↗. Explanation: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify). Permalink · Report an error

Answer: (a) 1 and 3 only

Statements 1 and 3 are correct; statement 2 is wrong. The Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 lists ordinary sand as a minor mineral, and it is the State Government, not the Centre, that makes the rules for granting minor mineral leases (section 15) and for preventing illegal mining (section 23C).

• ✓ 1. Section 3(e) of the MMDR Act defines minor minerals as building stones, gravel, ordinary clay and ordinary sand (other than sand used for prescribed purposes), plus any mineral the Centre notifies as minor.
• ✗ 2. Section 15 says the State Government may make rules for regulating the grant of quarry leases, mining leases and other concessions for minor minerals. The rule-making power lies with the State, not the Centre.
• ✓ 3. Section 23C lets the State Government make rules for preventing illegal mining, transportation and storage of minerals.

Remember · Minor minerals (including ordinary sand) are regulated by States: they frame the leasing rules (s.15) and the anti-illegal-mining rules (s.23C). The Centre only notifies which extra minerals count as minor.

Question and answer: UPSC's official GS Paper I (2019, Series A) — paper ↗ · answer key ↗. Explanation: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify). Permalink · Report an error

Answer: (a) 1 only

Only statement 1 is correct. The Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act, 2016 sets up a National Authority (section 8) and a State Authority in each State (section 10), but it does not make people's participation mandatory in compensatory afforestation.

• ✓ 1. Section 8 constitutes the 'National Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority', and section 10 constitutes a 'State Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority' in each State.
• ✗ 2. The Act lays down the Authorities, their governing bodies and how the National and State Funds are managed and used. Nowhere does it make people's participation a compulsory part of compensatory afforestation.

Remember · The CAF Act, 2016 creates a National Authority and State Authorities to manage compensatory-afforestation money; it does not mandate people's participation.

Question and answer: UPSC's official GS Paper I (2019, Series A) — paper ↗ · answer key ↗. Explanation: Minimalist IAS, checked 1 Oct 2026 (how we verify). Permalink · Report an error

Answer: (c) The e-Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011

India's e-Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011 introduced extended producer responsibility (EPR), which makes the producer of electrical and electronic equipment answerable for the product until its safe disposal after use. The rules were notified in May 2011 and came into force on 1 May 2012.

• ✓ (c) The official guidelines on these rules say they place the main responsibility for e-waste on producers of electrical and electronic equipment by introducing the concept of extended producer responsibility.
• ✗ (a) The 1998 bio-medical waste rules pre-date the e-waste rules and are not the ones credited with bringing in EPR.
• ✗ (b) The 1999 recycled plastics rules likewise pre-date the 2011 e-waste rules, which are the ones that introduced EPR in India.
• ✗ (d) The Food Safety and Standards Regulations, 2011 deal with food safety, not with waste, so producer responsibility for end-of-life products is not their feature.

Remember · EPR = the producer stays responsible for a product until its safe disposal. In India it came with the e-Waste Rules, 2011 (in force 1 May 2012).

Question and answer: UPSC's official GS Paper I (2019, Series A) — paper ↗ · answer key ↗. Explanation: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify). Permalink · Report an error