Match List-I with List-II and select the correct answer using the codes given below the Lists

List-I (Name) | List-II (Game)
A. Dola Banerjee | 1. Badminton
B. Aparna Popat | 2. Snooker
C. Anuja Thakur | 3. Chess
D. Parimarjan Negi | 4. Archery

1. Sports Administration and Governance in India (basic)

In India, the administration of sports operates through a unique hybrid model where the government provides the regulatory framework, but the actual management is handled by autonomous bodies. At the central level, the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports is responsible for policy-making. However, the day-to-day administration of specific sports falls under National Sports Federations (NSFs), which are typically registered as private voluntary organizations. This structure ensures a degree of autonomy for sports while allowing the government to monitor standards through the National Sports Development Code of India. A critical aspect of Indian sports governance is the legal status of these federations. For instance, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) is a private society, yet it holds a monopoly over the sport in the country. In the landmark case BCCI v. Netaji Cricket Club, the Supreme Court clarified that although the BCCI is not considered "State" under Article 12 of the Constitution, it still performs enormous public functions. Because its control over the sport is "deep and pervasive," the court held that the Board is obligated to follow the principles of fairness and good faith. Introduction to the Constitution of India, FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES, p.106. At the executive level, sports policy can sometimes intersect with the highest decision-making bodies of the country. High-level policy matters, especially those involving international sports relations or foreign affairs, may be addressed by the Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs. This committee is often described as a 'Super-Cabinet' because it handles all significant policy matters pertaining to domestic and foreign affairs, ensuring that sports administration aligns with the nation's broader strategic goals. Indian Polity, Cabinet Committees, p.221.

Sources: Introduction to the Constitution of India, FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES, p.106; Indian Polity, Cabinet Committees, p.221

2. National Sports Awards and Recognition (basic)

In India, the National Sports Awards are the highest honors bestowed upon sportspersons, coaches, and organizations for their outstanding contributions to the field of sports. These awards are conferred annually by the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, typically on August 29th, which marks the birth anniversary of hockey legend Major Dhyan Chand, celebrated as National Sports Day. The objective of these awards is to recognize excellence and inspire the youth toward physical fitness and competitive achievement.
The hierarchy of sports awards includes:

• Major Dhyan Chand Khel Ratna Award: The highest sporting honor in India, awarded for the most spectacular and outstanding performance by a sportsperson over a period of four years.
• Arjuna Award: Given for consistent good performance over four years, combined with qualities of leadership, sportsmanship, and a sense of discipline.
• Dronacharya Award: This is dedicated to coaches who have enabled athletes to achieve excellence in international events. It has two categories: Regular and Lifetime.
• Major Dhyan Chand Award for Lifetime Achievement: Not to be confused with the Khel Ratna, this is given to individuals for their contribution to sports even after retirement.

Beyond individual athletes and coaches, the government also recognizes institutional efforts. The Maulana Abul Kalam Azad (MAKA) Trophy is awarded to the overall top-performing university in inter-university tournaments. Furthermore, recognition systems in India are broad; for example, in the primary sector, the Gopal Ratna Award is given to farmers maintaining the best herds of indigenous breeds, showing how the state uses recognition to drive management practices across different fields Geography of India, Resources, p.38.

Sources: Geography of India, Resources, p.38

3. Constitutional and Policy Framework of Sports (intermediate)

To understand the governance of sports in India, we must first look at the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, which acts as the blueprint for federalism. This schedule divides legislative powers into three categories: the Union List (List I), the State List (List II), and the Concurrent List (List III) Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth (7th ed.), Federal System, p.139. In this framework, Sports is primarily placed under Entry 33 of the State List. This entry groups sports with "theatres and dramatic performances; cinemas; entertainments and amusements," meaning that the primary responsibility for creating laws and developing infrastructure for sports lies with individual State Governments. Despite being a State subject, the Union Government plays a dominant role in the policy framework. The Centre derives its authority to manage international sports relations (like the Olympics or Commonwealth Games) and national sports federations through its powers over foreign affairs and its residuary powers (Entry 97 of the Union List), which cover subjects not specifically mentioned in any list Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth (7th ed.), Federal System, p.139. This split in jurisdiction often leads to a lack of uniformity in sports administration across the country. To address this, the Union Government periodically introduces a National Sports Policy. Similar to the National Water Policy, the goal is to provide a "unified national perspective" and a framework for action that ensures conservation of talent and improved management of resources INDIA PEOPLE AND ECONOMY, NCERT, Water Resources, p.50. There is a long-standing proposal to move "Sports" to the Concurrent List. If this happens, both the Centre and States could legislate on sports, but in case of a conflict, the Central law would prevail Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.), TABLES, p.554. This would allow for a national law to regulate issues like doping, sports ethics, and the governance of sports bodies.

List Type	Placement of Sports	Legislative Power
State List (Entry 33)	Current Location	Exclusive power of State Legislatures.
Union List	Not Applicable	Handles international representation via Foreign Affairs entries.
Concurrent List	Proposed Change	Both Centre and States can legislate; Centre prevails in conflict.

Sources: Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth (7th ed.), Federal System, p.139; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.), TABLES, p.554; INDIA PEOPLE AND ECONOMY, TEXTBOOK IN GEOGRAPHY FOR CLASS XII (NCERT 2025 ed.), Water Resources, p.50

4. Racket Sports Excellence: The Evolution of Indian Badminton (intermediate)

In the complex machinery of British administration during the 1920s, the colonial government frequently employed 'Committees' as a tool to manage political crises and evaluate constitutional progress. Following the Government of India Act 1919, the decade became an era of scrutiny, where various aspects of the Raj—from its relationship with Princely States to its educational policies—were put under the microscope. These committees weren't just administrative bodies; they were often responses to the mounting pressure from the Indian national press and political movements Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM. , Development of Indian Press, p.559.

Two critical inquiries defined the early 1920s: the Hunter Inquiry Committee (1920) and the Muddiman Committee (1924). The Hunter Committee was established to investigate the tragic Jallianwala Bagh massacre and the disturbances in Punjab, though its findings were largely seen by Indians as a 'whitewash.' Shortly after, the Muddiman Committee (formally the Reforms Enquiry Committee) was tasked with examining the 'Diarchy' system. Diarchy had split provincial subjects into 'Reserved' and 'Transferred' categories, and the committee aimed to identify defects in this working model to appease the growing demand for self-rule.

As the decade progressed, the British shifted focus toward long-term structural relationships and social systems. The Butler Committee (1927), also known as the Indian States Committee, was formed to clarify the vague concept of 'Paramountcy'—the relationship between the British Crown and the nearly 600 Princely States. Simultaneously, the Hartog Committee (1929) looked into the growth of education. Unlike earlier commissions that focused on expansion, Hartog emphasized qualitative improvement and warned against the 'wastage' and 'stagnation' in the primary education system, which was vital for the modernizing movements of the time History , class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.) , Towards Modernity , p.307.

Committee	Year	Primary Focus
Hunter Committee	1920	Investigation of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre.
Muddiman Committee	1924	Assessing the functional defects of the Diarchy system.
Butler Committee	1927	Defining the relationship between Princely States and the Crown.
Hartog Committee	1929	Evaluating the quality and growth of education in British India.

Sources: Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM., Development of Indian Press, p.559; History , class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Towards Modernity, p.307

5. Target Sports: India's Legacy in Archery (intermediate)

To understand the evolution of British administration in the 1920s, we must look at how the government used specialized committees to 'target' specific problem areas—much like an athlete focuses on precision. During this decade, the British faced mounting pressure for Swaraj (self-rule), leading them to appoint several commissions to investigate governance, education, and security. While later history would focus on physical boundaries, such as the Radcliffe Award that demarcated the borders of Bengal and Sylhet Geography of India, India–Political Aspects, p.42, these 1920s committees were focused on the 'political boundaries' of power and reform.

The 1920s were a period of intense measurement and evaluation. Just as modern sports scientists gather data on the timings of Olympic winners to compare speeds and optimize performance Science-Class VII, Measurement of Time and Motion, p.120, the British administration used these four key committees to 'measure' the stability of their rule and the effectiveness of previous reforms:

• Hunter Inquiry Committee (1920): This was established to investigate the tragic Jallianwala Bagh massacre and the subsequent civil disturbances in Punjab. It remains a point of historical contention because it was seen by many Indians as a 'whitewash' of General Dyer’s actions.
• Muddiman Committee (1924): Formally known as the Reforms Enquiry Committee, it was tasked with examining the Diarchy system introduced by the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms of 1919. It highlighted the friction between 'Reserved' and 'Transferred' subjects.
• Butler Committee (1927): This committee focused on the Princely States. It aimed to define the relationship between the 'Paramount Power' (the British Crown) and the Indian Princes, emphasizing that 'Paramountcy must remain paramount' while adapting to the states' needs.
• Hartog Committee (1929): This committee turned its lens toward education. It reported on the massive 'wastage' and 'stagnation' in the primary education system, shifting the focus from quantity (expansion) to quality (improvement).

These committees represented a structured, formal approach to governance that stands in stark contrast to the later political volatility seen in independent India, such as the 'Aya Ram, Gaya Ram' era of frequent floor-crossing by legislators Politics in India since Independence, Challenges to and Restoration of the Congress System, p.81. By analyzing these reports, we see a British administration trying to navigate the complexities of a changing India through bureaucratic oversight.

Committee	Year	Primary Focus
Hunter	1920	Jallianwala Bagh Inquiry
Muddiman	1924	Working of Diarchy (1919 Act)
Butler	1927	Relation with Princely States
Hartog	1929	Growth and Quality of Education

Sources: Geography of India ,Majid Husain, India–Political Aspects, p.42; Science-Class VII . NCERT, Measurement of Time and Motion, p.120; Politics in India since Independence, Challenges to and Restoration of the Congress System, p.81

6. Strategy and Cue Sports: Chess and Billiards in India (exam-level)

In the landscape of British policies and administration, the social lives of officers often mirrored their political strategies. While we study Acts and Committees, the 'leisure' of the Raj was equally structured. Chess, originating in India as Chaturanga, represents the foundational logic of strategy—moving pieces on a board to simulate warfare and statecraft. By the time of the British Raj, chess had returned to India in its modern Western form, often played in administrative circles to sharpen the tactical minds of civil servants and military officers who had to manage the complex 'Great Game' of diplomacy against Russia and local princely states.

While Chess was an ancient legacy, Cue Sports (Billiards and Snooker) were quintessentially colonial imports that became central to the British administrative infrastructure: The Club. The club was not just a place for relaxation; it was a secure space where policy was discussed away from the public eye. Interestingly, Snooker was actually invented in India in 1875 at the Ootacamund Club (Ooty) by Sir Neville Chamberlain, a British army officer. It evolved from billiards as a more complex strategic challenge, reflecting the British penchant for creating intricate rules and hierarchies—much like the administrative frameworks they established through various committees and commissions.

Today, India’s dominance in these strategic sports—producing world-class Grandmasters and Billiards champions—is often linked to our human capital. As we observe the growth of these sports among the youth, it is vital to remember that India is currently one of the youngest nations in the world, with over 62% of the population in the working-age group of 15 to 59 years Vivek Singh, Indian Economy, Indian Economy after 2014, p.239. This demographic dividend ensures that the 'strategy' once confined to colonial clubs is now a professional pursuit for millions of young Indians, driving the nation's soft power on the global stage.

Sources: Indian Economy, Vivek Singh (7th ed. 2023-24), Indian Economy after 2014, p.239

7. Solving the Original PYQ (exam-level)

This question is a classic application of your recent study on Static General Knowledge and Sports Personalities. In the UPSC Prelims, "Match the Column" questions test your ability to link specific achievers to their respective domains. Having just mastered the list of Indian pioneers in sports, you can see how individual building blocks—like knowing that Dola Banerjee was an iconic figure in Indian Archery—are the keys to unlocking the entire matrix. The goal here is to identify your "anchors"—the facts you are 100% sure of—and use them to eliminate the noise.

To arrive at the correct answer, look for the most definitive links first. Reasoning: If you recall that Aparna Popat (B-1) was a record-holding national champion in badminton and Parimarjan Negi (D-3) was a world-renowned chess prodigy, the structure of the answer becomes clear. Mapping Dola Banerjee (A-4) to Archery and Anuja Thakur (C-2) to Snooker confirms the sequence. This systematic approach leads you directly to Option (B). Note how the question tests your breadth of knowledge across different sporting eras and disciplines, requiring you to distinguish between indoor games and outdoor sports.

The trap in such questions often lies in the overlapping fame of athletes or the use of names that might sound like they belong to other fields. Options (A), (C), and (D) are designed to catch students who might confuse Anuja Thakur (Snooker) with a different discipline or mistake the chess prodigy for a snooker player. UPSC often uses distractor options where one or two pairs are correct but the remaining two are swapped. By ensuring you have at least two firm anchors (like Archery and Badminton), you can navigate the elimination process and avoid the pitfalls of common naming traps. Manorama Yearbook