NCERT Solutions for Class 12 Political Science Chapter 3 Politics of Planned Development

Share this:

NCERT Solutions for Class 12 Political Science Chapter 3 Politics of Planned Development can be used for any purpose and are great for research and preparation for exams. NCERT questions and solutions are created by experts and masters from so students can rely on the accuracy and the details we provide.

Politics of Planned Development Class 12 Political Science II Textbook NCERT Solutions will become your comprehensive guide in easy learning and evaluating yourself.

Chapter 3 Politics of Planned Development Class 12 Political Science II NCERT Solutions


1. Which of these statements about the Bombay Plan is incorrect ?
(a) It was a blueprint for India’s economic future.
(b) It supported state-ownership of industry.
(c) It was made by some leading industrialists.
(d) It supported strongly the idea of planning.


(a) It was a blueprint for India’s economic future.

2. Which of the following ideas did not form part of the early phase of India’s development policy?
(a) Planning
(b) Liberalisation
(c) Cooperative farming
(d) Self sufficiency


(b) Liberalisation

3. The idea of planning in India was drawn from
(a) The Bombay plan
(b) Experiences of the Soviet bloc countries
(c) Gandhian vision of society
(d) Demand by peasant organisations
i. (b) and (d) only
ii. (d) and (c) only
iii. (a) and (b) only
iv. All of the above


iv. All of the above

4. Match the following:

(a) Charan Singhi. Industrialisation
(b) P C Mahalanobisii. Zoning
(c) Bihar Famineiii. Farmers
(d) Verghese Kurieniv. Milk Cooperatives


(a) Charan Singhiii. Farmers
(b) P C Mahalanobisi. Industrialisation
(c) Bihar Famineii. Zoning
(d) Verghese Kurieniv. Milk Cooperatives

5. What were the major differences in the approach towards development at the time of Independence? Has the debate been resolved?


At the time of Independence India had before it, two models of development: the Liberal-Capitalists Models and Socialist Model. Liberal-Capitalists Model was followed by Europe and United States Socialist Model was followed by U.S.S.R. and other communist countries. In India there were many leaders and scholars who were highly impressed by the Soviet Model of development. Communist Party, Socialist Party and even Democrate Socialists like Pt. Nehru within the Congress were supporters of Soviet Model of development. There were few supporters of Capitalists Model of development.

Yes the debate was resolved and India came up with five year plan (FYP) as in USSR. In this the government prepares a document for five year where all its income and expenditure for next five years is prepared.

6. What was the major thrust of the First Five Year Plan? In which ways did the Second Plan differ from the first one ?


The First Five Year Plan (1951-1956) aimed to address poverty in India. The Plan focused mainly on the agrarian sector, investing in dams and irrigation.

  • Huge allocations were made for large-scale projects like the Bhakhra Nangal Dam.
  • Land reforms were identified as the key to the country’s development.
  • The planners aimed to increase the level of national income by pushing up savings.

The first five year plan differed from the second five year plan:

In second FYP heavy industrialization was stressed upon whereas in first FYP, agriculture and irrigation were focused upon.
Second Five Year Plan wanted to bring quick structural transformation in all possible directions.

7. What was the Green Revolution? Mention two positive and two negative consequences of the Green Revolution.


Green revolution was introduced to bring revolution in weak agriculture of India, especially in food grains like wheat and rice through High yielding varieties of seed, fertilisers and scientific irrigation. The government offered high yielding varieties of seeds, fertilizers, pesticides and better irrigation facilities at subsidised prices to farmers. The government fixed the prices also to purchase the produce of farmers at a given price.

Positive consequences of the Green Revolution:

  • India became self-sufficient in food and it raised the availability of food in the country.
  • The green revolution also resulted in the rise of what is called the middle peasant sections. These were farmers with medium size holdings, who benefited from the changes and soon emerged politically influential in many parts of the country.

Negative Consequences:

  • Some regions like Punjab, Haryana and western Uttar Pradesh became agriculturally prosperous, while others remained backward.
  • The green revolution delivered only a moderate agricultural growth especially in wheat production.

8. State the main arguments in the debate that ensued between industrialisation and agricultural development at the time of the Second Five Year Plan.


The Second Five Year Plan (FYP) in India was drafted by a team of economists and planners led by P. C. Mahalanobis.Ch. Charan Singh, initially a Congress leader but later the founder of Bharatiya Lok Dal advocated for placing agriculture at the forefront of India’s planning efforts. He believed that planning policies were favouring urban and industrial sectors at the expense of farmers and rural communities, leading to a widening prosperity gap.

Others debated that poverty could not be eradicated without a boost in the industrial sector. The planners felt that the country with its vast natural and human resources was ideally suited for industries. Rapid industrialisation was an essential condition for the development of not only agriculture but also for all other sectors in the country.

9. “Indian policy makers made a mistake by emphasising the role of state in the economy. India could have developed much better in private sector was allowed a free play right from the beginning”. Give arguments for or against this proposition.


The above statement is not entirely accurate because following independence, state intervention was necessary to regulate the country’s economy. India did not adhere strictly to either the capitalist or socialist model of development. Instead, India adopted a “mixed economy” model where both private and public sector played key role in economy.

  • State helped the private sector to make profits by intervening only in those areas where the private sector was not prepared to go.
  • If the private sector were given free play in the economy then it would have led to monopoly in the market.
  • If private players had been given free field, only urban areas would have experienced development while rural areas would have continued to struggle for basic necessities.

10. Read the following passage and answer the questions below:

“In the early years of Independence, two contradictory tendencies were already well advanced inside the Congress party. On the one hand, the national party executive endorsed socialist principles of state ownership, regulation and control over key sectors of the economy in order to improve productivity and at the same time curb economic concentration. On the other hand, the national Congress government pursued liberal economic policies and incentives to private investment that was justified in terms of the sole criterion of achieving maximum increase in production. “ — Francine Frankel

(a) What is the contradiction that the author is talking about? What would be the political implications of a contradiction like this?
(b) If the author is correct, why is it that the Congress was pursuing this policy? Was it related to the nature of the opposition parties?
(c) Was there also a contradiction between the central leadership of the Congress party and its Sate level leaders?


(a) The author is talking about the contradiction between capitalist and socialist model, and regarding the adoption of model. Political implementation of this controversy led to confliction in parties and the members.
(b) The author is correct. The Congress was pursuing this policy under political compulsion. This was definitely related to the nature of opposition parties.
(c) No, there was not a contradiction between the central leadership of the Congress Party and its state level leaders. The states emphasized the importance of state ownership, regulation, and control over key sectors to enhance productivity, while the central leadership pursued liberal economic policies and provided incentives for private investment.

Share this:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.