Question

In the following question, a Statement is followed by two Conclusions, I and II. Statement: Section 5 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 gives a detailed procedure for fixing or revising minimum wages in respect of any scheduled employment. After considering the advice of the committees appointed, and all representations received by it before the date notified in the Gazette notification, the appropriate Government may by notification in the Official Gazette, fix or revise the minimum rates of wages.
Conclusion I: If a date is specified in the notification, the minimum rates shall come into force from such date.
Conclusion II: If no date is specified, then they shall come into force from the expiry of three months from the date of issue of the notification.
In the context of the above Statement and Conclusions, which one of the following is correct?

• A. Both Conclusions I and II follow
• B. Only Conclusion I follows
• C. Only Conclusion II follows
• D. Neither Conclusion I nor II follows

Hint:

For labour law questions, remember that Gazette Notifications are the official legal mechanism through which wage revisions become enforceable. If a commencement date is not specified, the Act itself generally provides a default effective date.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A

Step 1: Break Section 5 into its two branches, one where the notification names a commencement date, and one where it does not.

Step 2: Match Conclusion I against the first branch. Conclusion I says the specified date governs commencement, which is exactly the first branch restated, so it follows directly.

Step 3: Match Conclusion II against the second branch. Conclusion II says a three month gap from the date of issue applies when no date is named, which is exactly the second branch restated, so it also follows directly.

Step 4: Since both conclusions are restatements of the two branches already present in the statement and neither introduces new facts, both are logically supported. The correct option is that both Conclusions I and II follow.

Answer 2

An efficient way to check statement conclusion questions is to ask what fact, if changed, would make each conclusion false, and see whether that fact appears anywhere in the passage.

1. Both Conclusions I and II follow: For this to be wrong, the passage would need to contradict either conclusion. It does not; both conclusions simply echo the two rules that Section 5 lays down for commencement of revised wages.
2. Only Conclusion I follows: This choice survives only if the "no date specified" rule was absent from the passage or worded differently from Conclusion II, but the passage's default three month rule and Conclusion II say exactly the same thing.
3. Only Conclusion II follows: This choice survives only if the passage failed to support the "date specified" rule, but the statement clearly ties commencement to the notified date when one exists, which is what Conclusion I claims.
4. Neither Conclusion I nor II follows: This would require both conclusions to introduce something outside the passage, which is not the case since both are drawn straight from Section 5's own wording.

Testing each option this way shows that nothing in the two conclusions goes beyond what Section 5 already states, so neither can be eliminated.

Hence, the correct answer is Both Conclusions I and II follow.