“Anti-Rowlatt Satyagraha
• M. K Gandhi started campaign against Rowlatt bill and set up Satyagraha Sabha on 24th February, 1919 at Bombay.
• During this agitation, M.K Gandhi given famous quote “It is my firm belief that we shall obtain salvation only through suffering and not by reforms dropping on us from the English they use brute, we soul force”.
• After the incident of Jallianwala Bagh massacre on 13th April, 1919, the Anti-Rowlatt Satyagarha lost momentum.
• The movement was against the exclusion of freedom of press and detention without trial.”

“• When the Montagu report of 1918 was made public, there was a divide in the Congress over it. The moderates welcomed it while the extremists opposed it.
• This led to a schism in the Congress with moderate leaders forming the “”Indian National Liberal Federation”” in 1919. The party (INLF) was founded by Surendra Nath Banarjea and some of its prominent leaders were Tej Bahadur Sapru, V. S. Srinivasa Sastri and M. R. Jayakar.”

“All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC)
• AITUC was founded by Narayan Malhar Joshi in 1920.
Hence, statement 1 is incorrect.
• Lala Lajpat Rai was its first president and Dewan Chaman Lal its first secretary.
• Other leaders who participated were – Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose, V. V. Giri, Sarojini Naidu, C.R. Das, Jawarharlal Nehru, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Annie Besant, V.J. Patel, B.P. Wadia, Joseph Baptista, Lalubhai Samaldas, Jamnadas, Dwarka Das, B W Wadia, R R Karandikar, Col. J.C. Wedgwood.
• AITUC in its second session in 1921 in Jharia had adopted a resolution of Swaraj (Complete independence from British rule), almost eight years before the platform of freedom struggle- the Indian National Congress adopted such resolution in 1929.
Hence, statement 2 is correct.
• The Gaya session of the Congress (1922) welcomed the formation of the AITUC and a committee was formed to assist it.
Hence, statement 3 is incorrect.

Tikdam:
The 1922 session of the Congress was held in Gaya and not Madras.”

“• Anasuya Sarabhai’s name will remain etched in eternal history for championing the women’s labour movement in India.
Hence, statement 1 is correct.
• Known as ‘Motaben’, Gujarati for ‘elder sister’, she was born in 1885 into the affluent Sarabhai family of Ahmedabad.
• When epidemic hit Ahmedabad in 1914, the condition of the mill workers deteriorated further and they approached Anasuya to take up their cause.
– She gave an ultimatum to the mill owners and even went against her brother, Ambalal, who was the then-president of the Mill Owners’ Association, demanding better wages and working ambience for the labourers.
– Her endeavour was successful and the trade union movement in India took its baby steps.
• She was supported in her work by Mahatma Gandhi and in 1918, Anasuya managed mill owners to accede to the demand of Ahmedabad weavers for a 35% wage hike.
Hence, statement 2 is correct.
• Tens of thousands of workers participated in the protest, laying the foundation for Gujarat’s and India’s oldest labour union, Majoor Mahajan Sangh (Ahmedabad Textile Labour Association or TLA), that was established on February 25, 1920.
• The name of Ela Bhatt is synonymous with Anasuya. It was in the 1950s that she came in contact with Motaben and she became one of her closest aides and their relationship became the backbone of the formation of the Self-Employed Women’s Association of India (SEWA) in 1972.
Hence, statement 3 is correct.”

“Achievementsof Swarajist party
• Swarajist Vithalbhai Patel became speaker of the Central Legislative Assembly in 1925.
Hence, statement 1 is correct.
• They outvoted the government many times even in matters related to budgetary grants.
Hence, statement 2 is incorrect.
• They were able to defeat the Public Safety Bill in 1928.
Hence, statement 3 is correct.
• They exposed the weaknesses of the Montagu-Chelmsford reforms.
• They gave fiery speeches in the Assembly on self-rule and civil liberties.”

“• Bandi Jiwan : Sachin Sanyal
• Pather Dabi : Sharatchandra Chatterjee
• The Philosophy of the Bomb : Bhagwaticharan Vohra”

“• Raleigh Commission was set up to go into conditions of universities in India- to suggest measures for improvement in their constitution and working. The commission precluded from reporting on primary or secondary education.
Hence, statement 1 is incorrect.
• Based on its recommendations, the Indian Universities Act was passed in 1904.
Hence, statement 3 is correct.
• As per the Act,
– universities were to give more attention to study and research.
– the number of fellows of a university and their period in office were reduced and most fellows were to be nominated by the Government.
– Government was to have powers to veto universities’ senate regulations and could amend these regulations or pass regulations on its own.
– conditions were to be made stricter for affiliation of private colleges.
– five lakh rupees were to be sanctioned per annum for five years for improvement of higher education and universities.
Hence, statement 2 is correct.
• Curzon justified greater control over universities in the name of quality and efficiency, but actually sought to restrict education and to discipline the educated towards loyalty to the Government. The nationalists saw in it an attempt to strengthen imperialism and to sabotage nationalist feelings.
• Gokhale called it a “”retrograde measure””.

Tikdam:
Statement 1 is contradictory to statements 2 and 3. If it would have been established for reviewing the condition of primary education then it would not have made recommendations regarding higher education and universities. Thus, either of statement 1 or statements 2 and 3 is correct. Since there is no option stating statement 1 only, option B is the answer.”

“Hindustan Republican Association (HRA) Formation
• The constitution for the HRA was drafted by Bismil in 1923 at Allahabad with the blessing of Lala Har Dayal.
• Other prominent members of the party were Sachindra Nath Sanyal and Jogesh Chandra Chatterjee (who was also a member of the Anushilan Samiti).
• The HRA formed centres at, besides Allahabad, Agra, Kanpur, Varanasi, Lucknow, Shahjahanpur and Saharanpur.
• It also had bomb manufacturing units at Calcutta and Deogarh.
• A manifesto for the party was written by Sanyal titled ‘Revolutionary’. It contained incendiary material asking the youth of the country to join the party and take part in the freedom struggle. It did not approve of the methods used by Gandhi and criticised them. The manifesto stated that it sought to achieve a ‘Federal Republic of the United States of India’ after overthrowing British rule.
• It also demanded universal suffrage. The material espoused a socialist society for India.”

“• At about 12:30 PM on 8th April, 1929, as the President of the Central Assembly Vithalbhai Patel began to give his ruling on the Trade Disputes Bill at the Assembly, an explosion occurred and the hall began to be filled with smoke.
• There were slogans raised by young men from the Visitors’ Gallery, stating ‘Inquilab Zindabad’, ‘Workers of the world unite’, and ‘Down with imperialism’. The voices belonged to two young revolutionary freedom fighters Bhagat Singh and Batukeshwar Dutt (also called B K Dutt). They also threw pamphlets into the hall.
• Both the men did not flee the scene or try to evade arrest after the act. They willingly courted arrest.
• Both of them were members of the Hindustan Socialist Republican Association. Their motive, as stated by them, was not to kill or injure people, but to ‘make the deaf hear’.
• Bhagat Singh, who masterminded the attack, was inspired by the French anarchist Auguste Vaillant who had bombed the French Chamber of Deputies in the year 1893. Vaillant was executed for the act.
• In the 1929 attack, nobody was killed and only a few people had sustained minor injuries.
• In fact, the revolutionaries only wanted to spread their ideas of revolution and inspire Indians to fight British imperialism, apart from protesting the unpopular bills that were being enacted in the assembly that day.
• Among those present in the Hall were Motilal Nehru, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Madan Mohan Malaviya, John Simon (of the Simon Commission) and others.
• Both Singh and Dutt courted arrest even though both the bombs were thrown by Singh alone.”