Logical (Critical) Reasoning Questions for CLAT | QB Set 84

India continues to narrate its urban future through the loud vocabulary of megacities. But a quieter and far more consequential transformation is unfolding. Of India’s nearly 9,000 census and statutory towns, barely 500 qualify as large cities. The overwhelming majority are small towns, with populations below 1,00,000. This proliferation of small towns is a structural product of India’s capitalist development — and of its crisis.

How have small towns proliferated?

From the 1970s through the 1990s, capital accumulation was organised through metropolisation. Large cities became the primary sites for industrial production, state investment, infrastructure, and labour absorption. Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata and later Bengaluru and Hyderabad became spatial fixes for capitalism by absorbing surplus labour; concentrating consumption; and by creating conditions for accumulation. However, today, India’s metros have run into the classic problem of over-accumulation. Land prices have detached from productive use, infrastructure systems are stretched beyond repair, and rising costs have become unbearable for working groups.

It is in this moment that small towns have emerged. Across India, one can see this shift. Towns like Sattenapalle in Andhra Pradesh, Dhamtari in Chhattisgarh, Barabanki in Uttar Pradesh, Hassan in Karnataka, Bongaigaon in Assam, or Una in Himachal Pradesh are now logistics nodes, agro-processing hubs, warehouse towns, construction economies, service centres and consumption markets. They absorb migrant workers pushed out of metros and rural youth with few agrarian options. These small towns are not outside the urban process; they are fully inside it. Small towns are urbanised under conditions of capitalist stress — cheaper land, pliable labour, weaker regulation, and minimal political scrutiny.

Are small towns a better alternative?

They offer no inherent emancipatory promise. What is unfolding is not inclusive growth but the urbanisation of rural poverty. Informal labour dominates — construction workers without contracts, women in home-based piecework, and youth trapped in platform economies with no security. In towns like Shahdol in Madhya Pradesh or Raichur in Karnataka, one sees new hierarchies hardening: real estate brokers, local contractors, micro-financiers and political intermediaries are controlling land and labour.

This is where policy failure becomes glaring. India’s flagship urban missions remain deeply metro-centric. AMRUT, even in its expanded version, effectively excludes most small towns from meaningful infrastructure investment. Water supply and sewerage projects are designed for large cities, while small towns survive on fragmented schemes and temporary fixes. The result is predictable: tanker economies flourish, groundwater is mined indiscriminately, and ecological stress deepens.

Moreover, governance remains the weakest link. Small-town municipalities are underfunded and understaffed. Planning is outsourced to consultants unfamiliar with local realities and participation is reduced to procedural hearings.

(Source: The Indian Express)

Question 1

Which of the following best captures the author’s main argument in the passage?

A. India’s urban growth has been evenly distributed across cities of all sizes.
B. Small towns have emerged as key sites of urbanisation due to structural stress in India’s capitalist development.
C. Megacities remain the most sustainable solution for India’s future urban growth.
D. Rural areas are gradually disappearing because of rapid industrialisation.

Correct Answer: B

Question 2

According to the passage, what role did metropolitan cities play between the 1970s and 1990s?

A. They acted as centres that absorbed surplus labour and enabled capital accumulation.
B. They primarily focused on agricultural production and rural development.
C. They limited migration by providing employment only to skilled workers.
D. They discouraged private investment in favour of state-controlled growth.

Correct Answer: A

Question 3

Why does the author argue that the growth of small towns does not represent inclusive development?

A. Because small towns lack industrial activity and consumption markets.
B. Because the expansion of small towns reflects the urbanisation of poverty and informal labour. C. Because small towns are isolated from national and global economic processes.
D. Because small towns benefit only agricultural communities.

Correct Answer: B

Question 4

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the author’s criticism of India’s urban policy framework?

A. Several large cities have recently improved public transport systems.
B. Rural employment schemes have expanded in districts surrounding small towns.
C. Private developers are investing heavily in luxury housing in metropolitan areas.
D. Small-town municipalities lack adequate funding and technical capacity to manage urban services.

Correct Answer: D

Question 5

What is the author’s primary concern regarding governance in small towns?

A. Excessive political participation slows down development projects.
B. Local governments have too much autonomy without accountability.
C. Municipal institutions are weak, under-resourced, and disconnected from local realities.
D. Planning processes are overly influenced by workers’ collectives and cooperatives.

Correct Answer: C