Which of the following statements with regard to the Report of Tendulkar Committee (2009) on poverty estimates is/are correct? 1. The Committee had used an all-India urban poverty line basket as a reference to derive both rural and urban poverty levels. 2. The Committee had anchored the poverty line to the official food calorie norms. Select the correct answer using the code given below.

The correct answer is A, 1 only. The Suresh Tendulkar expert group, which reported to the Planning Commission in 2009, deliberately moved away from the old calorie-based poverty line. Earlier lines, set by the Lakdawala method, were anchored to a minimum of about 2400 calories a day in rural areas and 2100 in urban areas. Tendulkar argued that calorie intake was a poor measure of well-being and instead used a consumption basket that also counted spending on health and education. It took the all-India urban poverty line basket as its reference and, using price differences, derived state-wise rural and urban poverty lines from it. On this method it estimated that about 37.2 percent of Indians were poor in 2004-05. Statement 1 is therefore correct. Statement 2 is wrong because the committee did not anchor its line to calorie norms; it only checked that nutrition at the new line was adequate. So options B, C and D, which treat statement 2 as correct or reject statement 1, are wrong. Exam tip: Tendulkar 2009 dropped the calorie anchor and used the urban basket; Rangarajan reported in 2014.