UPSC GK Questions 2026

The correct answer is INS Kavaratti. The Ministry of Defence lists two Indian ships in SLINEX-26: INS Kavaratti, an indigenous Anti-Submarine Warfare Corvette, and INS Jyoti, the Fleet Tanker. INS Kavaratti also hosted the opening ceremony and the reception for the visiting Sri Lankan crew at the start of the Harbour Phase.

INS Jyoti is taking part, but as the fleet tanker, a support ship rather than an anti-submarine warship, so option A is wrong. SLNS Sindurala is not an Indian Navy ship at all; it represents the Sri Lanka Navy in the exercise, which rules out option C. INS Vikrant is not among the ships the release names for SLINEX-26, so option D is also incorrect. A common trap in such questions is to mix up the ships of the two navies, so note the prefix each name carries: INS for India and SLNS for Sri Lanka.

The correct answer is Sri Lanka. SLINEX is the bilateral maritime exercise between the navies of India and Sri Lanka, and the Ministry of Defence has described SLINEX-26 as its 13th edition, held at Visakhapatnam from 17 to 21 September 2026. The name itself carries the answer: SL for Sri Lanka, IN for India and EX for exercise. The Sri Lankan side is represented by SLNS Sindurala, while India has fielded INS Kavaratti and INS Jyoti.

Singapore, Thailand and the Maldives do not take part in SLINEX. The release names only two navies, the Indian and the Sri Lankan, and presents the exercise as a way of strengthening the maritime partnership between India and Sri Lanka, so options A, C and D are wrong. When a question gives you the name of an exercise, decode it first, because many bilateral exercise names are built from the initials of the partner countries.

The answer is 2025-26. Alongside the monetisation proposals, the twenty-first board meeting cleared the Annual Financial Statements and the Directors' Report for that financial year. These are routine items of corporate business, but they are exactly the kind of specific that a question will pick out precisely because candidates skim past them.

Option D is the strongest distractor, since the meeting itself took place during that year rather than after it, and accounts are approved for a year that has closed rather than one still running. Hold the three specifics from this meeting together and the whole item is covered: the twenty-first board meeting, assets worth over Rs 5,000 crore recommended, and accounts approved for 2025-26.

A small habit helps with items like this: when a release names a financial year, note whether it has closed or is still running, because that alone usually settles the question.

The answer is Central Public Sector Enterprises and other government entities. NLMC does not simply buy and sell. It works alongside whichever body owns the property, identifying which assets are suitable, carrying out due diligence, arranging a valuation and then structuring the process, with transparency, efficiency and value realisation as its stated priorities.

The other options describe owners the release does not mention. Option B in particular points in the wrong direction entirely, since this is public property being put to use, not a rescue of private firms. The purpose behind the whole exercise is worth remembering alongside the answer: unlocking the value of assets that sit underused on government books, which is why the corporation exists at all.

One more point of wording: monetisation is not always a sale. Depending on the structure, the state may lease an asset or take in a partner while keeping the title, so ownership does not necessarily change hands.

The answer is over Rs 5,000 crore. At its twenty-first board meeting, held on 18 September 2026, the National Land Monetization Corporation considered and recommended proposals covering assets of that value. What those assets are matters as much as the figure: surplus land and buildings, identified because they no longer serve the purpose they were acquired for.

The remaining options are round figures of the kind that make plausible distractors in a question about money, but none of them appears in the announcement. Two details are worth carrying with the figure, since a question may ask for either instead: it was the twenty-first meeting of the board, and the same sitting approved the Annual Financial Statements and Directors' Report for 2025-26.

The answer is 3,57,112 rural youth by 31 December 2027. This is the sanctioned target for the fourteen States and Union Territories reviewed in the first phase, and it sits well above what actually starts in October 2026, which is 34,920 young people in 1,164 batches. The gap between the two figures is the point of the review: the Ministry is pressing States to move faster so the target is reached in time.

Each wrong option pairs a real figure with the wrong deadline or the wrong scope. The 5.6 lakh in option D belongs to the national allocation across more than 1,200 projects by 24 States and Union Territories, not to these fourteen. Targets for the second phase run over the two-year period 2026-28 and cover all 31 participating States and Union Territories.

The answer is the Ministry of Rural Development, which is reviewing State readiness and rolling out the second phase of the scheme. The placement of DDU-GKY under Rural Development rather than under Skill Development is the point worth fixing in memory, because the name contains the word Kaushalya and the obvious guess is therefore wrong.

The clue is in the rest of the name: Grameen. The scheme is aimed at poor rural youth specifically, which is what puts it in the rural development portfolio. It is a Centrally Sponsored Scheme, its training is tied to placement rather than ending at a certificate, and courses run from three months up to twelve. The other ministries listed all work on employment or training in some form, which is exactly what makes them effective distractors.

The answer is 34,920. Four figures travel together in this item and the question turns on keeping them apart. 34,920 is the number of rural young people starting training in October 2026; 1,164 is the number of batches they are divided into; 3,57,112 is the far larger sanctioned target for the same fourteen States and Union Territories, to be met by 31 December 2027; and 5.6 lakh is the total already allocated across more than 1,200 projects by 24 States and Union Territories.

So option C is the batch count, option B is the sanctioned target and option D is the wider allocation, each a real figure from the announcement but an answer to a different question. A useful ordering is smallest to largest: batches, then the October intake, then the sanctioned target, then the national allocation.

The answer is the Delhi High Court, which received seven of the fourteen, half the total on its own. Of those seven, two were appointed as Judges and the other five as Additional Judges, a split the release sets out separately and which is itself worth noting.

The remaining seven were divided three ways. Jharkhand took three as Judges, Karnataka took three as Additional Judges, and the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh took one as a Judge. That last court is worth a second look for a different reason: a single High Court serves both Union Territories, which is a fact examiners like on its own. So the order by size runs Delhi, then Jharkhand and Karnataka level, then Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh.

The answer is the President, after consulting the Chief Justice of India. The release is explicit on both halves: the power is one the Constitution confers on the President, and it is exercised after consultation with the Chief Justice of India. The order of those two steps matters, because a question will sometimes reverse them.

Option C does exactly that reversal and is the strongest distractor. The Prime Minister and the Law Minister have no constitutional role in the appointment itself, which rules out option A. A Governor does figure in consultation for High Court appointments under the constitutional scheme, but the appointing authority is not the Governor, so option D fails on the same point. Hold the pair as consultation first, warrant afterwards.

The answer is fourteen. The Ministry of Law and Justice announced the elevation of fourteen serving judicial officers, spread over four High Courts. The largest share went to Delhi, which took seven of them, two as Judges and five as Additional Judges. Jharkhand received three as Judges, Karnataka three as Additional Judges, and one officer was appointed a Judge of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh.

Adding those up is the safest way to hold the figure: seven and three and three and one. Candidates who remember only the number of courts, which is four, or only the Delhi share, which is seven, will miss this. The other options are round numbers close enough to be tempting but none of them matches the announcement.

The answer is the Ministry of External Affairs. That pairing is not incidental: the Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation programme is a foreign policy instrument, used to offer training and expertise to officials of other developing countries, so a course aimed at human rights institutions abroad naturally runs through External Affairs.

The other ministries listed all have some connection to human rights work within India, which is what makes them usable as distractors, but none of them is named as the partner here. For the examination, treat ITEC and the Ministry of External Affairs as a fixed pair, and note that this was the fifth edition of the programme, held over six days in New Delhi from 14 September 2026.

The answer is fourteen. Two numbers travel together in this item and are easy to swap: thirty-eight senior functionaries attended, and they came from fourteen national human rights institutions. The institutions are the smaller figure, the people the larger one.

The countries represented were Algeria, Chile, Ecuador, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Malaysia, Oman, Samoa, South Africa, Tajikistan and Zimbabwe, which spans Africa, Latin America, Asia and the Pacific. That spread matters for the framing of the programme, which is built on the idea that institutions doing similar work in different legal systems have a good deal to teach each other. Hold the pair as thirty-eight from fourteen and neither figure will slip.

Note the shape of the programme alongside the figures. It was the fifth edition, it ran six days from 14 September 2026 in New Delhi, and the sessions were interactive rather than lecture-led, covering civil and political rights as well as socio-economic and cultural ones.

The answer is Justice V. Ramasubramanian, who chairs the National Human Rights Commission of India and closed the programme. His theme was cooperation between human rights institutions across the Global South, and his argument was that these bodies improve by sharing experience openly, naming the problems they run into and treating their own mistakes as something to learn from.

The other options are drawn from offices that sound plausible for a human rights event but had no role here. The Ministry of External Affairs did partner on the programme, which makes option D the strongest distractor, but the valedictory address came from the Commission's own Chairperson. Present at the session were Joint Secretaries Shri Samir Kumar and Smt. Saidingpuii Chhakchhuak. Remember the Chairperson's name; it is the single most reusable fact here.

The answer is Bengaluru, in Karnataka, where the ceremony took place on 18 September 2026. Hindustan Aeronautics Limited operates from several locations across the country, which is exactly why a question of this kind works as a test: the candidate has to recall the specific venue rather than a general association.

Speaking there, Raksha Mantri Shri Rajnath Singh framed the handover as a milestone towards building aerospace capability within the country and towards the technological self-confidence that goes with it. He also pressed for closer work between public sector undertakings and private firms, and asked young scientists and engineers to pursue transformative technologies. Pair the city with the date and the two ministers, and the full set of testable details is covered.

The answer is Pawan Hans Limited. The ceremony had two recipients, and separating them is the whole point of the question. Military trainers, the Tejas twin-seaters and the HTT 40s, went to the Indian Air Force. The four Dhruv helicopters of the Next Generation variant went instead to Pawan Hans Limited, which runs civil helicopter operations.

That division explains the guest list. Raksha Mantri Shri Rajnath Singh attended for the defence side and Shri K Rammohan Naidu, the Minister of Civil Aviation, for the civil side. The other options name forces that do operate rotary-wing fleets, which makes them plausible, but none of them figures in this handover. Remember the recipient alongside the aircraft type and the question becomes straightforward.

The answer is two. At the Bengaluru ceremony the Air Force received five aircraft in total, and the split is what the question turns on: two Tejas twin-seat trainers at Final Operational Clearance standard, plus three HTT 40 basic trainers. Candidates who remember only the total of five will get this wrong.

The fourth number in the story belongs elsewhere. Four Dhruv helicopters of the Next Generation variant went to Pawan Hans Limited, a civil operator, not to the Air Force. That is also why two ministers attended, one holding Defence and the other Civil Aviation. A clean way to hold all of it is as three pairs: two Tejas trainers, three HTT 40 trainers, four Dhruv NG helicopters, with the first two going to the Air Force and the third to Pawan Hans.

The correct answer is Kadha Rasa Sangama - Confluence of Essence of Stories. The Ministry of Culture describes the three-day festival as being held on this theme, bringing together three prominent Kathakali institutions, namely Sadanam Academy, Kerala Kalamandalam and Margi Theatre, each of which presents one distinctive production.

The other three options are plausible-sounding titles that the release does not mention anywhere, and none of them is connected with this festival. The theme is worth memorising alongside the three productions it frames: Mandodari from Sadanam Academy, drawn from the Ramayana; The Old Man and the Sea from Kerala Kalamandalam, adapted from Ernest Hemingway's novel; and Rugmangada Charitham from Margi Theatre, on the devotion of King Rugmangada and his observance of Ekadasi.

The correct answer is 1936. According to the Ministry of Culture, the Kalakshetra Foundation was established in 1936 by Rukmini Devi Arundale, and it has since played a significant role in the preservation, practice and dissemination of Indian classical arts. It is the Foundation that organises the Kathakali Festival, the seventeenth edition of which was inaugurated at the Bharata Kalakshetra Auditorium in Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai.

The remaining options give years that the release does not associate with the Foundation at all. Candidates should pair the founding year with the founder's name, because questions on this institution almost always test the two together, and occasionally test the city as well. A useful way to hold it is as a single line: Kalakshetra Foundation, 1936, Rukmini Devi Arundale, Chennai, now functioning under the Ministry of Culture.

The correct answer is Defence, External Affairs and Home Affairs. The release states that the five-day programme brought together senior officers from the three Services along with officials from the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of External Affairs and the Ministry of Home Affairs, for deliberations on contemporary and emerging national security challenges.

The combination matters because the programme's stated purpose was to strengthen inter-departmental coordination and inter-agency jointness, and these are the three ministries whose remits meet on national security: military, diplomatic and internal. The other options each swap in a ministry the release does not mention, such as Finance, Commerce or Science and Technology. Note alongside this the phrase the deliberations reinforced, a Whole-of-Nation approach to national security, which is the kind of formulation examiners like to quote directly.