Logical Reasoning - Course of Action - Discussion

The officers concerned in the commercial banks are to be suspended.

This course of action seems too extreme as the first step. Instead of immediate suspension, an investigation into the alleged violations could be conducted to determine the extent of non-compliance. If found guilty, appropriate disciplinary action, including suspension, could be taken against the responsible officers.

The RBI should be asked to stop giving such directives to commercial banks.

This course of action does not directly address the issue of alleged violations by commercial banks. Instead of stopping directives, a better approach might be for the concerned parties to engage in dialogue to understand the reason behind the alleged violations and work towards a resolution that ensures compliance with the RBI directive.

It's important to address the root cause of the problem and work towards a solution that ensures compliance with regulatory directives while also addressing any potential issues faced by commercial banks in implementing the directive.

I also think the answer is A. Because if the persons not following the guidelines are not fired then no one will follow the directives. The directives will only be followed by banks when action will be taken on people who do not follow the rules. In this case suspension is a good action against violators of the RBI. So I think A is the right answer.

The correct answer should be option D.

It is quite possible that the officers are forced to violate RBI directives under the pressure of the higher authorities of the commercial bank. Thus the matter must be investigated and action must be taken against the main person responsible for causing such nuisance.

As per my understanding answer should (B). As Reserve bank has right to ask to stop giving such directives to commercial banks.

As far as (A) is concerned bank can not suspend the concerned officers without giving warning letters. So only (B) is valid answer.

What do you think guys?

Dear Friends,

I think the right answer is A. Beacuse in the statement it is said that commercial bank is voilating directives means they know the directive but not following it. So cncerened person should be punished for voilating directives. Please give me feedback on my view.

I am really confused on this question. Because in course of action A it is talking about suspension. And I think that giving an ultimatum or warning is far better course of action than suspending him. But the answer is quite the opposite.

Please anyone explain me.

In this case, Commercial bank could have made a call to violate RBI directive. Hence suspending the officers may not be relevant, secondly the statement doesn't talk about any authority hence D is correct.

I think it should be C because either the officials must be suspended for violating the RBI directive or the RBI should stop giving such directive if the commercial banks are free to not follow it.

I think the answer is A because it is written that " officers concerned" which states that they are responsible for the violation and thus, should be suspended.

The Right answer is D.

RBI is the head itself which set norms in the welfare of the economy.

And suspend of officers is a harsh action.