The following sentences form a paragraph.They are numbered as P, Q, R and S. These four parts are not given in their proper order. Read the sentences and choose the alternative that arranges them in correct order. P. Captain Amarinder Singh, the Punjab Chief Minister, deserves appreciation for taking serious steps to bring his State out of the drug menace. Q. Punjab has brought immense pride to the country on the agricultural front. It needs to now take steps to remove the blot of drugs from its fabric. R. His mission must be two-pronged. First, he should be able to both persuade people in his State to give up on drugs and severely punish those who fail to abide by the drug-prevention laws.  S. Second, he should eliminate the supply chain of narcotic drugs linked to the neighbouring countries, particularly those in the Golden Crescent (Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan). 

The following sentences form a paragraph.They are numbered as P, Q, R and S. These four parts are not given in their proper order. Read the sentences and choose the alternative that arranges them in correct order. P. Captain Amarinder Singh, the Punjab Chief Minister, deserves appreciation for taking serious steps to bring his State out of the drug menace. Q. Punjab has brought immense pride to the country on the agricultural front. It needs to now take steps to remove the blot of drugs from its fabric. R. His mission must be two-pronged. First, he should be able to both persuade people in his State to give up on drugs and severely punish those who fail to abide by the drug-prevention laws.  S. Second, he should eliminate the supply chain of narcotic drugs linked to the neighbouring countries, particularly those in the Golden Crescent (Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan).  Correct Answer PRSQ 

Correct option - 1

Here, the passage is based upon drug menace(be a threat or possible danger to) in the state of Punjab. Firstly, the passage will not start with Q because it shows 'it needs to now take steps to remove drug problem'. This shows a suggestion to the people and authorities of the state. Hence, it should come at the end of the passage.Thus, option 1 i.e. PRSQ is an appropriate order. 

Related Questions

Read the passage and answer the questions that follow. Unsurprisingly, the latest conviction comes a month after the FATF, a global dirty money watchdog, urged Pakistan to complete an internationally agreed action plan to fight terror financing. In February 2018, Pakistan endorsed a UN list of terrorist organizations operating in the country and enforced a nationwide ban on them, including the LeT and the JuD, just before a meeting of the FATF. But the FATF still placed Pakistan on its “grey list” in June 2018, and demanded more actions from Islamabad to avoid being blacklisted, which could invite economic sanctions. Ever since, Pakistan, which cannot afford to be blacklisted, especially when its economy is in shambles, has moved against Saeed. The Anti-Terrorism Department’s FIRs against Saeed and his aides accuse the JuD of financing terrorism from its fund collections in the name of charity through NGOs. While the authorities’ move against Saeed is welcome, the question is whether these are genuine attempts to fight terrorism or half-hearted measures to dodge international pressure. There are doubts because Pakistan had used anti-India and anti-Afghan terrorist networks for strategic advantages. It was this dual policy of fighting terror at home while nurturing terror groups that target its rivals abroad that has been responsible for Pakistan’s predicament. If it is serious about fighting terrorism, Pakistan should crackdown on terror financing and terror infrastructure. The international community and organizations, including the FATF, should keep up the pressure until Islamabad shows tangible outcomes. According to the passage, why FATF did not remove Pakistan from the "grey list"?
Read the passage and answer the questions that follow. Unsurprisingly, the latest conviction comes a month after the FATF, a global dirty money watchdog, urged Pakistan to complete an internationally agreed action plan to fight terror financing. In February 2018, Pakistan endorsed a UN list of terrorist organizations operating in the country and enforced a nationwide ban on them, including the LeT and the JuD, just before a meeting of the FATF. But the FATF still placed Pakistan on its “grey list” in June 2018, and demanded more actions from Islamabad to avoid being blacklisted, which could invite economic sanctions. Ever since, Pakistan, which cannot afford to be blacklisted, especially when its economy is in shambles, has moved against Saeed. The Anti-Terrorism Department’s FIRs against Saeed and his aides accuse the JuD of financing terrorism from its fund collections in the name of charity through NGOs. While the authorities’ move against Saeed is welcome, the question is whether these are genuine attempts to fight terrorism or half-hearted measures to dodge international pressure. There are doubts because Pakistan had used anti-India and anti-Afghan terrorist networks for strategic advantages. It was this dual policy of fighting terror at home while nurturing terror groups that target its rivals abroad that has been responsible for Pakistan’s predicament. If it is serious about fighting terrorism, Pakistan should crackdown on terror financing and terror infrastructure. The international community and organizations, including the FATF, should keep up the pressure until Islamabad shows tangible outcomes. As per the passage, which word can replace CONVICTION grammatically and contextually?
Read the passage and answer the questions that follow. Unsurprisingly, the latest conviction comes a month after the FATF, a global dirty money watchdog, urged Pakistan to complete an internationally agreed action plan to fight terror financing. In February 2018, Pakistan endorsed a UN list of terrorist organizations operating in the country and enforced a nationwide ban on them, including the LeT and the JuD, just before a meeting of the FATF. But the FATF still placed Pakistan on its “grey list” in June 2018, and demanded more actions from Islamabad to avoid being blacklisted, which could invite economic sanctions. Ever since, Pakistan, which cannot afford to be blacklisted, especially when its economy is in shambles, has moved against Saeed. The Anti-Terrorism Department’s FIRs against Saeed and his aides accuse the JuD of financing terrorism from its fund collections in the name of charity through NGOs. While the authorities’ move against Saeed is welcome, the question is whether these are genuine attempts to fight terrorism or half-hearted measures to dodge international pressure. There are doubts because Pakistan had used anti-India and anti-Afghan terrorist networks for strategic advantages. It was this dual policy of fighting terror at home while nurturing terror groups that target its rivals abroad that has been responsible for Pakistan’s predicament. If it is serious about fighting terrorism, Pakistan should crackdown on terror financing and terror infrastructure. The international community and organizations, including the FATF, should keep up the pressure until Islamabad shows tangible outcomes. From the passage, it can be inferred that the author is: