BharatNotes Built from the education and health chapter, whose figures come from chapters 2 and 3 of the Government of Rajasthan's Economic Review 2025-26, read directly.
How to use this page
Three data sources appear in this topic and they are not interchangeable. Health indicators are NFHS, with fieldwork ending 2021. Maternal mortality is Sample Registration System data for 2021-23. All education indicators are UDISE+ for 2023-24 and 2024-25. Quoting an NFHS period against an SRS period is the commonest error here.
Two figures in this chapter moved the wrong way and are asked as though they moved the right way — the primary Gross Enrolment Ratio and secondary retention. A third, anaemia, looks favourable for a reason that has nothing to do with Rajasthan.
Read the tag on each question
| Tag | What it tests | If you keep missing these |
|---|---|---|
| Type A · which survey | An SRS figure offered as NFHS, or a UDISE+ year misplaced | Each table names its own source and period |
| Type B · wrong direction | An indicator that fell offered as one that rose | Not every line improved |
| Type C · gap vs improvement | A favourable comparison read as state progress | Ask whether the state moved, or the country did |
| Type D · state vs India | Rajasthan's figure offered for India's, or the reverse | The tables print both side by side |
| Recall / Concept | No trap — the figure, or the reasoning behind it | Ordinary revision |
Section A — The mortality reversal (Q1–8)
1. Rajasthan's Neonatal Mortality Rate in NFHS-5 was — Recall
Show answer
(c) 20.2 per 1,000 live births.
Why not the others: (a) 29.8 is Rajasthan in NFHS-4; (b) 24.9 is India in NFHS-5; (d) 30.3 is Rajasthan's infant mortality rate. All four sit in the same table.
2. On neonatal, infant and under-five mortality, the position between NFHS-4 and NFHS-5 was that Rajasthan — Concept
Show answer
(a) — a reversal on all three measures.
Why not the others: (b) and (c) each freeze the comparison; (d) all three improved. NFHS-4: 29.8 v 29.5, 41.3 v 40.7, 50.7 v 49.7. NFHS-5: 20.2 v 24.9, 30.3 v 35.2, 37.6 v 41.9. The state improved faster than the country on every one.
3. Rajasthan's Infant Mortality Rate fell between the two rounds by — Recall
Show answer
(d).
Why not the others: (a) 13.1 points is the fall in the under-five rate; (c) 7.3 points is the fall in stunting; (b) is not a figure in the table. The Review states each of these deltas itself.
4. India's Under-Five Mortality Rate in NFHS-5 was — Type D · state vs India
Show answer
(b) 41.9.
Why not the others: (a) 37.6 is Rajasthan in NFHS-5; (c) 49.7 is India in NFHS-4; (d) 50.7 is Rajasthan in NFHS-4. Four cells of one row, and the question turns on reading both the geography and the round.
5. Institutional births in Rajasthan reached what level in NFHS-5? — Recall
Show answer
(c) 94.9 per cent, above the national 88.6.
Why not the others: (a) 84.0 is Rajasthan in NFHS-4; (b) 88.6 is India in NFHS-5; (d) 78.9 is India in NFHS-4. A rise of 10.9 points, and the state is now clearly ahead of the country.
6. Full immunisation coverage in Rajasthan rose between the rounds from — Recall
Show answer
(a) — a rise of 25.6 points.
Why not the others: (b) 62.0 to 76.4 is India's immunisation movement, a rise of 14.4 points; (c) is anaemia and (d) is stunting. Full immunisation covers children aged 12 to 23 months, by card or mother's recall.
7. Which statement about immunisation is correct? — Type D · state vs India
Show answer
(b) — 54.8 against 62.0 in NFHS-4, then 80.4 against 76.4 in NFHS-5.
Why not the others: (a) and (c) each get one round wrong; (d) the gaps are wide in both. This is a second reversal in the same table, alongside the mortality one.
8. Stunting, wasting and underweight in Rajasthan in NFHS-5 stood at — Recall
Show answer
(d).
Why not the others: (a) is Rajasthan in NFHS-4; (b) is India in NFHS-5; (c) is India in NFHS-4. The falls were 7.3, 6.2 and 9.1 points respectively, and Rajasthan is below the national figure on all three.
Section B — Anaemia, fertility and the gap that misleads (Q9–16)
9. Anaemia among pregnant women aged 15 to 49 in Rajasthan moved between the rounds from — Type C · gap vs improvement
Show answer
(c) — a fall of 0.3 points across roughly five years, which is effectively flat.
Why not the others: (a) 50.4 to 52.2 is India's movement, which is a deterioration; (d) reverses the state's direction; (b) is immunisation. This is the only line in the table where Rajasthan barely moved.
10. Rajasthan's anaemia figure is 5.9 points better than India's. The correct explanation is — Type C · gap vs improvement
Show answer
(d) — Rajasthan fell 0.3 points, India rose 1.8.
Why not the others: every other option credits state policy for a gap the national figure created. The favourable comparison is real; the improvement is not, and an answer that treats it as an achievement has misread the table.
11. Rajasthan's Total Fertility Rate in NFHS-5 was — Recall
Show answer
(b) 2.0, down 0.4 points.
Why not the others: (a) 2.4 is Rajasthan in NFHS-4; (c) 2.2 is India in NFHS-4; (d) 2.1 is the replacement level the Review names, not a measured rate. Rajasthan is now below replacement.
12. Replacement-level fertility, as the Review states it, is about — Concept
Show answer
(d) about 2.1.
Why not the others: (a) 2.0 is the measured TFR for both Rajasthan and India in NFHS-5 and is the designed near-miss; (b) is Rajasthan's earlier rate; (c) appears nowhere. The distinction between the measured rate and the replacement threshold is the whole question.
13. Which indicator in the NFHS table shows India worse in NFHS-5 than in NFHS-4? — Type B · wrong direction
Show answer
(a) anaemia, from 50.4 to 52.2 per cent.
Why not the others: (b) rose from 78.9 to 88.6, (c) fell from 49.7 to 41.9 and (d) rose from 62.0 to 76.4, all improvements. Anaemia is the single line where the national figure went backwards.
14. On which NFHS-5 indicator are Rajasthan and India identical? — Type D · state vs India
Show answer
(c).
Why not the others: (a) 94.9 against 88.6, (b) 46.3 against 52.2 and (d) 16.8 against 19.3, all differ. TFR is the one line where the two converge.
15. The NFHS-5 fieldwork period was — Type A · which survey
Show answer
(b) 2019-21.
Why not the others: (a) 2015-16 is NFHS-4; (c) 2021-23 is the Sample Registration System period for maternal mortality; (d) 2024-25 is the current UDISE+ year. The health indicator table is therefore five years old at its most recent point.
16. Does the Economic Review 2025-26 carry NFHS-6 results for Rajasthan? — Type A · which survey
Show answer
(d).
Why not the others: all three assert a release the Review does not contain. Any figure attributed to NFHS-6 could not be verified from this source and is not reproduced on the parent page. That is recorded as an absence rather than a denial.
Section C — Maternal mortality and the health schemes (Q17–30)
17. Rajasthan's Maternal Mortality Ratio in 2021-23 was — Recall
Show answer
(c) 86.
Why not the others: (a) 113 is Rajasthan in 2018-20; (b) 88 is the all-India figure for the same period; (d) 27 is the fall between the two Rajasthan readings. Rajasthan is now marginally below the national figure, by two points.
18. The maternal mortality figures come from — Type A · which survey
Show answer
(a) the Sample Registration System.
Why not the others: (b) NFHS supplies the child and nutrition indicators over a different period; (c) UDISE+ is the education source; (d) is not cited here. Mixing the SRS maternal series with the NFHS child series is the standard error in this topic.
19. How is Rajasthan's MMR position best described? — Concept
Show answer
(a) — 86 against 88.
Why not the others: (d) overstates a two-point margin; (b) and (c) misstate it. The fall from 113 is substantial; the lead over India is not, and the two should not be conflated.
20. Under the Mukhyamantri Ayushman Arogya Yojana, claims paid numbered — Recall
Show answer
(b).
Why not the others: (a) 62,75,311 is claims submitted, worth ₹2,955.16 crore; (c) 15,32,780 is the number of patients treated; (d) borrows the 92.76 lakh RGHS claims figure. About 64 per cent of claims are paid by number but about 76 per cent by value.
21. That gap between 64 per cent by number and 76 per cent by value suggests — Concept
Show answer
(a).
Why not the others: (b) would produce the opposite pattern; (c) and (d) are contradicted by the two ratios differing. Both percentages are arithmetic on the published table, and the parent page marks them as derived.
22. The essential drug list under the Mukhyamantri Nishulk Nirogi Rajasthan (DAWA) Yojana comprises — Recall
Show answer
(c).
Why not the others: (b) and (d) permute the three numbers, which is exactly how this is set; (a) drops two categories. 15.73 crore patients benefited at ₹1,312.19 crore in 2025-26 up to December.
23. The 15.73 crore figure under DAWA should be read as — Concept
Show answer
(d).
Why not the others: (a) the state's population is about 8 crore, so the figure cannot be a headcount; (b) follows from the same arithmetic problem; (c) it is an achieved figure to December, not a projection. It cannot mean every resident was treated twice.
24. The Rajasthan Government Health Scheme covers about — Recall
Show answer
(b) about 13.65 lakh families.
Why not the others: (a) 92.76 lakh is the number of claims settled, not families; (c) 741 is the number of empanelled private hospitals in the state; (d) is the DAWA patient count. Registration is through Jan Aadhaar.
25. RGHS benefits extend to treatment under — Recall
Show answer
(c).
Why not the others: (a), (b) and (d) each narrow the list the Review gives. The scheme covers ministers, MLAs, former MLAs, serving and retired All India Service officers, state employees and pensioners and their dependants, and spent ₹2,440.69 crore on 92.76 lakh claims in 2025-26 to December.
26. Ayushman Vay Vandan was launched on 29 October 2024 for — Recall
Show answer
(a).
Why not the others: (b) describes Mukhyamantri Bal Sambal Yojana, under which 224 children were certified and ₹65 lakh spent; (c) is RGHS; (d) is not this scheme. It provides cashless treatment.
27. Under Mukhyamantri Bal Sambal Yojana, how many children were certified as suffering from rare diseases? — Recall
Show answer
(b).
Why not the others: (a) 741 and (d) 3,748 are the RGHS counts of empanelled hospitals and pharmacy stores; (c) 4,000 is the monthly number of deliveries at Adarsh Primary Health Centres.
28. Adarsh Primary Health Centres reported what monthly workload? — Recall
Show answer
(d).
Why not the others: (a) swaps patients and deliveries, which produces an impossible figure; (b) and (c) belong to DAWA and RGHS. These are rural PHCs designated as Adarsh.
29. Which figure is deliberately absent from the parent chapter? — Concept
Show answer
(c).
Why not the others: (a), (b) and (d) are all on the page. The Review tables read for that chapter cover Ayurveda institutions and urban facilities specifically rather than the whole rural network, and an approximate figure would be worse than none.
30. Claims submitted under the Mukhyamantri Ayushman Arogya Yojana were worth — Recall
Show answer
(a) ₹2,955.16 crore.
Why not the others: (b) ₹2,245.53 crore is the value of claims paid; (c) ₹1,312.19 crore is DAWA expenditure; (d) ₹2,440.69 crore is RGHS expenditure. Submitted and paid are the pair being tested.
Section D — Education (Q31–45)
31. The Gross Enrolment Ratio at primary level moved between 2023-24 and 2024-25 from — Type B · wrong direction
Show answer
(d) a fall.
Why not the others: (a) reverses the direction, which is exactly the assumption the question tests; (b) is the upper primary movement, a rise of 1.2 points; (c) is elementary. The Review reports the fall and offers no explanation, and none is invented on the parent page.
32. The weakest Gross Enrolment Ratio in 2024-25 was at — Recall
Show answer
(b) higher secondary, at 66.1.
Why not the others: all three others are higher. About a third of the relevant age group is not enrolled at higher secondary even after a 4.1-point rise, which is the largest single gap in the education tables.
33. The Pupil Teacher Ratio in 2024-25 was most favourable at which level? — Concept
Show answer
(c) secondary, at 11.
Why not the others: (a) primary at 18 is the least favourable, (d) upper primary at 12 is second best and (b) higher secondary at 15 is third. The ratio improves as the level rises, which is the opposite of what most people assume.
34. Which Pupil Teacher Ratio changed between the two years? — Recall
Show answer
(a) primary only.
Why not the others: upper primary held at 12, secondary at 11 and higher secondary at 15, so (b), (c) and (d) are wrong. Only the primary ratio moved.
35. The transition rate from secondary to higher secondary moved from — Recall
Show answer
(b) — a rise of 5.6 points, the largest of the three transitions.
Why not the others: (a) is primary to upper primary and (c) is upper primary to secondary; (d) 59.1 to 55.9 is secondary retention, which fell. All three transition rates rose.
36. Which retention rate fell between 2023-24 and 2024-25? — Type B · wrong direction
Show answer
(d).
Why not the others: (a) rose 82.5 to 83.1, (b) rose 75.3 to 78.7 and (c) rose 48.9 to 51.9. The Review comments on the primary and elementary improvements and passes over this decline, which is why the parent page states it.
37. Retention to class 12 in 2024-25 stood at — Concept
Show answer
(c).
Why not the others: (a) is primary and (b) elementary retention; (d) 66.1 is the higher secondary GER, a different measure. About half of those who start class 1 are still enrolled at class 12.
38. Dropout rates in 2024-25 were — Recall
Show answer
(a).
Why not the others: (b) is the 2023-24 set; (c) inverts the order across levels; (d) overstates. Dropout roughly halved at primary and upper primary in one year, and secondary remains more than double the other two.
39. The Gross Enrolment Ratio can exceed 100 because — Concept
Show answer
(d).
Why not the others: (a), (b) and (c) misdescribe the measure. The "regardless of age" clause is the most commonly asked feature of the GER, and it is the reason over-age and under-age enrolment can push the ratio past 100.
40. The Transition Rate measures — Concept
Show answer
(b).
Why not the others: (a) defines the Retention Rate, (c) the Dropout Rate and (d) the Gross Enrolment Ratio. All four definitions come from the Review's own footnotes, and RPSC asks what an indicator measures as often as what it equals.
41. The Dropout Rate is defined as the proportion of pupils enrolled at a level in one year who — Concept
Show answer
(c).
Why not the others: (a), (b) and (d) describe outcomes that do not remove a pupil from enrolment. The phrase "at any grade" is what makes a transfer or a repeat not a dropout.
42. All five education indicators on the parent page come from — Type A · which survey
Show answer
(a).
Why not the others: (b) and (c) supply the health indicators over different periods; (d) is not cited. All five education tables share one source and one pair of years, which is what makes them directly comparable with each other.
43. Between 2023-24 and 2024-25 the primary GER fell while primary dropout halved. The honest position is — Concept
Show answer
(b).
Why not the others: (a) both are UDISE+ figures and neither is disputed; (c) and (d) assert a causal link that no source supports. The parent page reports the fall and states plainly that the Review gives no reason for it.
44. The elementary retention rate in 2024-25 was — Recall
Show answer
(d) 78.7, up from 75.3.
Why not the others: (a) 83.1 is primary retention, (b) 75.3 is elementary in the previous year and (c) 55.9 is secondary. Elementary covers classes 1 to 8.
45. Which pair of education indicators moved in opposite directions between the two years? — Type B · wrong direction
Show answer
(c).
Why not the others: (a) transitions all rose and dropouts all fell, which are both improvements; (b) both moved favourably in the sense of the PTR, and the GER fall is a separate point; (d) both rose, 62.0 to 66.1 and 48.9 to 51.9. Secondary retention is the one line inside the retention table that goes the other way.
More in This Series
- Basic Social Services: Education and Health — the parent chapter every answer here comes from
- Economy of Rajasthan — the unit index
- Major Welfare Schemes of the Government of Rajasthan — the transfers alongside these services
- Caution for Readers — the claims across this site that are genuinely unsettled
