Consider the following pairs with regard to sports awards: | No. | Award Name | Description | | --- | ---------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | 1. | Major Dhyan Chand Khel Ratna Award | For the most spectacular and outstanding performance by a sportsperson over period of last four years | | 2. | Arjuna Award | For the lifetime achievement by a sportsperson | | 3. | Dronacharya Award | To honour eminent coaches who have successfully trained sportspersons or teams | | 4. | Rashtriya Khel Protsahan Puraskar | To recognize the contribution made by sportspersons even after their retirement | How many of the above pairs are correctly matched?

Shows national awards (Padma) are announced on a fixed annual occasion and have formal numerical limits — indicating centralised rules/governance for awards.

A student could infer that similarly formal notifications likely define eligibility and time-periods for sports awards and should be checked in official rules.

Describes how India classifies and formally introduced major civilian decorations, showing that awards are institutionally defined categories.

Use this pattern to expect that the Khel Ratna would have an official definition/criteria document that could confirm whether a four‑year performance window is specified.

Gives an example of an Indian award (Outstanding Parliamentarian) instituted with an annual cycle and nominations finalised by a committee, illustrating that awards often have explicit selection procedures.

A student can reasonably look for a similar selection mechanism and explicit criterion (e.g., performance over X years) for the Khel Ratna in official notifications.

Describes the Farmers Gopal Ratna Award with a clear performance-based criterion (best herd and management practices), showing Indian awards frequently state concrete performance criteria.

By analogy, one can expect the Khel Ratna to state measurable criteria (and a time-frame) for ‘outstanding’ performance; checking the award’s rules would test the four‑year claim.

Shows that some major awards (here a UN/environment award) explicitly include a 'Lifetime Achievement' category, illustrating the common practice of distinguishing lifetime achievement from other award categories.

A student could use this pattern to check official descriptions of the Arjuna Award to see whether it lists a 'lifetime achievement' category or is described differently (e.g., for recent performance).

Describes formal rules for Indian civilian awards (Padma/Bharat Ratna) including specific limits and annual announcements, indicating that Indian awards often have defined categories and regulations.

Apply the idea that Indian awards are formally defined to look up statutory or official criteria for the Arjuna Award (notifications, ministry rules) to see if 'lifetime achievement' is mentioned.

Gives an example of an Indian award (Outstanding Parliamentarian) that was instituted with a defined nomination/selection committee and annual conferment, implying sports awards may also have formal selection mechanisms and stated purposes.

Check whether the Arjuna Award has a similar institutional selection process and an explicitly stated purpose (e.g., performance vs lifetime contribution) to infer if it's for lifetime achievement.

Lists several national awards for specific sectors (farmers, livestock) with targeted purposes, showing national awards commonly target particular achievements or contributions rather than using a single 'lifetime' label across all awards.

Use this pattern to inspect the Arjuna Award's stated objective (sport-specific achievement vs lifetime service) in official award lists or ministry materials.

Lists India-specific awards (Gopal Ratna, Kamdhenu) given to people for excellence in particular occupations/roles, showing a pattern of role-targeted national awards.

A student could infer that India commonly institutes awards honoring specific professional contributions and thus look for a similarly role-specific award for coaches in sports.

States a named award (Naiv Candhi Wildlife Conservation Award) is annually given to prominent contributors in a defined field, illustrating the practice of awarding 'prominent contributors' in domain-specific areas.

Extend the pattern to expect a domain-specific award in sports for prominent contributors — e.g., coaches — and check authoritative lists of sports awards for a Dronacharya entry.

Bishnoi Life Protection Award is given for significant contributions in wildlife protection, another example of awards recognizing individuals for contributions to a field.

Use the pattern of field-based recognition to hypothesize that coaching (a defined role within sports) could have its own award and then search sports-award lists or official notifications for Dronacharya.

Rajiv Gandhi Environment Award is given to units making significant contributions to clean technology, showing awards can target both individuals and organizations for domain impact.

Recognize that awards target successful trainers/implementers as well as innovators; thus an award for coaches (trainers) in sports fits this institutional pattern and warrants targeted verification.

Explains structural rules about national awards (Padma) including annual announcements and numerical limits, indicating formal processes govern national honours.

A student could use this to seek formal government lists/notifications (e.g., annual award announcements) to confirm whether a formally instituted Dronacharya Award exists for coaches.

Discusses national awards (Bharat Ratna, Padma series) as recognising merit/distinguished service rather than being 'titles', showing the general pattern that Indian national awards honour contributions irrespective of formal status.

A student could infer that other national-level awards (including sports awards) might similarly focus on contribution/merit and then check RKPP criteria to see if 'post-retirement contributions' are eligible.

States that major national awards are given for 'exceptional' or 'distinguished public service in any field, including service rendered by government servants', indicating awards often target the nature of service rather than current employment/active status.

One could extend this rule to suspect RKPP may judge based on contribution impact (not necessarily active participation) and then compare RKPP eligibility language.

Example of the Bishnoi Life Protection Award being given for 'significant contribution' in wildlife protection, implying awards in India commonly reward contributions which could be made at various career stages.

A student could use this example to hypothesize that RKPP might similarly reward contribution regardless of whether it occurred during or after active sporting career and then verify RKPP rules.

Describes the institution of an 'Outstanding Parliamentarian' award decided by committee and given annually—illustrates the procedural pattern that formal awards use specific nomination/committee processes to determine merit.

Using this, one could expect RKPP will have explicit nomination/selection rules; checking those rules would reveal whether retired sportspersons are eligible.

Notes an annual wildlife conservation award given to 'prominent contributors' who made substantial impact—another example that awards often emphasize impact rather than the contributor's active/retired status.

A student could extend this pattern to ask whether RKPP's stated eligibility focuses on impact (which would allow post-retirement recognition) and then consult the RKPP eligibility wording.