Distinction Between Titles and Honors

Evidence 1 and Inference 1 are coherent. Banning hereditary titles was the core intent of Article 18 to ensure egalitarianism. Evidence 2 and Inference 2 are coherent. The 1996 SC ruling validated the awards by distinguishing merit recognition from aristocratic titles. Evidence 3 and Inference 3 are contradictory. The Supreme Court explicitly forbade the use of these awards as prefixes or suffixes to names. The correct counterpart is the prohibition of naming affixes.

The Assertion is correct. You cannot use the award as a title. Reason (R1) is true and explains the assertion. This was the specific compromise the SC struck in 1996 to validate the awards while upholding the spirit of Article 18. Reason (R2) is factually false. The Constitution does not mention the Bharat Ratna, and it is explicitly NOT a hereditary title of nobility. The correct counterpart is its status as a merit-based honor.

Statement 1 is incorrect. While they aren't unconstitutional titles, the SC expressly forbade their use as prefixes. The correct counterpart is the judicial ban on naming affixes. Statement 2 is correct. Article 18 explicitly exempts academic distinctions ('Dr.'), making that valid. However, the 1996 SC ruling forbade the use of National Awards ('Padma Shri') as a prefix. Statement 3 is incorrect. Article 18 expressly ALLOWS military and academic distinctions.

Statement 1 is correct. It aims to abolish titles of nobility. Statement 2 is incorrect. The SC UPHELD the awards, stating merit recognition does not violate equality. The correct counterpart is the constitutional validity of the awards. Statement 3 is correct. Military/academic distinctions are explicitly exempt. Statement 4 is incorrect. The SC explicitly banned the use of these awards as prefixes or suffixes. The correct counterpart is the prohibition of naming affixes. Thus, exactly two statements are correct.