State Autonomy in Local Administration

Only the first statement is correct. State governments hold the exclusive power to create, alter, or abolish districts, and can do so via executive action or a state assembly law. Statements 2, 3, and 4 are false because the Central government (Parliament, the President, and the Union Home Ministry) has absolutely no mandatory role or approval power in the creation of districts. (The Centre is only involved if a district is being *renamed*).

The Assertion is true; the Centre cannot carve out districts within existing states. Reason 1 correctly supports this by identifying that state governments hold exclusive jurisdiction over internal administrative subdivisions. Reason 2 is legally false because the President has no role in creating districts, and no specialized ordinance is required from the Centre.

The second ruling is correct. The power to create or alter districts lies entirely with the State government. Furthermore, the State government is not strictly required to pass a law through the legislative assembly; it is perfectly legal for them to create new districts simply by issuing an executive order. The Central Parliament has no role to play here.

Only the fourth requirement is valid (States can create districts via executive or legislative action). The first three statements are false; the central Parliament, the President, and the Ministry of Home Affairs have absolutely no mandatory role or approval power in the process of carving out or creating new districts within a state.