Constitutional Mechanisms for Territorial Alteration

The first and second statements are accurate. Article 2 allows Parliament to admit or establish *new* states (not previously part of the Union). Article 3 empowers Parliament to reorganize *existing* states (altering areas, boundaries, or names). The third statement is false because bifurcating an existing state into two smaller units is an internal re-adjustment, which falls strictly under the jurisdiction of Article 3, not Article 2.

The Assertion is true; external expansion and internal reorganization use different tools. Both Reasons provide excellent legal support: Reason 1 correctly defines the external/admission scope of Article 2, and Reason 2 correctly defines the internal/reorganization scope of Article 3.

The second mapping is correct. Action X (renaming an existing state) is an internal re-adjustment governed by Article 3. Action Y (admitting a new political entity that was not previously part of the Union) is governed by Article 2.

Only two summaries are valid (Statements 1 and 2 defining Articles 2 and 3 respectively). Statement 3 is false because the internal bifurcation of an existing state into separate zones is explicitly the domain of Article 3, not Article 2.