Each question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Such principles may or may not be true in the real sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in answering the following questions, you must not rely on any principles except the principles that are given herein below for every question. Further, you must not assume any facts other than those stated in the question. The objective of this section is to test your interest towards study of law, research aptitude and problem solving ability even if the 'most reasonable conclusion' arrived at may be unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the object of this section to test your knowledge of law.

PRINCIPLE: The consideration or object of an agreement is unlawful if the Court regards it as opposed to public policy. Every agreement of which the object or consideration is unlawful is void.

FACTS: 'X' promises to obtain for 'Y' an employment in the public service; and 'Y' promises to pay Rs. 5,00,000 to 'X'.

Which of the following derivations is CORRECT?

Correct Answer: The correct option is "There is an agreement between 'X', and 'Y' which cannot be enforced by the court of law".

1. Understanding the Principle:
According to the given legal principle, an agreement's consideration or object is considered unlawful if it is regarded by the Court as opposed to public policy. Any agreement whose consideration or object is unlawful is void. A void agreement has no legal effect and cannot be enforced by any court of law.

2. Analyzing the Facts:
'X' promises to secure a job/employment in the public service (a government/public office position) for 'Y', and in return, 'Y' promises to pay Rs. 5,00,000 to 'X'.

3. Application of Legal Principle to Facts:
Trading or trafficking in public offices/public posts (paying money to secure a government job) is strictly contrary to public policy because public offices must be appointed based on merit, not financial gratification. Therefore, the consideration or object of this transaction between 'X' and 'Y' is opposed to public policy and unlawful.
Since the object/consideration is unlawful, the arrangement between 'X' and 'Y' forms a void agreement. By definition, a void agreement cannot be legally enforced by a court of law.

Conclusion:
Hence, there is an agreement between 'X' and 'Y', but it cannot be enforced by the court of law.