How many productions will be there, after constructing the reduced grammar for the given grammar below?
\[ \text{1. } X \rightarrow aYa \text{2. } Y \rightarrow Xb \text{3. } Y \rightarrow bCC \text{4. } C \rightarrow ab \text{5. } E \rightarrow aC \text{6. } Z \rightarrow aZY \]
Step 1: Reducing the grammar.
The given grammar contains several rules that can be reduced. We will look at the productions involving non-terminal \( Y \) and attempt to eliminate unnecessary rules.
1. \( X \rightarrow aYa \): This production can be kept as is.
2. \( Y \rightarrow Xb \): Substitute \( X \) from the first rule, so \( Y \rightarrow (aYa)b \), which can be reduced.
3. \( Y \rightarrow bCC \): Can be reduced by eliminating \( C \) in subsequent steps.
4. \( C \rightarrow ab \): Reduced to a single rule.
5. \( E \rightarrow aC \): A single rule for \( E \).
6. \( Z \rightarrow aZY \): This can be reduced to a simpler production.
After simplifying the above rules, we are left with 5 production rules in total.
Step 2: Conclusion.
Thus, the correct number of reduced productions is 5, so the correct answer is (3) Five.
Match List-I with List-II 
Match List-I with List-II\[\begin{array}{|c|c|} \hline \textbf{Provision} & \textbf{Case Law} \\ \hline \text{(A) Strict Liability} & \text{(1) Ryland v. Fletcher} \\ \hline \text{(B) Absolute Liability} & \text{(II) M.C. Mehta v. Union of India} \\ \hline \text{(C) Negligence} & \text{(III) Nicholas v. Marsland} \\ \hline \text{(D) Act of God} & \text{(IV) MCD v. Subhagwanti} \\ \hline \end{array}\]