Match the Acts in Group-I with the corresponding organizations empowered by the Act in Group-II.
\[\begin{array}{|c|c|} \hline \textbf{Group I} & \textbf{Group II} \\ \hline (P)\ \text{RERA 2016} & (1)\ \text{Chief Information Commission} \\ (Q)\ \text{RTI Act 2005} & (2)\ \text{Land Registration Board} \\ (R)\ \text{Town and Country Planning Act} & (3)\ \text{Real Estate Regulatory Authority} \\ (S)\ \text{Municipal Act} & (4)\ \text{Development Authority} \\ & (5)\ \text{Board of Councillors} \\ \hline \end{array} \]
Step 1: RERA 2016.
The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 set up the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA).
\[
P \Rightarrow 3
\]
Step 2: RTI Act 2005.
The Right to Information Act, 2005 empowered the Chief Information Commission.
\[
Q \Rightarrow 1
\]
Step 3: Town and Country Planning Act.
This act is related to planned urban development and empowers the Development Authority.
\[
R \Rightarrow 4
\]
Step 4: Municipal Act.
The Municipal Act establishes Boards of Councillors for local self-governance.
\[
S \Rightarrow 5
\]
\[
\boxed{P-3, \ Q-1, \ R-4, \ S-5}
\]
P and Q play chess frequently against each other. Of these matches, P has won 80% of the matches, drawn 15% of the matches, and lost 5% of the matches.
If they play 3 more matches, what is the probability of P winning exactly 2 of these 3 matches?