Dear Mahmood Brother, since this is a history paper therefore the facts are always bound to remain the same for everybody. The only difference would be in your presentation skills and the writing style (how you phrase it)

So the structure should be:

-Introduction Paragraph: the untimely death of Aibek, the nascent Turkish kingdom was in disarray, no administrative structure (it was a military state), no capital even (Delhi and Lahore were 2 capitals- in fact they were military states), infighting ensuing at the death of Aibek, Peculiar times, Iltutmish rises to the occasion

What threats were being faced by the nascent Delhi sultanate?
-revolts and conspiracies by the nobles
-the recently subdued Rajput kingdoms resorting to Revolts
-lack of sound administrative structure
-unlike Aibek, Iltutmish has no backing from Ghazni (this is a major point- so he is on his own)

What steps he takes
-Organizes the administration- Delhi becomes the Capital (so Iltutmish gave India its first Capital), organizes the Corps of the Forty (To unite the nobility and kill the revolts etc)

and other points that you said. Treat it like an Essay Question. Give it a flow, a taste that shall occupy the examiner. Else 99% of the material remains through 99.99% of the papers You can't come up with something new (not in a huge quantity anyways)

Dear Umar brother ,

thank you so much for your kind effort and reply.
I welcome your suggestions. Under each mentioned outline i was going to elaborate the same points which elaborated .like conflict with Rajputana and diplomatics policy against mongols , when iltutmish refused for asylum to Mankbarni, shah of khwarzim against mongols. because mongols were chasing to him. but they returned back, so iltutmish diplomatically saved his infant turkish empire . this is the only one example which i mentioned , while other administrative reforms and battles will be mentioned in this question.

what you think ?

what you think why mongols backed and did not proceeded further towards indus valley? if they proceed further , map of the world would be changed.

As far as i may recall, by that time Ganghis Khan died and his sons were at odds among themselves. Secondly, like Mahmud of Ghazni, they saw their fortunes in Western Asia rather than South Asia (i may be wrong). It was only during Balban's time that the Mongols were united enough and strong enough to think about annexing South Asia but by that time Balban had become strong enough.

That is the reason why Iltutmish and Balban more or less share the policy of non-expansion

__________________
Umar Abbas Babar
I Know I am Bad But When Bad is the Best, Bad is the Only Choice

thanks umar brother,

as you know one question have numerous dimensions ,

I personally read three books Stanley lane pool , Ishwari parsed and V smith for comparison thoroughly, every one analysed with different approach and with some additional information. but all are quite interesting and eloquent.

so lets see and pray for all CE 14 . i hope this subject will not come the knife of FPSC's policy of slaughtering.

Regards

What should be the structure of ans. I mean should any body attempt it like in essay style (outlines, from intro to conclusion) or the ordinary way means just headings and subheadings?

Which way is the best to get good marks?

Outline is strictly a No! you can make one at the back of the paper (in the rough work area). As far as headings are concerned, I believe they add to the value but on a personal level, I never used headings What I do is to frequently change between black and blue ink to highlight my points.

Well of course prayers are a must. I would recommend buying V.D Mahajan "The Delhi Sultanate" for the Sultanate Era. There is no better book than this one. What Mr. Mahajan has done is gather quotes from all the writers like Lane Pool, Prasad, Smith, Qureshi and given them together

This is especially good about topics like "Write a critical note on Iltutmish" OR his personality

__________________
Umar Abbas Babar
I Know I am Bad But When Bad is the Best, Bad is the Only Choice

I got
Paper-I =53
Paper-II =53

@Umarabass

I drew outlines in both of the papers. Scored well in indopakI, but could not got attain good scores in both indopakII and Pak Aff! That means we must not draw outlines like essay type? And please let me know what should be length of a qualitative ans. I know about quality and quantity, as quality matters a lot. Just let me know what should be the standard length of a 20 marks question in a history subject. Though I have dropped indpak but I will have to attempt US History. I believe same techniques will the requirements of US History...

Let me know the way you follow, and is it necessary to mention introduction and conclusion in every question? Or just we are supposed to hit the answer, no matter about intro or con?

Thanks...

I never drew an outline brother! I treated every question like an essay with an introduction, evidence and conclusion. They awarded me 139 marks in 2012. in all my attempts I never wrote more than 5 sides as an answer. In 2010 they awarded me 100 something marks. The reason for the poor performance was that I studied only ordinary books for that attempt (Qureshi, Rabbani etc)

__________________
Umar Abbas Babar
I Know I am Bad But When Bad is the Best, Bad is the Only Choice

46 and 53
99

__________________
striving to discover the undiscovered to serve the humanity