A : Carbon shows anamolous behaviour in group Gp- 14 .
R : Carbon has maximum covalency of 4 .

Options

A. If both Assertion & Reason are true and the reason is the correct explanation of the assertion , then mark (1)
B. If both Assertion & Reason are true but the reason is not the correct explanation of the assertion , then mark (2)
C. If Assertion is true statement but Reason is false , then mark (3)
D. If both Assertion and Reason are false statements , then mark (4)

Answer

To analyze the assertion and reason provided in the question, we will break down the statements step by step.

### Step 1: Understanding the Assertion
**Assertion (A): Carbon shows anomalous behavior in group 14.**

- Carbon is the first element in Group 14 of the periodic table.
- It is smaller in size compared to other elements in the group (like silicon, germanium, etc.).
- Due to its small size, carbon exhibits unique properties that differ from the heavier elements in the same group.

### Step 2: Understanding the Reason
**Reason (R): Carbon has a maximum covalency of 4.**

- Covalency refers to the number of bonds an atom can form with other atoms.
- Carbon can form four covalent bonds due to its four valence electrons (in the 2s and 2p orbitals).
- Unlike heavier elements in Group 14, carbon does not have available d-orbitals to expand its covalency beyond four.

### Step 3: Evaluating the Relationship Between Assertion and Reason
- The assertion states that carbon shows anomalous behavior due to its unique properties as the smallest element in Group 14.
- The reason provided explains that carbon's maximum covalency is 4 because it lacks d-orbitals to expand its bonding capacity.
- While both statements are true, the reason does not directly explain why carbon shows anomalous behavior; it merely states a fact about carbon's bonding capacity.

### Conclusion
- Both the assertion and reason are true.
- However, the reason does not correctly explain the assertion.

### Final Answer
The correct option is: Both assertion and reason are true, but the reason is not the correct explanation of the assertion.

---