One of the very rare ambiguous question in GATE. It is ambiguous what the question asks for
minimum permissible rate at which sequence numbers used for packets of a connection can increase
It is not meaningful to use "minimum" with "can increase" - should be either "maximum" with "can" or "minimum" with "should/must"
Now the second problem,
rate at which sequence numbers used for packets of a connection
In TCP, once the Initial Sequence Number(ISN) is set, the increase in sequence number is determined by the data sent rate - for every 8 bits, it increases by $1.$ If the question is asking for this rate, then it is independent of the ISN and depends on the packet lifetime and number of possible sequence numbers. With $32$ bits we have $2^{32}$ sequence numbers possible and to avoid using the same sequence number while a packet with one is still alive, we should ensure no more than $2^{32}$ sequence numbers in a packet lifetime which is given as $64s$. So, maximum increase possible for sequence number will be $2^{32}$ in $64s$ which will be $2^{26} /s= 64M/s $ corresponding to a data rate of $64 \times 8 = 512 Mbps.$ This is not in the option.
Now the other possible meaning of the question is the rate at which the ISN of a packet can increase. This problem comes when a connection gets aborted and re-established (i.e., same IP and Port addresses at sender and receiver) very soon. In this case, receiver might get confused if it gets any sequence number which might have been used by the old connection. To, avoid this the new sequence number must be used only after all previous ones are dead. i.e., only after Maximum Life time of a packet which is $64s$. (Page 29, TCP Specification) This ensure that ISN can change only once in $64s$ giving the rate change as $1/64 = 0.015/s$ which is option A. (Even though, the ISN is changing only once, as per the question the new ISN is not old ISN +1 but old ISN + time passed in milliseconds)
Option A.