💥Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (July Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS2

  • “Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution is a limited power and it cannot be enlarged into absolute power.” In the light of this statement explain whether Parliament under Article 368 of the Constitution can destroy the Basic Structure of the Constitution by expanding its amending power?

    Article 368 empowers Parliament to amend the Constitution, but this power is not absolute. The SC, through the Basic Structure Doctrine, has clarified that while Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, it cannot alter or destroy its essential features.

    Limitations on the Amending Power of Parliament

    Procedure under Article 368 – Constitutional amendments must strictly follow special majority and, where applicable, state ratification (for federal provisions).

    Basic Structure Doctrine (Kesavananda Bharati, 1973) – Parliament cannot alter, abrogate, or destroy the Basic Structure of the Constitution.

    Minerva Mills, 1980 – The limited amending power itself is part of the Basic Structure.

    Balance Between Fundamental Rights and DPSPs – Parliament cannot give unlimited precedence to one over the other, preserving constitutional harmony.

    Separation of Powers – Parliament cannot encroach upon the independence of the judiciary or the executive-legislative balance. Eg- NJAC

    Federal Structure – Amendment cannot centralize power to the extent of destroying federalism or state autonomy. (S.R. Bommai Judgment)

    I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007) – Even laws under the Ninth Schedule are open to judicial review if they violate Basic Structure.

    Thus, parliament cannot destroy or expand its amending power beyond constitutional limits. It is subject to Basic Structure

    Supremacy of the Constitution

    Republican and democratic form of government

    Secularism

    Federalism

    Judicial Review and Rule of Law

    Separation of Powers

    Limited amending power (Minerva Mills)

    Analysis

    The power of amendment under Article 368 is an instrument to ensure the Constitution’s continuity, and dynamic adaptation, not institutional annihilation. In a democracy governed by the Rule of Law, no organ can arrogate to itself absolute power, for that would negate the very idea of constitutionalism.

  • On what grounds a people’s representative can be disqualified under the Representation of People Act, 1951? Also mention the remedies available to such person against his disqualification.

    The RPA, 1951 provides the statutory framework for conducting elections and maintaining the integrity of India’s democratic process.

    Grounds for Disqualification under RPA, 1951

    Disqualification on Conviction for Certain Offences – Section 8

    bribery, undue influence, promoting enmity (IPC 153A, 295A), or corruption.

    If the sentence is two years or more, the disqualification is immediate and lasts six years after release.

    Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2013) – Section 8(4) was struck down, making disqualification automatic on conviction.

    Disqualification for Dismissal from Government Service – Section 9 – Disqualification for five years if dismissed for corruption or disloyalty to the State.

    Disqualification for Office of Profit – Section 10 – Holding an office of profit under the government (not exempted by law)

    Disqualification for Government Contracts – Section 9A

    Disqualification for Failure to Lodge Election Expenses – Section 10A

    Remedies Available Against Disqualification

    Judicial Appeal – If conviction is stayed, disqualification ceases to operate (Lok Prahari v. Union of India, 2018).

    Under Articles 103 & 192, President or Governor’s Decision acts on the advice of the Election Commission.

    Election Petition (Section 80, RPA, 1951) in the High Court within 45 days of result declaration.

    Analysis

    Thus, the disqualification provisions ensure the trinity of Ethics, Accountability and Fairness of electoral process.

  • ‘The time has come for India and Japan to build a strong contemporary relationship, one involving global and strategic partnership that will have a great significance for Asia and the world as a whole.’ Comment.

    Shinzo Abe in his book “Towards a beautiful nation” termed India as Japan’s natural ally as they have no conflict of strategic interest and share common goals to build a free and open Indo-Pacific.

    Reasons for strong India-Japan Relations

    Geopolitical – Cold war 2.0, G-2

    Geoeconomic – Weaponisation of supply chains by China, Trump’s Tariff Wars

    Defence and Security – China’s boiling frog strategy in Indo Pacific

    Connectivity – China’s debt trap diplomacy through BRI. Eg- Sri Lanka crisis

    Multilateralism – UNSC reforms (both are members of G-4)

    Building a Strong India-Japan Partnership for Stability in Asia

    Strengthen Strategic and Security Cooperation

    Institutionalize Indo-Pacific Defence Cooperation- Expand 2+2 ministerial dialogues, enhance joint military exercises (Malabar, JIMEX) and intelligence sharing.

    Maritime Security- Establish a Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA) network in the Indian Ocean to ensure secure Sea Lanes of Communication (SLOCs).

    Regional Architecture- Coordinate policies within Quad, ASEAN, and East Asia Summit to promote regional security and crisis management.

    Deepen Economic and Connectivity Linkages

    Sustainable Infrastructure under the Asia-Africa Growth Corridor (AAGC) as a transparent alternative to China’s BRI.

    Develop joint critical mineral and semiconductor supply chains under the Japan-India Industrial Competitiveness Partnership (IJICP).

    Energy and Technological Cooperation – Partner in hydrogen energy, solar manufacturing, and battery storage technologies to drive Asia’s clean transition.

    Soft Power and People-to-People Ties – Encourage joint humanitarian and disaster relief operations (HADR) to reinforce India-Japan goodwill across Asia.

    Building a Strong India-Japan Partnership for Stability in the World

    Promote a Rules-Based Global Order

    UN Reforms- Work jointly for UN Security Council reform

    Global Governance- Align efforts in WTO, IMF, and World Bank to make global institutions more representative and equitable.

    Global Economic Leadership

    Promote rule based economic order to counter weaponisation by trade by US and China

    Technology and Trade Norms- Co-develop standards in AI ethics, data protection, and digital economy governance.

    Climate Action- Jointly lead green finance mechanisms and global partnerships on carbon neutrality, leveraging Japan’s technology and India’s markets.

    Collaboration in Global Commons

    Maritime Freedom- Cooperate to safeguard open seas in the Western Pacific and Africa’s eastern coast.

    Space and Cyber Cooperation- Develop joint frameworks for space situational awareness and cybersecurity, ensuring safe use of global commons.

    As Prof. C. Raja Mohan notes, India and Japan can be “anchor democracies in the Indo-Pacific”, balancing China’s rise

  • Implementation of information and Communication Technology (ICT) based Projects / Programmes usually suffers in terms of certain vital factors. Identify these factors, and suggest measures for their effective implementation.

    Major ICT-Based Projects/Programmes in India

    Digital India: The umbrella programme for transforming India into a digitally empowered society.

    BharatNet: connected over 2.15 lakh Gram Panchayats with 42.36 lakh route km of optical fiber.

    e-NAM: A pan-India electronic trading portal for agricultural commodities.

    UMANG App: provide access to 1,500+ central and state government services.

    DigiLocker: cloud-based platform for issuance and verification of digital documents/certificates.

    e-Courts: Aimed at digitizing the Indian judiciary to reduce case pendency and improve access.

    U-WIN: Digital platforms for tracking universal immunization.

    ONDC: Open Network for Digital Commerce, democratizing e-commerce for MSME.

    Bhashini: AI-led language translation platform to overcome linguistic barriers.

    Major Issues in ICT Projects

    Digital Divide – Eg: Rural internet penetration 59.06% vs urban 131.45% (TRAI Q1 2025).

    Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities- Eg: cybercrime losses in 2024 – 206% rise (I4C, MHA 2025).

    Data Privacy Concerns – Weak enforcement of data protection exposes citizens to misuse risks.

    Poor Digital Literacy – Eg: Only 38% women have ever used internet (NFHS-5, MoHFW).

    Inadequate Infrastructure – Internet connectivity, electricity, devices remain insufficient in remote regions.

    Capacity Constraints – lower level government staff lack training in digital tools, data analytics, AI skills.

    Targeting and verification errors exclude genuine beneficiaries from welfare schemes. Eg: PM-Kisan validation errors stranded 2.18 crore families (Dvara Research).

    Departmental Silos – Ministries operate in isolation; lack integrated digital data ecosystems for governance.

    Faulty validation processes. Eg: Aadhaar-PDS biometric failures linked to Simdega starvation death, Jharkhand (NHRC).

    Linguistic Barriers – English-dominant interfaces exclude regional language users from accessing services.

    Measures for Effective Implementation

    Bridge Digital Divide – Saturate rural connectivity through BharatNet expansion and affordable smartphones distribution.

    Strengthen Cybersecurity Framework – Implement zero-trust architecture, ICT audits, dedicated CERT-In response teams.

    Strengthen DPDP Act 2023 – Enforce verifiable consent, data minimisation, breach reporting through Data Protection Board.

    Mass Digital Literacy Drive – Scale PMGDISHA and Mission Karmayogi to all citizens and government employees.

    Citizen Co-creation – Engage citizens through MyGov, hackathons, and pilot testing before scaling projects.

    Inter-Ministerial Convergence – Adopt PM Gati Shakti model integrating data across ministries on single GIS platform.

    Outcome-Based Monitoring – Real-time dashboards, third-party audits, beneficiary feedback for course correction.

    Public-Private Partnerships – Engage startups, fintechs, and academia for innovation and last-mile delivery.

    Adopt Global Best Practices – Estonia’s X-Road, Once-Only Principle for seamless inter-departmental data sharing.

    For Viksit Bharat 2047, robust ICT governance demands inclusion, security, capacity, and citizen-centric design.

  • There is a growing divergence in the relationship between poverty and hunger in India. The shrinking of social expenditure by the government is forcing the poor to spend more on Non- Food essential items squeezing their food – budget.- Elucidate.

    While extreme poverty fell to 2.35% (World Bank, 2024), undernourishment (12%) and child wasting (18.7%) persist (SOFI 2025).

    Growing Divergence between Poverty and Hunger

    Decline in Monetary Poverty: About 24.82 crore individuals escaped multidimensional poverty in the last 9 years. (NITI Aayog)

    Persistence of Hunger and Malnutrition:

    Despite surplus food production, India’s GHI score (25.8) remains in the “serious” category.

    Indicators such as stunting (32.9%), wasting (18.7%), and anemia (57% women) reveal continued deprivation.

    Shift from Absolute Hunger to Hidden Hunger: 57% of women and 67% of children are anemic

    Shrinking of Social Expenditure by the Government

    Education expenditure: ~2.9% of GDP (NEP recommendation 2020).

    Decline in allocation for MGNREGA

    Impact on Poor Households:

    Health: Out-of-pocket health spending forms 40% of total health expenditure (NHA 2023).

    Indian Middle class is 1 Hospital Bill Away from poverty

    Education: Rising private tuition and school costs strain household budgets.

    Learning poverty – Over 70% of Class 3 students cannot read age-appropriate texts (ASER 2025)

    Utilities and fuel: Increasing electricity, rent, and LPG costs raise non-food spending.

    Proliferation of slums – 17% urban population living in slums

    Way Forward

    Social Determinants Approach: Integration of hunger and poverty with nutrition, sanitation (Swachh Bharat), and clean energy (Ujjwala Yojana).

    Nutrition-Sensitive Policies: Diversify PDS with millets, pulses, fortified foods, and region-specific nutrition interventions.

    Adopt data-driven local interventions under Aspirational Districts Programme to target high-burden regions.

    Adopt Brazil’s Bolsa Família conditional cash transfer scheme

    Scale State level best practices like TN’s inclusion of Eggs in MDM

    This can help achieve SDG 1, 2 and realise Atmanirbhar Bharat.

  • From the resolution of contentious issues regarding distribution of legislative powers by the courts, ‘Principle of Federal Supremacy’ and ‘Harmonious Construction’ have emerged. Explain.

    As per Ivor Jennings, India is “a federation with a strong centralising tendency.” The 7th Schedule is a reflection of this tendency.

    Contentious Issues regarding Distribution of Legislative Powers

    Concurrent List repugnancy – Eg- Education (Concurrent List, Entry 25) – Centre’s NEET law vs Tamil Nadu’s opposition to it.

    Residuary powers with the Union

    Under Article 249, Rajya Sabha can empower Parliament to legislate on State List subjects. Eg- Essential Commodities Act (food items, agricultural produce).

    During National Emergency (Art. 250) or President’s Rule (Art. 356), Parliament can legislate on State subjects.

    Principle of Federal Supremacy

    In cases of irreconcilable conflict, Union law prevails over State law.

    Judicial Validation–

    Union of India v. H.S. Dhillon (1972) – Parliament has residuary powers.

    State of Karnataka v. Union of India (1977) – Union’s primacy in matters of national importance.

    State of West Bengal v. Union of India (1963) – SC upheld Parliament’s power to acquire State property.

    Zameer Ahmed Latifur Rehman Sheikh v. State of Maharashtra (2010) – SC ruled that a central money laundering law overrides conflicting State law under Article 254(1).

    Protects national unity and uniformity in crucial subjects.

    Principle of Harmonious Construction

    Courts attempt to reconcile conflicts so that both Union and State laws can function simultaneously.

    Judicial Validation–

    In C.B. Boarding and Lodging v. State of Mysore (1970), the SC upheld the State’s power to levy tax on lodging houses, even though taxation on income was a Union subject.

    State of Rajasthan v. G. Chawla (1959) – Both Centre and State laws upheld through harmonious interpretation.

    Hoechst Pharmaceuticals v. State of Bihar (1983) – Repugnancy avoided through reconciliation.

    Preserves federal balance and safeguards state autonomy.

    “Federalism is not a monolith; it is a dialogue between self-rule and shared rule.” Both Union & States are creatures of the Constitution

  • What can France learn from the Indian Constitution’s approach to secularism?

    Secularism ensures the neutrality of the State toward religion while protecting freedom of belief and conscience.

    While France follows Laïcité, emphasizing strict separation of religion and State, India practices positive secularism, ensuring equal respect for all religions within a plural society.

    France’s Model of Secularism (Laïcité)

    Based on non-recognition and non-involvement of the State in religious affairs.

    Guarantees freedom of conscience but restricts public religious expression (e.g., veil ban in schools, 2004).

    Aims to preserve republican unity and neutrality in the public sphere.

    India’s Model of Secularism

    Enshrined in the Preamble and Articles 25-28 of the Constitution.

    Guarantees freedom of religion, equal treatment of all faiths, and State neutrality.

    Allows State intervention for social reform (e.g., abolition of untouchability, Sabarimala judgment).

    Described as positive secularism – promoting harmony through engagement, not exclusion.

    Upheld as a basic feature of the Constitution in S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994).

    Lessons France Can Learn from Indian Secularism

    Inclusive Neutrality: The State can respect all religions equally rather than excluding them from the public sphere.

    Reform-Oriented State Role: The State can intervene in religious practices to uphold human rights and gender equality (e.g., abolition of untouchability, temple entry)

    Multiculturalism – respecting cultural and religious rights and customs. Promoting plurality instead of uniformity

    Freedom of Religious Expression: Allowing individuals to express faith in public spaces strengthens personal liberty (e.g., Sikh turban, Muslim veil).

    Pluralism as Democratic Strength: Religious diversity, when accommodated constitutionally, enhances national unity and democratic legitimacy.

    Balancing Liberty with Equality: Secularism should protect individual conscience while also advancing social justice and non-discrimination.

    Dialogue over Restriction: Promoting inter-faith dialogue and accommodation builds social cohesion better than prohibitive policies.

    Protection of minority rights through special provisions. Eg- Article 29,30.

    Secularism need not mean “absence of religion in public life,” but rather “equal respect and peaceful coexistence of all religions under a neutral State.”

  • Despite Consistent experience of High growth, India still goes with the lowest indicators of human development. Examine the issues that make balanced and inclusive development elusive.

    India is Fastest Growing Economy in the world (IMF) but low HDI rank (130 out of 193, UNDP 2025) highlight that growth has not translated into inclusive development.

    Indicators of human development

    Poverty Headcount Ratio – 11.28% (2022-23)

    Malnutrition – NFHS-5

    35.5% stunting,

    19.3% wasting,

    32.1% underweight in children under five

    Inequality – the richest 1% owning over 40% of the nation’s wealth, while the bottom 50% hold a mere 3-6%.

    Issues that make balanced and inclusive development elusive.

    Political Factors

    Policy Fragmentation: scheme overlaps and lack of convergence dilute impact.

    Short-Term Populism: Focus on vote-bank subsidies over long-term human capital investments. Eg- low spending on Health (1.98% of GDP) and Education (2.9% of GDP)

    Weak Decentralization: Eg- Only 40% of States have functional District Planning Committees.

    Economic Factors

    Jobless Growth: Services contribute 55% of GDP but employ less than 30% of workforce.

    Agrarian Distress: 42% of workforce in agriculture contributes just 17% to GDP

    Social Factors

    Gender Inequality: low Female Labour Force Participation due to

    Triple Burden – Household, Children, Job

    Patriarchal Mindset – Eg- Sarpanch Pati

    Law of asset ownership – only 11% land ownership

    Education and Health Deficits

    High out of pocket expenditure (40%)

    Digital Apartheid in education during Covid

    Environmental Stress: Unsustainable urbanization, pollution, and water scarcity aggravate human deprivation.

    Institutional Factors

    Weak Governance Capacity: Poor implementation, leakages, and bureaucratic delays persist. Eg- inclusion-exclusion errors in PDS

    Ineffective Targeting: Outdated socio-economic data hinder evidence-based policy (SECC 2011 still in use).

    Way Forward

    Capability Approach – increase spending on Health (2.5%of GDP) and Education (6% of GDP)

    Adopt Best Practices

    Kerala’s People’s Plan Campaign

    Participatory Budgeting in porto alegre brazil

    Decentralized Governance based on principle of subsidiarity.

    “Growth becomes meaningful only when it expands human freedom and capability.” – Amartya Sen

  • Do you think that constitution of India does not accept principle of strict separation of powers rather it is based on the principle of ‘checks and balance’? Explain.

    SoP is derived from Montesquieu’s Spirit of Laws (1748) – dividing state power into Legislature, Executive, Judiciary to prevent concentration and arbitrariness.

    Separation of Powers in the Constitution

    Article 50 – Separation of executive and judiciary (Directive Principle).

    Articles 122 & 212 – Courts not to question proceedings of Parliament and State Legislatures.

    Articles 121 & 211 – Conduct of judges cannot be discussed in Parliament or State Legislatures (except during impeachment).

    Article 361 – President and Governors enjoy immunity; not answerable to courts for exercise of powers and duties.

    However, Strict Separation Does Not Exist due to

    Legislature & Executive Overlap – Executive is drawn from the legislature (Art. 74 & 75; Art. 163 & 164).

    Delegated Legislation – Legislature delegates rule-making powers to executive authorities.

    Judicial Functions of Legislature in cases of breach of privilege or impeachment of judges.

    Judicial Functions of Executive – pardons and commutations (Art. 72 & 161) by President and Governors.

    Checks and Balances in Practice

    Judicial Review – Judiciary can strike down unconstitutional laws and executive actions. Eg – NJAC Judgment.

    Legislative Control over Executive via questions, motions, and no-confidence votes.

    Executive’s Role in appointment of judges through the collegium system consultation.

    Judiciary review of laws for conformity with Fundamental Rights and Basic Structure. Eg – Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975).

    Legislative control over judiciary – Eg- 2018 Amendments to Atrocities Act, Impeachment Motions

    “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” – Lord Acton
    Thus, checks and balances are essential to prevent tyranny and preserve democracy.

  • “The Central Administration Tribunal which was established for redressal of grievances and complaints by or against central government employees, nowadays is exercising its powers as an independent judicial authority.” Explain.

    The CAT was established under Article 323A and Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 to provide speedy and specialized justice in service matters of Central Government employees.

    Objectives of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT)

    Speedy Justice

    Reduce Burden on Courts

    Specialized Adjudication

    Ensure Administrative Fairness – Protect employees from arbitrary, unjust, or discriminatory administrative actions.

    Accessible and Affordable Justice

    Maintain consistency and coherence in decisions across departments.

    Promote Administrative Accountability

    Realize Article 39A by making justice accessible to all employees.

    CAT as Independent Judicial Authority

    Exclusive Jurisdiction-

    CAT adjudicates disputes on recruitment, promotion, transfer, service conditions, and disciplinary actions of Central employees.

    Its jurisdiction excludes ordinary civil courts in service matters.

    Powers of a Civil Court, including summoning witnesses, receiving evidence, and delivering binding orders.

    Though under the DoPT for administrative purposes, CAT functions judicially independent in decision-making.

    Judicial Review Authority- CAT can strike down administrative actions violating Articles 14, 16, or 21. Eg- It has quashed arbitrary transfer orders and disciplinary actions in several cases.

    Following L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997), CAT decisions are subject to judicial review by High Courts under Articles 226/227, ensuring accountability.

    CAT, in line with Article 39A, must ensure administrative justice while upholding judicial independence and judicial review as constitutional safeguards.