The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare released the National Family Health Survey-6 (NFHS-6), showing major improvements in maternal health, child nutrition, immunisation, and financial protection.
About NFHS
Conducted by the International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS), Mumbai
Covers population, health, nutrition, and family welfare indicators
NFHS-6 surveyed about 6.79 lakh households across 715 districts
PYQ Relevance[UPSC 2024] Explain the reasons for the growth of Public Interest Litigation in India. As a result of it, has the Indian Supreme Court emerged as the world’s most powerful judiciaryLinkage: The PYQ examines the expanding role and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which lies at the core of the present debate on pendency and judicial burden.The article discusses judicial reforms and institutional capacity of the Supreme Court. Efficient justice delivery is essential for preserving judicial independence and constitutional governance.
Mentor’s Comment
The Union government has recently increased the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court from 34 to 38 judges, reviving an old debate on judicial reforms: Can more judges solve India’s mounting judicial pendency? The issue has direct relevance for judicial reforms, separation of powers, access to justice, and constitutional governance in India.
What is the Constitutional Provision Governing the Number of Supreme Court Judges?
Article 124(1): Establishes the Supreme Court and provides for a Chief Justice of India (CJI) and other judges.
Parliamentary Power: The Constitution does not fix a permanent number of judges. It authorises Parliament to determine the number of judges by law.
Flexible Institutional Design: Enables periodic expansion of judicial strength based on rising caseload, pendency, and administrative requirements.
How has the Number of Supreme Court Judges Increased?
Ordinary Legislation: Increase in judicial strength requires amendment of the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956.
No Constitutional Amendment Required: Since Article 124 empowers Parliament, increase occurs through ordinary parliamentary legislation, not a constitutional amendment under Article 368.
Recent Change (2025): Parliament passed the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Bill, 2025, increasing sanctioned strength from 34 to 38 judges.
Ordinance Route: The President promulgated an ordinance under Article 123 before Parliament formally completed the process, despite Parliament expected to convene shortly.
How Has the Supreme Court’s Strength Increased Over Time?
Year
Strength of SC Judges
1950
8 (including CJI)
1956
11
1960
14
1977
18
1986
26
2009
31
2019
34
2025
38
What Does This Trend Indicate?
Rising Caseload: Expansion reflects increasing litigation and constitutional responsibilities.
Persistent Pendency: Repeated increases have not prevented rising backlog, indicating structural inefficiencies beyond numerical shortage.
Shift in Institutional Role: Expansion coincides with the Supreme Court increasingly functioning as a general appellate court, rather than primarily a constitutional court.
Can Increasing Judicial Strength Alone Reduce Pendency in the Supreme Court?
Judicial Capacity: Increasing sanctioned strength from 34 to 38 judges enhances disposal capacity and may reduce waiting time for hearings.
Limited Impact: Pendency of nearly 94,000 cases suggests backlog is structural rather than merely numerical.
Historical Continuity: Successive governments have periodically increased judicial strength, yet pendency continues to rise.
Institutional Limitation: More judges do not automatically improve efficiency unless accompanied by procedural reforms.
Concerns Over Ordinance Route: The government introduced the increase through an ordinance, despite Parliament being expected to convene soon, raising concerns about legislative bypass.
Has the Supreme Court Drifted from Its Intended Constitutional Role?
Constitutional Design: The Supreme Court was envisioned primarily as a constitutional court, dealing with substantial constitutional interpretation.
Article 136 Expansion: The Court’s extraordinary power under Article 136 (Special Leave Petition) has expanded its jurisdiction significantly.
Routine Appeals: A substantial share of the Court’s docket is now occupied by SLPs, converting the Court into a de facto regular appellate court.
Judicial Observation (2016): A Constitution Bench refused to restrict Article 136, observing that no effort should be made to reduce the Court’s powers.
Consequences: Excessive appellate workload diverts attention from constitutional matters of national significance.
Do Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) Contribute to Judicial Backlog?
Extraordinary Remedy: SLPs were designed as exceptional remedies under Article 136 for rare cases involving grave injustice.
Judicial Overreach of Scope: SLPs now dominate a substantial portion of Supreme Court litigation.
Absence of Guidelines: Lack of strict admission standards has encouraged indiscriminate filing.
Case Example: Vijaya Bank v. Prashant B. Narnaware: A contractual employment dispute reached the Supreme Court despite involving issues more suited for lower courts.
Constitutional Concern: Excessive admission of routine matters dilutes the Court’s constitutional focus.
Does Government Litigation Worsen Judicial Pendency?
Largest Litigant: Governments remain among the largest litigants in Indian courts.
National Litigation Policy Failure: The proposed National Litigation Policy (NLP) aimed to reduce avoidable government litigation but was never effectively implemented.
Routine Appeals Culture: Government departments frequently pursue appeals even in settled legal matters.
Administrative Inconsistency: Frequent changes in legal officers produce contradictory litigation strategies.
Institutional Burden: Excessive state appeals consume judicial time and prolong case disposal.
Illustration: Cases often remain pending for years before reaching the Supreme Court because High Courts do not conclusively settle disputes.
Will More Benches Improve Consistency or Create Conflicting Judgments?
Expanded Bench Strength: More judges imply greater number of division benches.
Potential Benefit: Greater benches may increase disposal rates and reduce waiting time.
Risk of Fragmentation: Larger bench numbers may generate inconsistent judicial interpretations.
Polyvocality Challenge: Different benches may reach different conclusions on similar legal principles.
Need for Coordination: Greater reference to larger Constitution Benches becomes essential for doctrinal consistency.
Can Institutional Reforms Address Pendency More Effectively Than Numerical Expansion?
Filtering Mechanism: Strengthens scrutiny of frivolous litigation, particularly under Article 136.
Case Prioritisation: Ensures only cases involving substantial constitutional questions reach the Supreme Court.
Written Submissions: Reduces prolonged oral arguments and judicial time consumption.
Bench Management: Facilitates better coordination among benches to reduce conflicting rulings.
High Court Empowerment: Encourages High Courts to decisively settle disputes rather than passing litigation upward.
Case Illustration: State of Uttaranchal v. Balwant Singh Chaufal (2010): Supreme Court stressed that Public Interest Litigation (PIL) must serve genuine public causes and not personal interests.
Can Judicial Appointments Improve Gender Representation?
New Opportunity: Four additional judicial positions create scope for increasing women’s representation.
Gender Gap: High Courts continue to have relatively low numbers of senior women judges.
Transparency Need: Judicial appointments require greater openness and diversity considerations.
Convention Bias: Seniority norms have often disadvantaged women in elevation to higher courts.
Conclusion
Increasing the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court from 34 to 38 judges may improve disposal rates and reduce immediate workload pressures, but pendency is fundamentally a structural and institutional challenge rather than a purely numerical one. Sustainable reform requires restoring the Court’s constitutional role through stricter filtering of Special Leave Petitions (SLPs), reducing excessive government litigation, strengthening High Courts, improving case management, and ensuring doctrinal consistency. Judicial expansion can facilitate faster justice only when accompanied by systemic reforms that enhance efficiency, coherence, and access to justice.
The Supreme Court recently upheld the constitutional validity of the government’s retrospective 28% GST levy on online real-money gaming, reviving tax demands of nearly ₹2.5 lakh crore against gaming companies, fantasy sports platforms, and casinos. The ruling is significant because it overturns relief granted by the Karnataka High Court .
Understanding Online Gaming in India: What is Being Regulated?
Online gaming refers to digital games played over the internet through mobile applications, websites, or gaming platforms.
In India, the sector includes real-money gaming, fantasy sports, skill-based games (rummy, poker), casino-style betting, and casual entertainment gaming.
The regulatory challenge arises because gaming falls at the intersection of technology, taxation, public order, consumer protection, and gambling laws, with different legal treatment depending on the nature of the game.
How is online gaming regulated in India?
Constitutional Position:Betting and gambling fall under the State List (Entry 34, List II, Seventh Schedule), allowing states to enact their own laws. This has created a fragmented regulatory landscape.
Central Regulation: The Union government regulates aspects relating to intermediary liability, digital platforms, taxation, cybersecurity, money laundering, and online content.
IT Rules Framework: The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, amended in 2023, introduced provisions for regulation of online real-money games, due diligence by intermediaries, and verification mechanisms.
State-Level Variation: States adopt differing approaches:
Permissive Approach: States such as Sikkim and Nagaland license certain online skill games.
Restrictive Approach: States such as Tamil Nadu and Telangana imposed restrictions on some online money games citing addiction and public welfare concerns.
Tax Regulation: Since October 2023, online gaming, casinos, and horse racing attract 28% GST on the full face value of bets/deposits, rather than only platform commissions.
What is the difference between a ‘Game of Skill’ and a ‘Game of Chance’?
Game of Skill
A game in which success predominantly depends upon a player’s knowledge, training, strategy, judgment, or expertise, even if some chance element exists.
Examples:
Rummy: Recognised by courts as substantially skill-based.
Fantasy Sports (Dream11): Judicial rulings have treated team selection requiring statistical judgment as skill-oriented.
Chess, Bridge, E-sports: Depend primarily on cognitive ability and strategy.
Judicial Position: Courts have held that a game remains one of skill if skill predominates over chance.
Game of Chance
A game in which outcomes depend predominantly on luck, randomness, or uncertain events, with limited influence of player expertise.
Examples:
Roulette
Slot machines
Lottery
Casino gambling
These activities are generally treated as betting or gambling and face stricter regulation.
Why does the skill-versus-chance distinction matter?
Legal Treatment: Games of skill generally receive greater constitutional protection under Article 19(1)(g) (right to trade/business), whereas gambling may face prohibition.
Taxation: The GST dispute emerged because gaming firms argued that skill-based games should be taxed on Gross Gaming Revenue (GGR) rather than total player deposits.
State Regulation: Several states permit skill games while prohibiting gambling and betting.
Consumer Welfare: Governments increasingly view even skill-based money gaming through a public health lens due to addiction concerns.
Why has the Supreme Court verdict become a watershed moment for India’s online gaming sector?
Retrospective Tax Validation: Upholds the constitutional validity of the 28% GST levy retrospectively, reviving tax notices worth approximately ₹2.5 lakh crore against gaming firms, fantasy sports companies, and casinos.
Judicial Finality: Settles a prolonged legal dispute by dismissing petitions filed by gaming companies challenging GST demands and retrospective tax notices.
Reversal of Earlier Relief: Overturns relief granted by the Karnataka High Court to Gameskraft, which had challenged a ₹21,000 crore GST notice.
Massive Fiscal Exposure: Creates unprecedented liabilities for firms such as Dream11, which reportedly faced notices of around ₹40,000 crore, and Delta Corp, which received notices totalling ₹23,204 crore.
How did the dispute over GST liability on online gaming emerge?
Taxation Ambiguity: Emerged from disagreement over whether GST should apply only on platform fees/commissions (Gross Gaming Revenue-GGR) or on the full value of deposits/bets placed by users.
Industry Position: Argued that taxation should apply prospectively from 1 October 2023, following GST Council amendments.
Government Position: Treated real-money gaming involving uncertain outcomes as betting and gambling, irrespective of skill elements.
Skill vs Chance Debate: The industry maintained that games such as fantasy sports and rummy involve skill and should be taxed differently from gambling.
Supreme Court Position: Accepted the government’s interpretation by treating online money gaming involving uncertain outcomes as taxable similarly to betting activities.
Why is taxation on the ‘full face value’ of bets controversial?
Commercial Unsustainability: Imposes GST on the entire deposited amount rather than platform earnings, substantially increasing tax liability.
Revenue Mismatch: Creates tax demands many times higher than cumulative revenues generated by companies.
Retrospective Burden: Applies liabilities to past operations, creating sudden and severe liquidity pressures.
Consumer Pricing Constraints: Restricts firms’ ability to transfer increased tax burdens to users due to market competition and affordability concerns.
Business Viability Risk: Forces firms to reconsider business models, downsize operations, or shift to alternative sectors.
Illustration: A platform earning only a small commission on player deposits may still face taxation on the total deposited amount, sharply inflating liabilities.
Does the verdict strengthen fiscal governance or undermine ease of doing business?
Revenue Protection: Enhances government capacity to prevent tax avoidance and regulatory arbitrage.
Consumer Protection: Aligns with state concerns regarding gambling addiction and financial vulnerability among youth.
Retrospective Taxation Concerns: Raises questions regarding predictability of taxation, a core element of investment confidence.
Ease of Doing Business: Creates apprehensions regarding sudden regulatory shifts affecting emerging digital sectors.
Regulatory Signalling: Indicates stronger state oversight over digital platforms operating in legally grey areas.
How has India’s regulatory approach towards online gaming evolved?
Tax Tightening: GST Council introduced 28% GST on online gaming based on the face value of bets.
Security Concerns: Authorities flagged concerns relating to digital wallets, cryptocurrency-based transfers, illicit fund movement, and money laundering.
National Security Risks: Identified gaming platforms as potential communication channels for organised criminal and extremist activities.
Legal Restrictions: The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming (PROG) Act, 2025 introduced strict restrictions on online money gaming platforms.
Financial Restrictions: Prohibits banks and financial institutions from facilitating transactions linked to prohibited platforms.
Penal Consequences: Provides imprisonment and financial penalties for operators, promoters, and facilitators of prohibited gaming activities.
Can India balance innovation in digital gaming with regulatory safeguards?
Regulatory Clarity: Requires a transparent legal distinction between games of skill and games of chance.
Consumer Safeguards: Ensures age verification, spending limits, addiction prevention, and grievance redressal.
Proportionate Taxation: Supports sustainable taxation aligned with actual revenue generation.
Technology Oversight: Strengthens anti-money laundering (AML) and cybersecurity frameworks.
Economic Potential: Recognises gaming as part of India’s digital economy, employment generation, and technology ecosystem.
Federal Coordination: Requires harmonisation between central taxation policies and state gambling laws.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court verdict represents more than a taxation dispute; it signals a decisive shift in India’s governance of emerging digital sectors. While the judgment strengthens regulatory clarity and fiscal oversight, the retrospective nature and scale of tax liabilities raise concerns regarding investment certainty and innovation. India’s challenge lies in designing a framework that simultaneously ensures consumer protection, revenue integrity, and sustainable growth of legitimate digital enterprises.
The Supreme Court on May 21, 2026, clarified that courts may resume proceedings in pending sedition cases under Section 124A of the IPC if the accused voluntarily consent, partially relaxing the 2022 stay order. The development has revived debate over free speech and misuse of sedition while its constitutional validity remains pending before the Court.
What is Sedition?
Sedition under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 historically criminalised acts bringing “hatred, contempt or disaffection” against the government established by law. Although Section 124A stands repealed with the enforcement of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, a comparable provision now exists under Section 152 of the BNS, titled “Acts Endangering Sovereignty, Unity and Integrity of India.” The Supreme Court’s recent clarification primarily concerns pending Section 124A IPC cases, while the constitutional debate has now expanded to include Section 152 of the BNS.
Feature
Section 124A IPC
Section 152 BNS
Law
Indian Penal Code, 1860
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
Offence Name
Sedition
Acts Endangering Sovereignty, Unity and Integrity of India
Why has sedition remained controversial since colonial times?
Colonial Origins: Sedition traces back to the Statute of Westminster, 1275, and later became part of British colonial criminal law.
Colonial Instrument: Used by British authorities against Indian nationalists including Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Mahatma Gandhi.
Nehru’s Criticism: Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru described sedition in Parliament (1951) as “highly objectionable and obnoxious.”
Democratic Contradiction: Critics argue sedition criminalises legitimate criticism of government.
Recent Misuse Example: A former independent MP and her husband reportedly faced sedition charges after allegedly threatening to recite the Hanuman Chalisa outside a former Maharashtra Chief Minister’s residence.
How has the Supreme Court’s May 21 clarification altered the status of sedition proceedings?
Judicial Clarification: Permits courts to continue trials, appeals, and proceedings under Section 124A if the accused person voluntarily consents.
Partial Revival: Modifies the effective pause imposed by the Supreme Court’s May 2022 interim order, which had directed governments to refrain from registering fresh FIRs and coercive action under sedition.
Case Illustration: The clarification emerged in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Kanhaiya Lal, where accused persons convicted under sedition sought appeal proceedings.
Procedural Shift: Allows High Courts and lower courts to proceed selectively rather than maintaining a blanket suspension.
Why had sedition proceedings been effectively paused since 2022?
Constitutional Challenge: Multiple petitions led by S.G. Vombatkere v. Union of India questioned Section 124A for violating fundamental rights, especially free speech under Article 19(1)(a).
Executive Reconsideration: The Union Government informed the Supreme Court in 2022 that it intended to re-examine the sedition provision.
Interim Judicial Protection: The Court expected governments not to register new FIRs, continue investigations, or take coercive action during reconsideration.
Protection Against Misuse: Intended to prevent arbitrary criminalisation of speech while constitutional validity remained unresolved.
How does a consent-based revival create unequal legal consequences?
Legal Disparity: Creates different legal outcomes between accused persons who consent to proceedings and those who refuse due to fear of imprisonment.
Coercive Choice: Places vulnerable accused persons between two difficult outcomes:
Consent to trial: Risk imprisonment under a constitutionally contested law.
Refusal to consent: Remain indefinitely trapped in legal limbo.
Judicial Inconsistency: Produces uneven implementation of Section 124A across courts and states.
Why is prolonged delay in deciding sedition’s constitutionality problematic?
Rule of Law Concerns: Citizens remain subject to prosecution under a law whose constitutional status remains undecided.
Violation of Personal Liberty: Prolonged uncertainty potentially affects Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty).
Administrative Burden: Courts and police continue managing pending cases without legal clarity.
Judicial Delay: The S.G. Vombatkere petitions have remained unresolved for nearly four years despite the law’s immense constitutional significance.
Constitutional Ambiguity: Creates uncertainty regarding permissible limits of dissent and criticism.
What constitutional safeguards currently govern sedition law?
Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962): Supreme Court upheld sedition but restricted it only to speech involving incitement to violence or public disorder.
Protection of Criticism: Mere criticism of government policies, measures, or actions does not amount to sedition.
Article 19(2): Permits reasonable restrictions on free speech in interests of sovereignty, integrity, and public order.
Article 21 Linkage: Excessive restrictions on speech may indirectly affect liberty and dignity.
Judicial Balancing: Courts attempt to reconcile national security with democratic dissent.
Should sedition continue in a constitutional democracy?
Arguments Supporting Retention
National Security: Ensures legal protection against secessionism, violent insurgency, and anti-state mobilisation.
Public Order: Enables state intervention against speech directly inciting violence.
Sovereignty Protection: Addresses organised attempts to destabilise constitutional authority.
Arguments Supporting Repeal
Chilling Effect: Discourages legitimate criticism and democratic dissent.
Colonial Legacy: Retains a law originally designed to suppress anti-colonial voices.
Redundancy: Provisions relating to terrorism, unlawful activity, criminal conspiracy, and incitement to violence already exist.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s clarification on resuming pending Section 124A IPC (sedition) proceedings for consenting accused has reopened concerns over free speech, legal certainty, and constitutional fairness. A democratic constitutional order requires that restrictions on dissent remain narrowly defined, judicially consistent, and proportionate, making an early adjudication on the validity of Section 124A IPC and Section 152 of the BNS, 2023 essential to balance national security with civil liberties.
PYQ Relevance
[UPSC 2014] What do you understand by the concept “freedom of speech and expression”? Does it also cover hate speech? Why do the films in India stand on a slightly different plane from other forms of expression? Discuss.
Linkage: This PYQ examines freedom of speech and reasonable restrictions under Article 19, central to the sedition debate. Sedition similarly concerns limits on speech vis-à-vis public order, sovereignty, and democratic dissent.
The Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances (DARPG) launched the National e-Governance Service Delivery Assessment (NeSDA) 2025 Portal to strengthen digital governance and assess online public service delivery across India.
What is NeSDA?
NeSDA (National e-Governance Service Delivery Assessment) is:
A biennial assessment framework
Developed by DARPG
Based on the UN Online Service Index (OSI)
Customized for India’s federal structure
Note: The UN Online Service Index (OSI) is a key component of the UN E-Government Development Index (EGDI) published by the United Nations. It measures the quality and availability of digital government services provided by countries through online platforms.
Objective
To assess:
Availability
Accessibility
Quality
Maturity of online government services
Across:
States
Union Territories
Selected Central Ministries
Key Features of NeSDA 2025
Portal Categories
Government Portals
Service Delivery Portals
Sectors Covered
Finance, Education, Labour & Employment, Agriculture, Health, Transport, Tourism, Public Grievance, Environment, Local Governance, and Corporate Affairs
[2022] Consider the following: 1. Aarogya Setu 2. COWIN 3. DigiLocker 4. DIKSHA Which of the above are built on to open-source digital platforms?
Germany and the Netherlands announced the establishment of a joint NATO tactical headquarters in the Baltic region to strengthen deterrence against Russia.
Key Highlights
The joint command centre is called:
1GNC (German-Netherlands Corps)
Will operate mainly in:
Estonia
Latvia
Can command up to 50,000 troops
Functions of 1GNC
Planning military exercises
Operational command during conflicts
Strengthening NATO’s eastern flank
Rapid military response capability
About the German-Netherlands Corps
Established in 1995
Headquarters located in Münster
Germany and Netherlands rotate leadership
Supported by personnel from 14 NATO countries
Note: The Baltic region in Northern Europe comprises the countries surrounding the Baltic Sea. It is most commonly divided into the Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania), alongside neighboring nations like Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Germany, Poland, and Russia.
[2025] Consider the following countries: I. Austria II. Bulgaria III. Croatia IV. Serbia V. Sweden VI. North Macedonia How many of the above are members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization?
PYQ Relevance[UPSC 2022] Discuss global warming and mention its effects on the global climate. Explain the control measures to bring down the level of greenhouse gases which cause global warming, in the light of the Kyoto Protocol, 1997.Linkage: CBAM directly links climate action with trade regulation, making carbon emissions economically consequential for exports. It bridges climate governance and international trade policy.
Mentor’s Comment
The European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) will enter its definitive phase from January 1, 2026, imposing a carbon-linked levy on imports based on embedded emissions. This marks a major shift because, for the first time, global trade access is increasingly being linked to carbon intensity of production rather than conventional tariffs alone. For India, sectors such as steel, cement, aluminium, fertilizers, electricity, and hydrogen face direct exposure.
What is the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM)?
It is the European Union’s policy tool designed to put a fair price on carbon emitted during the production of carbon-intensive goods entering the EU.
By charging importers for embedded emissions, it aims to prevent “carbon leakage,” ensuring EU producers are not at a disadvantage compared to foreign producers and encouraging cleaner global industrial production.
Key Aspects of CBAM:
Purpose: Mitigates the risk of carbon leakage, where companies move production to countries with lenient environmental regulations.
Covered Sectors: Initially, CBAM covers imports of iron and steel, cement, fertilizers, aluminum, hydrogen, and electricity.
How it Works: Importers must report the GHG emissions embedded in their products. From 2026, they will need to purchase “CBAM certificates” to pay for these emissions, aligned with the carbon price paid by EU producers under the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS).
Goal: The policy is a central part of the “Fit for 55” package, aiming for a 55% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, compared to 1990 levels.
How is CBAM reshaping the rules of global trade?
Carbon-linked Market Access: Links export competitiveness to embedded carbon emissions rather than only product quality or price competitiveness.
Carbon Leakage Prevention: Imposes charges on imported products to prevent industries from relocating production to countries with weaker environmental regulations.
Trade Governance Shift: Moves global trade away from traditional tariff barriers toward climate-linked compliance mechanisms.
Policy Diffusion: Encourages wider adoption of carbon-pricing policies by developed economies, increasing compliance burdens globally.
Competitiveness Redefinition: Makes production efficiency dependent not only on cost but also on carbon efficiency of manufacturing processes.
Example: The EU’s CBAM applies to steel, cement, aluminium, fertilizers, electricity, and hydrogen, sectors with high embedded carbon intensity.
Why does CBAM pose a major challenge for India’s exports?
Export Competitiveness Risk: Increases costs for carbon-intensive exports entering the European market.
Steel and Aluminium Exposure: Creates immediate vulnerabilities because these sectors depend significantly on European markets and involve carbon-intensive production.
Compliance Burden: Forces exporters to adopt cleaner technologies and stricter reporting systems to retain market access.
Profit Margin Compression: Shrinks margins as firms absorb additional compliance costs or face stricter contractual requirements.
Buyer Preference Shift: Encourages European buyers to prefer low-emission suppliers, reducing competitiveness of carbon-intensive exporters.
Example: Although EU importers formally pay CBAM charges, the burden may shift to Indian exporters through stricter contracts and supplier selection mechanisms.
How could CBAM indirectly affect India’s domestic economy?
Fertilizer Price Transmission: Raises input costs because India imports fertilizers from regions affected by CBAM-related carbon pricing.
Import Cost Escalation: Increases prices of imported emission-intensive goods, affecting production costs domestically.
Inflationary Pressure: Creates cost-push inflation through higher import prices of industrial inputs.
Supply Chain Spillover: Extends impacts beyond directly targeted export sectors through global production linkages.
Example: Major fertilizer exporters to India, Egypt, Russia, Morocco, and China, may pass carbon-compliance costs into export prices.
How is CBAM different from traditional non-tariff measures (NTMs)?
Structural Difference: Functions as a price-based and quantifiable carbon levy, unlike conventional product standards.
Compliance Nature: Traditional NTMs rely on qualitative product standards, whereas CBAM directly prices embedded emissions.
Reduced Interpretational Scope: Creates measurable obligations linked to carbon emissions rather than broad compliance requirements.
Carbon Accountability: Establishes a direct relationship between production emissions and market access.
Key Distinction: Traditional product standards determine whether a product qualifies for entry. CBAM determines how expensive market access becomes based on carbon intensity.
Why are developing countries particularly vulnerable to carbon-linked trade barriers?
Technology Constraints: Face limited access to low-carbon technologies and cleaner industrial systems.
Cost Asymmetry: Experience higher transition costs because carbon-neutral production remains expensive.
Equity Concerns: Encounter climate-linked barriers despite historically lower contributions to global emissions.
Market Access Restrictions: Risk exclusion from developed markets if carbon standards tighten further.
Trade Negotiation Imbalance: Face pressure to comply despite differences in developmental capacity.
Example: India’s ongoing Free Trade Agreement (FTA) negotiations with the European Union continue even as CBAM raises concerns regarding fair market access.
What domestic reforms must India undertake to remain competitive?
Clean Energy Investment: Strengthens industrial decarbonisation through renewable energy and cleaner fuel adoption.
Carbon Efficiency: Improves industrial competitiveness through lower emission-intensive production processes.
Industrial Modernisation: Facilitates adoption of cleaner technologies in steel, cement, aluminium, and fertilizer sectors.
Soil Health Management: Reduces fertilizer dependency through effective implementation of the Soil Health Card Scheme and balanced nutrient application.
Domestic Production Capacity: Lowers import vulnerability by expanding local manufacturing of emission-intensive inputs.
Carbon Policy Framework: Ensures gradual implementation of domestic carbon-pricing mechanisms.
How should India respond at the international level?
Equitable Trade Negotiation: Seeks fair treatment for developing countries in climate-linked trade regimes.
Transition Support: Demands technology transfer and transitional finance from developed countries.
Climate Justice Framework: Strengthens arguments around Common But Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR).
Multilateral Coordination: Builds coalitions among developing countries against discriminatory carbon-linked trade measures.
WTO Compatibility Concerns: Questions whether climate-linked tariffs violate principles of non-discrimination in trade.
Conclusion
CBAM represents a structural transformation in global trade where carbon intensity increasingly determines market access. For India, the challenge lies not merely in adapting to climate-linked trade regimes but in balancing industrial competitiveness, developmental priorities, and climate commitments. A calibrated strategy combining domestic industrial decarbonisation, technology adoption, and equitable global negotiations will remain essential.
The Union government has released draft rules for VB-GRAM G, which is scheduled to replace the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) from July 1, 2025.
What is the Viksit Bharat-Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) (VB-G RAM G) Act, 2025?
It is a 2025 legislative overhaul of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA).
It guarantees 125 days of employment (up from 100) per rural household to align with the Viksit Bharat 2047 vision.
Key Aspects of VB-GRAM G:
Employment Guarantee: Increases guaranteed wage employment to 125 days in a financial year.
Replacement of MGNREGA: The act shifts from a demand-driven model to a supply-driven, budget-capped framework aimed at producing quality assets rather than only providing relief.
Focus Areas: Prioritizes water security, core rural infrastructure, livelihood assets (e.g., storage, livestock shelters), and climate resilience.
Implementation: Implemented as a centrally sponsored scheme with 60:40 fund sharing between Centre and States.
Planning & Tech: Works are planned through Viksit Gram Panchayat Plans and integrated with digital tools like AI-based fraud detection, geo-tagging, and biometric attendance.
Agricultural Support: Empowers states to restrict work during peak agricultural seasons to ensure labor availability for farmers
How does VB-GRAM G differ structurally from MGNREGS?
Employment Days: Increases annual guaranteed workdays from 100 to 125 days, with a provision for 60-day employment during sowing and harvesting seasons to ensure farm labour availability.
Nature of Guarantee: Alters the rights-based legal guarantee under MGNREGS into a revised framework where employment and wage mechanisms operate through a modified mission structure.
Financial Responsibility: Transfers part of the funding burden to State governments, unlike MGNREGS where the Centre bore 100% wage expenditure.
Institutional Shift: Introduces a new administrative and allocation mechanism under VB-GRAM G rules, replacing existing MGNREGS operational provisions.
Transitional Framework: Ensures continuity for existing job card holders. Workers registered under MGNREGS can continue employment after e-KYC verification under the new system.
Why is the change in Centre-State fiscal relations significant?
Normative Allocation Formula: Introduces state-wise fund allocation based on parameters determined by the Centre instead of direct expenditure-driven funding.
Sixteenth Finance Commission Linkage: Uses recommendations of the Sixteenth Finance Commission for determining normative allocations.
Fiscal Decentralisation: Requires States to bear a proportion of expenditure, increasing fiscal responsibility at the State level.
Uneven State Impact: States such as Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Haryana, Punjab, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Assam, Gujarat, and Tamil Nadu may receive higher allocations, while Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Chhattisgarh could receive lower allocations compared to MGNREGS.
Compliance-Based Incentives: Allocations may depend on timely social audits, grievance redressal compliance, and panchayat performance indicators.
Will the new framework strengthen or weaken rural employment security?
Rural Labour Market Integration: Aligns employment guarantees with agricultural labour demand cycles.
Welfare Rationalisation: Reflects broader efforts to reduce Union fiscal expenditure on large entitlement programmes.
Conclusion
The proposed VB-GRAM G framework reflects a major transition in India’s rural welfare architecture from a rights-based employment guarantee model to a fiscally decentralised and performance-linked framework. While higher workdays, agricultural season alignment, and compliance-based governance may improve efficiency, concerns remain regarding weakened legal guarantees, uneven State capacities, and reduced welfare certainty. Its long-term success will depend on balancing fiscal sustainability with rural livelihood security, while preserving the welfare objectives that made MGNREGS a critical social safety net.
PYQ Relevance
[UPSC 2024] Development and welfare schemes for the vulnerable, by its nature, are discriminatory in approach.” Do you agree? Give reasons for your answer
Linkage: VB-GRAM G directly changes Centre-State fiscal relations by shifting part of the funding burden to States and introducing a normative allocation model. The article is fundamentally about fiscal federalism and welfare governance, making this PYQ the closest thematic match.
In a landmark judgement, the Supreme Court of India unanimously upheld the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) authority to conduct a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
What is Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls?
The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) is a massive, door-to-door voter list verification and clean-up exercise conducted by the Election Commission of India (ECI). Its core philosophy is to ensure that “no eligible citizen is left out while no ineligible person is included in the Electoral Roll“.
The ECI typically uses two different methods to maintain voter lists:
Summary Revision (Routine): Done annually or before minor elections. It updates the voter list mostly at a desk level, adding new 18-year-olds or processing forms submitted voluntarily by citizens without visiting every home.
Special Intensive Revision (SIR): An extraordinary, physically demanding exercise. Booth Level Officers (BLOs) must physically visit every single household in a designated region to manually verify the identity and status of every registered voter.
The Step-by-Step SIR Process:
Pre-Enumeration: The ECI prints unique, pre-filled Enumeration Forms (EFs) for every registered voter using existing databases.
House-to-House Verification: Government-appointed Booth Level Officers (BLOs) make at least three distinct visits to every home. They hand over the EFs, help family members link entries with older historical lists, and note down changes.
Data Collection: The BLOs mark down and flag voters who fall into the “ASDD” category: Absent, Shifted, Dead, or Duplicate. New eligible voters are provided Form 6 to register immediately.
Draft and Hearings: A purged “Draft Electoral Roll” is published. Anyone whose name is dropped or flagged is issued an official notice and given a fair hearing to provide supportive documentation (like Aadhaar, government IDs, or old birth records) to prove their eligibility.
Final Roll Publication: Once all claims, disputes, and appeals are legally settled by District Magistrates, the finalized, clean voter list is published.
Why has the Supreme Court upheld Bihar’s SIR as constitutionally valid?
Constitutional Mandate: Recognises that the ECI has a constitutional obligation to conduct free and fair elections, which requires maintaining accurate and updated electoral rolls.
Citizenship Requirement: Affirms that citizenship constitutes a precondition for enrolment in electoral rolls, making scrutiny of citizenship legally permissible during roll revision.
Article 324 Authority: Strengthens the ECI’s powers under Article 324, which grants superintendence, direction, and control over elections.
Electoral Integrity: Accepts that electoral democracy depends not merely on polling but also on accurate voter identification and authentic electoral rolls.
Judicial Validation: Rejects the argument that SIR amounts to a “backdoor citizenship screening exercise”, holding that such verification falls within EC’s legitimate powers.
Why did Bihar’s Special Intensive Revision become politically and legally controversial?
Voter Exclusion Concerns: Critics argued that SIR risked excluding legitimate voters through stringent verification measures.
Citizenship Screening Allegation: Petitioners claimed the exercise indirectly imposed a citizenship verification process under the guise of electoral revision.
Pending Judicial Challenge: The second phase of SIR commenced even while legal challenges remained pending before the Supreme Court, intensifying political contestation.
Political Opposition: Opposition parties termed the verdict a setback for electoral inclusiveness and democratic participation.
Federal Implications: Concerns emerged regarding possible replication of such exercises in other States, potentially altering electoral politics.
What constitutional and legal reasoning did the Supreme Court rely upon?
Electoral Roll Purity: The Court held that maintaining a clean electoral roll remains essential to constitutional democracy.
Constitutional Competence: Recognised ECI’s authority to examine citizenship issues only for electoral enrolment purposes, without replacing statutory citizenship authorities.
Citizenship Adjudication: Clarified that disputed citizenship cases requiring determination under the Citizenship Act, 1955 must be referred to competent authorities.
Representation of the People Framework: Linked EC’s powers to the Representation of the People Act, 1950, governing electoral registration.
Judicial Interpretation of Article 324: Expanded the interpretation of Article 324 as a continuous supervisory power extending beyond election-day management.
How serious were inaccuracies in Bihar’s electoral rolls that justified the SIR exercise?
Large-Scale Migration: The Court recognised substantial migration patterns affecting voter records.
Demographic Change: Acknowledged shifts in population and residence affecting electoral eligibility.
Death and Non-reporting: Identified failures in removing deceased voters due to inadequate reporting systems.
Massive Scale of Electoral Revision: Bihar’s final electoral roll published in September 2024 recorded nearly 7.42 crore electors, compared with approximately 7.89 crore voters notified in June 2025, indicating substantial revision.
Purged Voter Data: Around 65 lakh electors were reportedly excluded after verification, making the exercise politically sensitive and administratively significant.
Does the judgment expand the Election Commission’s institutional power?
Institutional Strengthening: Enhances EC’s constitutional legitimacy in undertaking intensive roll verification exercises.
Supervisory Expansion: Interprets Article 324 broadly to include continuous oversight over electoral machinery.
Administrative Responsibility: Places responsibility on ECI to balance electoral purity with inclusiveness.
Future Precedent: Creates judicial precedent for similar voter verification exercises in other States.
Accountability Requirement: Simultaneously requires procedural safeguards to prevent arbitrary deletions or disenfranchisement.
What concerns remain regarding the implementation of SIR?
Risk of Exclusion: Vulnerable populations, migrants, marginalised communities, and those lacking documents may face exclusion risks.
Documentation Challenges: Citizenship and residence verification may disproportionately burden poorer citizens.
Administrative Discretion: Excessive discretion by local officials may produce errors or politically motivated exclusions.
Electoral Trust Deficit: Perceived bias in revision exercises may reduce confidence in electoral neutrality.
Democratic Balance: Ensures electoral integrity but requires safeguards to preserve universal franchise.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s endorsement of Bihar’s SIR reinforces the Election Commission’s constitutional authority to preserve electoral integrity through accurate voter rolls. However, the legitimacy of such exercises will depend on procedural fairness, transparency, and safeguards against wrongful exclusion. The challenge lies in balancing electoral purity with inclusive democratic participation.
PYQ Relevance
[UPSC 2022] Discuss the role of the Election Commission of India in the light of the evolution of the Model Code of Conduct
Linkage: This question links to the constitutional powers and institutional autonomy of the ECI under Article 324, which the present judgment substantially expands in the context of electoral roll verification.
The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare released the National Health Accounts (NHA) Estimates 2022-23 showing a decline in Out-of-Pocket Expenditure (OOPE) and a rise in government health spending.
Key Findings
Decline in Out-of-Pocket Expenditure (OOPE)
OOPE share in Total Health Expenditure (THE):
64.2% in 2013-14
43.4% in 2022-23
Indicates reduced financial burden on households
Reasons for Decline
Ayushman Arogya Mandirs
Over 1.8 lakh wellness centres providing:
Free drugs and diagnostics
Teleconsultation
Maternal and child healthcare
Non-communicable disease services
Preventive healthcare
Increased Government Spending
Government health expenditure rose:
From 1.15% of GDP (2013-14)
To 1.43% of GDP (2022-23)
Reached 1.84% during COVID-19 in 2021-22
Other Key Trends
Rise in Per Capita Government Health Expenditure: Increased from ₹1,042 to ₹2,786 between 2013-14 and 2022-23
Increase in Social Security Expenditure: Rose from 6% to 9.9%
Growth in Private Health Insurance: Increased from 3.4% to 9.2%
What is OOPE?
Out-of-Pocket Expenditure refers to direct payments made by households for healthcare services at the point of use.
Significance
Better healthcare access
Reduced catastrophic health expenditure
Progress toward Universal Health Coverage (UHC)
Strengthening preventive healthcare
Challenges
OOPE still remains high at 43.4%
Pharmaceutical expenses continue to drive household spending
Rural and regional disparities persist
[2023] Consider the following statements: Statement-I: India’s public sector health care system largely focuses on curative care with limited preventive, promotive and rehabilitative care. Statement-II: Under India’s decentralized approach to health care delivery, the States are primarily responsible for organizing health services. Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?
[A] Both Statement-I and Statement-l are correct and Statement-II is the correct explanation for Statement-I.
[B] Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-is not the correct explanation for Statement-l.
[C] Statement-l is correct but Statement-II is incorrect.
[D] Statement-I is incorrect but Statement-Il is correct.
