💥Mains Ready By December. Smash Mains & Smash PYQ Admissions Open
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS2

  • Parliament passes Tribunals Reforms Bill; National Tribunals Commission set up

    Why in the News?

    Parliament passed the Tribunals Reforms Bill, 2026, which establishes a National Tribunals Commission to oversee the selection and administration of tribunals. The Bill responds to a Supreme Court direction, yet it retains executive control over the commission’s appointments and finances. This exposes the tension between insulating tribunals from the ministries they review and preserving the government’s grip over the same bodies.

    What is the National Tribunals Commission (NTC)?

    1. Definition: The National Tribunals Commission (NTC) is a proposed statutory body to oversee the appointment, service conditions, and administration of tribunals under a common framework covering 16 tribunals.
    2. Composition: It is to be headed by a former Supreme Court judge or a former chief justice of a High Court, supported by two judicial members and two technical members.
    3. Selection method: Appointments to member tribunals are to be made through a search cum selection system run by the commission, supported by a dedicated NTC Secretariat.
    4. Origin: The Supreme Court first recommended an independent statutory commission of this kind in the Rojer Mathew judgment of 2019.

    Why were tribunals created in the first place?

    1. Speed and specialisation: Tribunals allow specialists to settle technical disputes faster than regular courts, in areas such as taxation, company law, securities, and the environment.
    2. Complementary role: They do not replace constitutional courts but supplement the judicial system with specialised adjudication.
    3. Economic stake: Timely resolution frees locked capital and restores investor confidence, linking ease of justice to ease of doing business.
    4. Constitutional basis: Articles 323A and 323B provide for administrative tribunals on service matters and tribunals on specified subjects respectively.

    How has tribunal jurisprudence developed?

    1. S.P. Sampath Kumar, 1987: Upheld tribunals but held that their decisions remain subject to review by constitutional courts.
    2. L. Chandra Kumar, 1997: Held that judicial review by High Courts under Article 226 is part of the basic structure and cannot be ousted by tribunals.
    3. Rojer Mathew, 2019: Recommended an independent statutory National Tribunals Commission and held that defining who is qualified to exercise judicial power is an essential legislative function that cannot be left to executive rulemaking.
    4. Madras Bar Association, 2025: Struck down provisions Parliament had reenacted, restored the earlier framework, and gave the government four months to establish the commission.
    5. Structural flaw addressed: Tribunals had historically been administered by the same ministries whose decisions they were meant to review.

    What are the other major changes the Bill introduces?

    1. Five year terms: Restores five year terms for tribunal members in place of shorter tenures the courts had rejected.
    2. Uniform service conditions: Introduces uniform service conditions across tribunals to end variation between ministries.
    3. National Tribunals Data Grid: Provides for a data grid to track pendency and disposal across tribunals.
    4. Pending appointments protected: Does not disturb appointments already in the pipeline.
    5. Rationalisation retained: Follows the earlier reduction of tribunals from 26 to 19 and then to 16.

    Where does the genuine tension in the Bill lie?

    1. Autonomy versus executive control: The commission is meant to insulate tribunals from executive control, yet the Centre still appoints its members and retains substantial influence over its finances and administration.
    2. Delegation to executive rules under Section 14: Qualifications, manner of selection, salaries, and service conditions of members are left to future executive rules, the very delegation the Rojer Mathew reasoning had resisted.
    3. Ministerial screening under Section 16: A ministry first screens a complaint against a member before it passes to the commission for inquiry.
    4. Consultation, not concurrence: The Centre consults the Chief Justice of India only for the chairperson and judicial members, retaining the decisive voice.
    5. Representation gap: Members flagged that very few tribunal members come from Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe communities, with only one tribal judge recorded so far.

    What are the challenges to the tribunal system?

    1. Executive dependence: Funding, staffing, and infrastructure of many tribunals still flow from the parent ministry whose orders they review.
    2. Vacancies and pendency: Delayed appointments leave benches vacant and cases pending, defeating the promise of speedy justice.
    3. Inconsistent service conditions: Divergent tenures and salaries across tribunals weaken independence and deter qualified members.
    4. Access barriers: Concentration of benches in a few cities makes tribunals hard to reach for litigants from distant areas.
    5. Weak enforcement: Tribunal orders are sometimes not implemented, as seen in inter State water sharing disputes.

    Conclusion

    The Tribunals Reforms Bill, 2026, creates the long directed National Tribunals Commission and restores protections the Supreme Court had earlier upheld. The central weakness is that a body designed to insulate tribunals from executive control remains subject to executive appointment, removal, and finance. Genuine autonomy will require the government to surrender its power to appoint or remove members at will, a change the current text does not make.

    Back2Basics

    What is Judicial Review?

    1. About: Judicial review is the power of constitutional courts to examine the validity of legislative and executive action against the Constitution.
    2. Rationale: It protects fundamental rights and the separation of powers by preventing any organ from exceeding constitutional limits.
    3. Basic structure: In L. Chandra Kumar, the Supreme Court held that judicial review by the High Courts and the Supreme Court is part of the basic structure and cannot be excluded, including over tribunal decisions.

    Constitutional Framework Governing Tribunals

    1. Article 323A: Empowers Parliament to establish administrative tribunals for disputes over recruitment and service conditions of public servants.
    2. Article 323B: Empowers appropriate legislatures to set up tribunals for specified matters such as taxation, industrial and labour disputes, and elections.
    3. Article 226: Preserves the High Courts’ writ jurisdiction, which tribunals cannot oust.
    4. Article 227: Preserves the High Courts’ power of superintendence over tribunals within their territory.
    5. Article 136: Preserves the Supreme Court’s discretionary appellate jurisdiction over tribunal decisions.

    Way Forward

    1. Full commission autonomy: Vest appointment, removal, and finance of the commission in an independent process free of executive dominance.
    2. Statutory qualifications: Fix member qualifications and service conditions in the parent statute rather than delegated rules.
    3. Timely appointments: Ensure a search cum selection cycle that fills vacancies before benches fall idle.
    4. Inclusive representation: Widen the pool so that Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, and other under represented groups are considered for tribunal membership.
    5. Enforcement mechanism: Provide a clear route to enforce tribunal orders, including in inter State disputes.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2025] Comment on the need for administrative tribunals as compared to the court system. Assess the impact of the recent tribal reforms through rationalisation of tribunals made in 2021.

    Linkage: The PYQ directly relates to the need, role and rationalisation of tribunals as an alternative to regular courts. The NTC debate highlights concerns of tribunal independence, executive control, vacancies and effective administration of justice.

  • Amid backlash, govt to refer FCRA Bill to JPC

    Why in the News

    The government agreed to move a resolution referring the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026, to a Joint Parliamentary Committee after protests from the Opposition, State Assemblies, and Christian institutions. The referral exposes the core tension in the Bill: the State’s power to take over foreign funded assets when a registration lapses, set against the property and autonomy of charitable, educational, and religious institutions built partly on foreign donations.

    What is the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 (FCRA)?

    1. Core function: The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 (FCRA) regulates the acceptance and use of foreign contributions and foreign hospitality by individuals, associations, and companies to ensure such funds do not harm national interest.
    2. Registration regime: Any association receiving foreign funds must register with the Union Home Ministry or take prior permission, with registration renewable every five years.
    3. Restricted recipients: Election candidates, judges, government servants, legislators, and political parties are barred from receiving foreign contributions.
    4. Administering authority: The Act is administered by the Ministry of Home Affairs, not the Finance Ministry, which distinguishes it from foreign investment law.

    What is a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC)?

    1. Definition: A Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) is an ad hoc committee constituted to examine a specific Bill or matter in detail, with members drawn from both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha.
    2. Distinction from a Select Committee: A Select Committee is constituted by a single House and consists only of members of that House, while a JPC draws members from both Houses through motions adopted separately by each.
    3. Powers: A JPC can examine a Bill clause by clause, hear the government and stakeholders, seek evidence, and suggest amendments, though its recommendations are not binding.
    4. Precedent: Bills earlier sent to a JPC include the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, the Personal Data Protection Bill, and the One Nation One Election Bill.

    What are the major changes the Bill proposes on asset vesting?

    1. New Chapter IIIA: The Bill inserts a new chapter providing for the vesting of foreign contributions and assets created from them in a government Designated Authority in certain circumstances.
    2. Cessation of certificate under Section 14B: A certificate is deemed to have ceased if an organisation does not apply for renewal, its renewal is refused, or it is not renewed before expiry.
    3. Provisional vesting under Section 16A: On cessation, the organisation’s foreign contribution and assets created from it provisionally vest in the Designated Authority, which may take possession and manage the activities in public interest.
    4. Permanent vesting and disposal: If a fresh or restored certificate is not obtained within the prescribed period, assets permanently vest in the authority and may be transferred to a government body or sold, with proceeds credited to the Consolidated Fund of India.
    5. Whole asset coverage: An asset created partly from foreign contribution and partly from other sources vests in its entirety, with the organisation left to apply for return of a distinct or ascertainable domestic portion.

    Why do Church and civil society groups oppose the Bill?

    1. Penalising past investments: Church bodies and non governmental organisations fear that the vesting rules, read with the cessation concept, could reach assets of organisations whose registrations lapsed in the past.
    2. Retrospective reach under Section 16B: The contested Section 16B provided that assets already vested under the existing Section 15 would be deemed provisionally vested under the new regime from the date the amendment takes effect.
    3. Minority institutions at risk: The Tamil Nadu Assembly resolution warned the provisions could affect the autonomy and functioning of educational and social welfare institutions run by minority communities.
    4. Absence of judicial oversight: The Council of Churches in Mizoram objected that a designated authority would gain sweeping powers over land, buildings, and funds without judicial oversight.
    5. Federal concern: The Tamil Nadu resolution urged that any amendment preserve natural justice, proportionality, property rights, legitimate expectation, and federalism.

    Where does the genuine tension in the Bill lie?

    1. Regulating funds versus regulating recipients: Opposition members argue the Bill does not regulate the use of foreign contributions but instead regulates the organisations receiving them, shifting the target from misuse to the institution itself.
    2. Public interest versus property rights: The State frames vesting as plugging gaps in managing foreign funded assets when registration is cancelled, while institutions frame it as expropriation of property built over decades.
    3. Place of worship safeguard: For a place of worship, the authority must preserve its religious character while entrusting management to an eligible person, a safeguard critics see as insufficient against loss of control.
    4. A law outliving the government: Critics note that a law passed by Parliament will outlive the government of the day and carry far reaching consequences regardless of present assurances.

    What are the challenges to the FCRA framework

    1. Compliance burden: Frequent renewal cycles, bank account restrictions, and reporting requirements impose heavy administrative costs on small organisations.
    2. Chilling effect on civil society: Cancellation and suspension of registrations have reduced the funding available to advocacy and research bodies.
    3. Definitional vagueness: Terms such as activities prejudicial to national interest lack precise statutory definition, widening administrative discretion.
    4. Concentration of executive power: The Home Ministry combines the power to register, inspect, suspend, and cancel, with limited independent review.
    5. Federal friction: State governments and minority institutions argue they are not consulted before changes that affect welfare institutions within their jurisdiction.

    Conclusion

    The government has signalled willingness to refer the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026, to a Joint Parliamentary Committee, while the Opposition continues to demand full withdrawal. The referral defers rather than resolves the central dispute over retrospective vesting and the fate of assets built from mixed foreign and domestic funds. The monsoon session is due to end on 13 August, and the JPC examination will determine whether the vesting provisions survive in their present form.

    Back2Basics:

    Statutory Framework Governing Foreign Funding of Associations

    1. FCRA, 2010: Primary statute governing acceptance and utilisation of foreign contribution by associations and individuals.
    2. Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Rules, 2011: Subordinate rules prescribing registration, renewal, reporting, and account maintenance procedures.
    3. FCRA (Amendment) Act, 2020: Barred transfer of foreign funds between registered entities, capped administrative expenses at 20 percent, and mandated a designated FCRA account at the State Bank of India main branch in New Delhi.
    4. Article 19(1)(c): Guarantees the right to form associations, the freedom that receipt of foreign funds engages.
    5. Section 25 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999: Distinguishes foreign investment routes from foreign contribution, which FCRA governs separately.

    FCRA Regulatory Framework

    1. Governing Act: Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010, which replaced the earlier FCRA, 1976.
    2. Administering ministry: Ministry of Home Affairs, Foreigners Division.
    3. Jurisdiction: Covers all persons and associations in India receiving foreign contribution, including for definite cultural, economic, educational, religious, or social programmes.
    4. Registration validity: Five years, renewable, with prior permission route for one time or project specific receipts.
    5. Designated account: Foreign contribution must first be received in a single designated FCRA account at the State Bank of India, New Delhi main branch.

    Way Forward

    1. Statutory consultation: Undertake comprehensive consultation with State governments, minority institutions, and non governmental organisations before finalising vesting provisions.
    2. Judicial oversight: Provide for independent or judicial review before an asset permanently vests in the authority.
    3. Protect mixed assets: Frame a clear mechanism to segregate and return the domestically funded portion of institutions built from combined donations.
    4. Narrow retrospective reach: Confine the new regime to prospective lapses rather than registrations that ended before the amendment.
    5. Proportionate enforcement: Distinguish genuine diversion of funds from procedural lapses in renewal so that welfare institutions are not penalised for administrative delays.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2015] Examine critically the recent changes in the rules governing foreign funding of NGOs under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA), 1976.

    Linkage: The PYQ directly relates to regulation of foreign funding and the functioning of NGOs under FCRA. The proposed Bill extends this debate to executive powers, asset vesting, civil society autonomy and property rights.

  • Are regional parties losing relevance in India?

    Why in the News?

    The defeat of the Trinamool Congress in the 2026 West Bengal Assembly elections and a wave of defections across regional parties have raised questions about their future. Lokniti CSDS data shows regional parties have retained a consistent one third vote share across four Lok Sabha elections, exposing that their challenge is organisational renewal rather than declining voter support.

    How are national and regional parties classified?

    1. What it is: The Election Commission of India classifies parties as national, state (regional), or registered unrecognised, based on vote share and seats won in general and state elections.
    2. Why vote share matters: Vote share is the best indicator of a party’s underlying support base, because India’s first past the post system magnifies both victories and defeats in seat terms.

    What do the Lok Sabha vote share figures show, 2009 to 2024?

    1. National parties combined: 63.59 per cent in 2009, 60.04 per cent in 2014, 68.15 per cent in 2019, and 62.72 per cent in 2024.
    2. Regional parties combined: 31.22 per cent in 2009, 35.85 per cent in 2014, 28.1 per cent in 2019, and 33.53 per cent in 2024.
    3. National seats: National parties won 376 seats in 2009, 342 in 2014, 397 in 2019, and 346 in 2024.
    4. BJP trajectory: The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) rose from 116 seats and 18.8 per cent in 2009 to 282 seats and 31 per cent in 2014, 303 seats and 37.3 per cent in 2019, and 240 seats and 36.56 per cent in 2024.
    5. Congress trajectory: The Congress fell from 206 seats and 28.55 per cent in 2009 to 44 seats and 19.31 per cent in 2014, then 52 seats and 19.46 per cent in 2019, and 99 seats and 21.19 per cent in 2024.
    6. Stable one third: Regional parties have consistently secured around one third of total votes, the only dip being 2019 at 28.1 per cent, held down by the Balakot air strike backdrop.

    What does the state wise picture show?

    1. Assembly preference: Voters display a much stronger preference for regional parties in Assembly elections than in Lok Sabha elections, underscoring the enduring pull of state level identities.
    2. Replacement within the regional camp: In Tamil Nadu, when the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam faced a setback, it was replaced by another regional party rather than by a national one.
    3. Persistent strength: Regional parties retain significant vote share across several states despite fluctuations in seats won.

    Why do defections not signal shrinking support?

    1. Trinamool: The Trinamool Congress witnessed several defections following its West Bengal defeat.
    2. Aam Aadmi Party: The Aam Aadmi Party saw many of its Rajya Sabha members defect.
    3. Nationalist Congress Party (Sharad Pawar): It saw defections in Maharashtra.
    4. Distinction: These point to organisational vulnerabilities, but defections by themselves do not indicate a shrinking electoral support base.

    What is the governance footprint of regional parties?

    1. Independent rule: Regional parties independently govern four states, the lowest number in nearly two and a half decades, down from nine states independently governed between 2015 and 2020.
    2. Dominant coalition partners: Regional parties are the dominant partners in four states, namely Andhra Pradesh, Meghalaya, Nagaland, and Puducherry.
    3. Junior partners: The BJP leads coalitions with regional allies in Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Assam, Goa, Maharashtra, and Tripura, while the Congress is a junior partner in Jharkhand, Jammu and Kashmir, and Tamil Nadu.
    4. Fewer governments, stable votes: The decline in the number of governments headed by regional parties does not imply a corresponding decline in their electoral support.

    Setback versus survival, the real challenge

    1. Not declining votes: The challenge before regional parties is not declining voter support but organisational renewal.
    2. FPTP distortion: The first past the post system magnifies seat swings even when vote share stays broadly stable.
    3. Too early for an obituary: A consistent one third vote share shows it is premature to write the obituary of regional parties.

    One Nation One Election context

    1. The proposal: The proposed One Nation One Election framework would synchronise Lok Sabha and state Assembly elections.
    2. Concern for regional parties: Regional parties fear that simultaneous polls could let national issues and better resourced national parties overshadow state level concerns where regional parties are strongest.

    What are the challenges to regional parties?

    1. Organisational decay: Weak cadre structures and dependence on single leaders leave parties fragile.
    2. Defections and poaching: Loss of legislators erodes bargaining power even when vote share holds.
    3. Leadership succession: Founder centric parties struggle with generational transition.
    4. Resource asymmetry: National parties command far greater funding and media reach.
    5. Simultaneous elections risk: One Nation One Election could dilute the salience of state issues.
    6. Coalition dependence: Falling numbers of independent governments push parties into junior roles.

    Conclusion

    Regional parties continue to retain a substantial and consistent support base despite electoral setbacks and defections. The evidence shows their difficulty is organisational renewal, not shrinking voter preference, since vote share has stayed near one third across four Lok Sabha elections. Both national and regional parties hold stable places in India’s party system.

    India’s Party System (Foundational Context)

    1. About: India has a multi party system with recognised national parties, recognised state parties, and registered unrecognised parties.
    2. Rationale: Party recognition governs privileges such as reserved election symbols, free broadcast time, and star campaigner allowances.
    3. Classification basis: The Election Commission of India recognises parties based on thresholds of vote share and seats won in Lok Sabha and Assembly elections.

    Key Concerns Regarding the Party System

    1. Intra party democracy deficit: Many parties lack transparent internal elections and leadership accountability.
    2. Money and elections: Rising campaign expenditure entrenches resource rich parties.
    3. Defections: Frequent defections weaken mandate stability despite anti defection law.
    4. Personality centric organisation: Dependence on individual leaders undermines institutional continuity.

    Back2Basics: Representation of the People Act, 1951

    1. What it is: The Representation of the People Act, 1951 governs the conduct of elections to Parliament and state legislatures.
    2. Coverage: It covers qualifications and disqualifications of members, registration of parties, and corrupt practices and offences.
    3. Party recognition: Party recognition and symbol allotment operate under this Act and the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968.
    4. Regulator: It is administered by the Election Commission of India, a constitutional body under Article 324.

    Constitutional and Statutory Framework Governing Elections

    1. Article 324: Vests superintendence, direction, and control of elections in the Election Commission of India.
    2. Article 325: Provides a single general electoral roll and bars exclusion on grounds of religion, race, caste, or sex.
    3. Article 326: Provides for elections on the basis of adult suffrage.
    4. Representation of the People Act, 1950: Governs preparation of electoral rolls and allocation of seats.
    5. Representation of the People Act, 1951: Governs the actual conduct of elections and party registration.

    Way Forward

    1. Strengthen internal democracy: Institutionalise leadership succession and cadre building within regional parties.
    2. Reform party finance: Improve transparency to reduce resource asymmetry.
    3. Enforce anti defection: Tighten timelines and disqualification processes to deter defections.
    4. Protect federal representation: Design electoral reforms, including any simultaneous elections proposal, to safeguard state level voice.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2024] Examine the need for electoral reforms as suggested by various committees with particular reference to “one nation-one election” principle.

    Linkage: The PYQ directly relates to electoral reforms and the One Nation-One Election proposal. The article highlights how simultaneous elections could affect regional parties, state-level issues and India’s federal party system.

  • Russia’s share in India’s oil imports jumps to 48% in June

    Why in the News

    Russia’s share in India’s crude oil imports rose to an all-time high of 48 percent in June 2026, even as India cut its total crude imports. This comes as the US Senate has passed a bill to levy tariffs of up to 100 percent on the top buyers of Russian oil and gas, placing India’s energy security and its trade exposure to the United States in direct tension.

    What is the Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026?

    1. Definition: The Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026 is a US bill that authorises secondary tariffs of up to 100 percent on countries that continue to buy Russian oil and gas. It targets the largest purchasers of these products from Russia.
    2. Status: The bill was passed by the US Senate and still requires passage by the US House of Representatives before it becomes law.

    What are the tariff triggers under the bill?

    1. Top-buyer test: Tariffs apply to a country that was among the five largest importers of Russian crude oil or natural gas in the 12 months preceding the Act’s enactment.
    2. Continuation test: The tariff applies if that country continues to import Russian oil or gas beyond 30 days after enactment.
    3. Sanctions-evasion clause: Tariffs can also be imposed on countries found to have helped Russia evade sanctions.
    4. India’s exposure: India, alongside China, is one of the top two importers of Russian oil, so it qualifies under these criteria.

    What do the June import figures show?

    1. Fall in total imports: June crude oil imports of 18.2 million metric tonnes (MMT) were 16.5 percent lower than in May 2026 and 13 percent lower than in June the previous year.
    2. Import bill still high: The June oil import bill was 22 percent lower than in May but still 40 percent higher than in June last year, due to elevated crude prices.
    3. Russian purchases held up: India imported 8.7 MMT of Russian oil in June, only 1 percent lower than May and 25 percent higher than a year earlier.
    4. Record Russian share: Russia’s share reached 48 percent by quantity and 48.6 percent by value, rising every month since March.
    5. UAE at a high: The United Arab Emirates (UAE) supplied 17.5 percent of imports by volume and 18 percent by value, its highest share so far.
    6. Concentration: Russia and the UAE together accounted for nearly two-thirds of India’s oil imports in June, the highest combined share from any two countries.
    7. Shrinking discount: The premium Russia charged India rose from a discount as recently as February 2026 to a premium of $10.6 per tonne in June, down from $77.7 per tonne in April.

    How has India pre-empted sanctions exposure?

    1. Ship-to-ship transfers: The Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas said exposure was pre-empted through ship-to-ship transfer operations in international waters via the Red Sea route through Yanbu and Fujairah.
    2. Avoiding a single choke point: The aim was to ensure that no single choke point or sanctions regime could halt India-bound cargo.
    3. Refinery flexibility: Indian refineries spent a decade acquiring the flexibility to switch between crude grades and shipping routes when disruption struck.

    Why does the record Russian share expose India?

    1. Energy security dependence: India cannot quickly cut back on Russian oil while supplies through the Strait of Hormuz remain constrained by the West Asia conflict.
    2. Trade and tariff risk: Continued high Russian purchases place India within the top-buyer criteria of the US bill, risking tariffs of up to 100 percent.
    3. Ambiguity on evasion: It is unclear whether India’s ship-to-ship arrangements would be treated as helping Russia evade sanctions.

    Conclusion

    India’s rising dependence on discounted Russian crude has hit a record 48 percent share, secured through diversified shipping routes even as total imports fell. This leaves India balancing its energy security against the risk of secondary tariffs under the US bill. The immediate milestone is the bill’s fate in the US House of Representatives, which will determine whether the tariff threat becomes law.

    Back2Basics:

    Strait of Hormuz

    1. Designation: A narrow strait linking the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea.
    2. Bordering states: Bordered by Iran to the north and Oman and the UAE to the south.
    3. Significance: One of the world’s most critical oil transit choke points, carrying a large share of seaborne crude.

    What is Energy Security? (Foundational Context)

    1. About: Energy security is the uninterrupted availability of energy sources at an affordable price.
    2. Rationale: It matters because India imports the bulk of its crude oil, leaving growth and prices exposed to external supply shocks.
    3. Core dimensions: It rests on availability, affordability, accessibility, and diversification of both sources and supply routes.

    Key Facts about India’s Oil Imports

    1. Import dependence: India imports over 85 percent of its crude oil requirement.
    2. Global standing: India is among the world’s largest crude oil importers and consumers.
    3. Key choke point: The Strait of Hormuz, between the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea, carries a large share of India’s West Asian crude.

    Challenges to India’s Energy Security

    1. High import dependence: Reliance on imports for most crude exposes the economy to price and supply shocks.
    2. Geopolitical concentration: A large combined share from Russia and the UAE concentrates supply risk in two sources.
    3. Choke-point vulnerability: Disruption at the Strait of Hormuz can constrain West Asian supply.
    4. Sanctions exposure: Purchases from sanctioned suppliers risk secondary tariffs and financial penalties.
    5. Price volatility: War-driven crude price spikes inflate the import bill and widen the current account deficit.

    Way Forward

    1. Diversify sources: Expand purchases from a wider set of suppliers to reduce concentration.
    2. Build strategic reserves: Enlarge strategic petroleum reserves to cushion supply shocks.
    3. Accelerate clean energy: Scale up renewables, biofuels, and electric mobility to cut import dependence over time.
    4. Secure shipping routes: Maintain logistical flexibility across grades and routes to withstand choke-point disruption.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2025] Energy security constitutes the dominant kingpin of India’s foreign policy, and is linked with India’s overarching influence in Middle Eastern countries. How would you integrate energy security with India’s foreign policy trajectories in the coming years?

    Linkage: The PYQ examines the integration of India’s energy security with its foreign policy. India’s record 48% dependence on Russian crude highlights the geopolitical dimension of energy security. The article shows the need to diversify suppliers and routes while balancing ties with Russia, the US and West Asia.

  • A fifth of Telangana voters face exclusion

    Why in the News

    In Telangana, 73.47 lakh enumeration forms, nearly 22% of the electorate, were marked “Uncollectable” during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The large number raises concerns about balancing clean electoral rolls with the risk of excluding genuine voters.

    What is Special Intensive Revision (SIR)?

    • SIR: Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.
    • Conducted by the Election Commission of India (ECI) through comprehensive, house-to-house enumeration.
    • Electors submit enumeration forms; non-returned forms may be marked “Uncollectable”.
    • Doubtful cases may receive notices from Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) for verification.

    Current Status in Telangana

    • Enumeration ended: August 10, 2026.
    • Uncollectable: 73,47,075 forms, nearly 22% of the electorate.
    • Draft rolls: Scheduled for August 17.
    • Claims and objections will follow publication of the draft rolls.

    Why is it Concerning?

    1. Disenfranchisement risk: Genuine voters may be deleted along with ineligible entries.
    2. Burden on voters: Migrants, poor households and hard-to-reach groups may struggle to submit forms.
    3. Short timeline: Limited time to reconcile uncollectable forms before draft publication.
    4. Legal concerns: The process has faced challenges regarding deletion procedures.

    Safeguards After Draft Roll

    • Claims and objections: Voters can seek restoration of wrongly deleted names.
    • ERO verification: Doubtful cases can be examined before finalisation.
    • Appeals: Aggrieved voters can approach higher electoral authorities and courts.

    Constitutional & Legal Framework

    • Article 324: Gives the Election Commission of India (ECI) superintendence, direction and control over elections and electoral rolls.
    • Article 325: Provides for one general electoral roll and prohibits exclusion on grounds of religion, race, caste or sex.
    • Article 326: Provides for adult suffrage.
    • Representation of the People Act, 1950 (RPA 1950): Governs preparation and revision of electoral rolls.
    • Registration of Electors Rules, 1960: Provides procedures for claims, objections and revision.

    Back2Basics: Election Commission of India

    • Type: Constitutional body under Article 324.
    • Established: 1950.
    • Composition: Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners.
    • Mandate: Conducts elections to Parliament, State legislatures, and the offices of President and Vice-President.
    • Role in rolls: Conducts summary and intensive revisions to maintain accurate electoral rolls.

    Challenges

    1. Wrongful deletion of genuine voters.
    2. Exclusion of migrants and seasonal workers.
    3. Duplicate, dead and ineligible entries.
    4. Compressed timelines for verification and objections.
    5. Documentation burden on vulnerable voters.
    6. Loss of public trust due to perceived lack of transparency.

    [2017] For election to the Lok Sabha, a nomination paper can be filed by

    (a) Anyone residing in India

    (b) A resident of the constituency from which the election is to be contested

    (c) Any citizen of India whose name appears in the electoral roll of a constituency

    (d) Any citizen of India

  • Find solutions to speed up work on Eklavya schools: House panel to Centre

    Why in the News

    The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Social Justice and Empowerment flagged delays in constructing and operationalising Eklavya Model Residential Schools (EMRS). Only 428 of 728 sanctioned schools have been completed, while 118 continue from government or rented buildings.

    What is EMRS?

    • EMRS: Eklavya Model Residential Schools.
    • Provides free residential education from Classes 6 to 12 to Scheduled Tribe (ST) students in tribal-majority and remote areas.
    • Nodal Ministry: Ministry of Tribal Affairs.
    • Managing body: National Education Society for Tribal Students (NESTS).
    • Aim: Improve educational access while preserving tribal cultural identity.

    What did the Panel Find?

    • 428/728 schools completed.
    • 249 under construction.
    • 51 at pre-construction stage.
    • 118 schools operate from temporary government/rented buildings.
    • Delays have caused construction cost escalation.
    • Panel suggested an independent monitoring agency and an alternative implementation mechanism.

    Scholarship Concerns

    • Scholarship funds are often released in the next academic year due to delays in State/Union Territory verification.
    • The Committee criticised the repeated explanation that States need more time for verification.
    • It also recommended reviewing the ₹8 lakh annual income ceiling for the free coaching scheme for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Other Backward Classes (OBCs).
    • Government accepted 14 of 25 recommendations; the panel rejected responses on four issues.

    Why is Implementation Weak?

    1. Federal dependence: Central schemes depend on States for construction and verification.
    2. Weak monitoring: Delays accumulate without independent oversight.
    3. Cost escalation: Delays increase construction costs and budget requirements.
    4. Portal mismatch: Scholarship portals and State verification timelines do not align well.

    Constitutional Framework

    • Article 15(4): Enables special provisions for advancement of socially and educationally backward classes and STs.
    • Article 46: Directs the State to promote educational and economic interests of STs.
    • Article 275(1): Provides Central grants for tribal welfare and Scheduled Areas.
    • Article 342: Specifies Scheduled Tribes.
    • Fifth & Sixth Schedules: Provide special arrangements for administration of Scheduled and tribal areas.

    Back2Basics: EMRS

    • Full form: Eklavya Model Residential Schools.
    • Nodal Ministry: Ministry of Tribal Affairs.
    • Implementing body: NESTS, National Education Society for Tribal Students.
    • Classes: 6 to 12.
    • Target: ST students in tribal-majority and remote areas.
    • Purpose: Quality residential education with cultural preservation.

    Key Government Initiatives

    • Pre-Matric & Post-Matric Scholarships: Financial support for ST students.
    • National Fellowship and Scholarship for Higher Education of ST Students: Supports higher education.
    • PM-JANMAN: Pradhan Mantri Janjati Adivasi Nyaya Maha Abhiyan, focused on Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTGs).
    • Dharti Aaba Janjatiya Gram Utkarsh Abhiyan: Development of tribal villages.
    • Vanbandhu Kalyan Yojana: Umbrella framework for tribal development.

  • Amendments to FCRA to bring more transparency

    Why in the News

    India’s ambassador to the United States publicly defended the amendments to the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act after a US Congressman claimed the changes would let the Indian government take control of churches and charities. The envoy argued the amendments bring more transparency and follow national security practice adopted by other democracies.

    What is the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act?

    1. Definition: The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) is the law that governs the acceptance and use of foreign donations by non-governmental organisations (NGOs), civil society bodies, educational institutions, and religious organisations. It requires such bodies to register and channel foreign funds through a laid-down process.
    2. Objective: The stated purpose is to ensure foreign contributions do not compromise national interest or the integrity of public and political life.

    What do the 2026 amendments change?

    1. Vesting of assets already in law: When a registration is cancelled or surrendered, foreign contributions and the assets created from them already vest in a State Government authority under a provision in force since 2010.
    2. A designated safeguard authority: The 2026 Bill adds a designated authority to safeguard those assets rather than leaving them unprotected.
    3. A way back: If the organisation restores its registration, all assets and unused funds are returned in full.
    4. Protection for places of worship: Where a cancelled association created property connected to a place of worship, that property passes to another FCRA-registered association of the same faith to ensure continuity of worship.
    5. Faith-neutral application: The Act applies to all organisations regardless of religion, community, or ideology, and faith-based welfare, religious education, and maintenance of places of worship remain eligible for foreign funding.

    Why does the government say FCRA regulation is justified?

    1. Sovereign step: Regulating foreign financial flows in public and political spaces is presented as a sovereign act driven by national security concerns.
    2. Internal matter: Legislative decisions concerning India are treated as internal affairs decided by Parliament.
    3. Accepted global feature: The government frames such regulation as a standard feature of modern governance in many democracies.

    How do other countries regulate foreign funding?

    1. United States: The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) has operated since 1938, requiring agents of foreign principals to register and disclose their activities.
    2. United States: The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) has operated since 2010, mandating reporting of foreign-held financial accounts.
    3. Australia: Legislated foreign-influence transparency rules in 2018.
    4. Canada: Enacted its foreign-funding framework in 2024.
    5. United Kingdom: Its foreign-influence registration scheme came into force in July 2025.
    6. European Union: Is currently legislating a comparable framework.

    What is the scale of FCRA-regulated funding?

    1. NGO base: India has over three million NGOs, of which only 14,450 hold FCRA registration.
    2. Legislative timeline: India first enacted FCRA in 1976, followed by a new Act in 2010, with further amendments in 2016, 2018, and 2020.
    3. Use of funds: Registered associations routinely receive foreign funds for health, education, disaster relief, research, and humanitarian work.

    Conclusion

    The government’s position is that the 2026 FCRA Bill adds safeguards for the assets of cancelled associations, a route to restore them, and specific protection for places of worship, framed as a transparency and national-security measure rather than a takeover of religious bodies. The next step is passage of the 2026 Bill and the accompanying Rules, which the government describes as the continuation of a phased strengthening of the law since 1976.

    Regulation of Foreign Funding of NGOs in India (Foundational Context)

    1. About: Foreign funding of civil society is regulated so that donations from abroad do not influence India’s internal politics or security.
    2. Administering authority: FCRA is administered by the Ministry of Home Affairs, which grants, renews, and cancels registrations.
    3. Design feature: Registered bodies must receive all foreign contributions in a single designated bank account for monitoring.

    Laws and Rules Governing Foreign Contributions

    1. Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 1976: The original law regulating the acceptance of foreign donations by associations.
    2. Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010: Replaced the 1976 Act, tightened registration, and required renewal every five years; introduced vesting of assets of cancelled associations in a State authority.
    3. 2020 Amendment: Barred sub-granting of foreign funds, capped administrative expenses at 20 percent, and mandated an SBI New Delhi FCRA account.
    4. 2026 Bill and Rules: Add a designated authority to safeguard assets of cancelled registrations and protect property linked to places of worship.

    Back2Basics: FCRA regulatory framework

    1. Governing Act: Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010, as amended.
    2. Administering ministry: Ministry of Home Affairs.
    3. Jurisdiction: Applies to associations, individuals, and companies receiving foreign contributions, excluding certain government bodies.
    4. Key requirement: Mandatory registration or prior permission, five-yearly renewal, and receipt of funds in a designated account.

    Challenges to the FCRA Regime

    1. Compliance burden: Frequent amendments and strict banking rules raise the administrative cost for small NGOs.
    2. Registration cancellations: Large-scale cancellations have disrupted health, education, and relief work dependent on foreign grants.
    3. Chilling effect: Uncertainty over renewals discourages legitimate civil society activity.
    4. Ambiguity in definitions: Broad terms such as activities against national interest allow wide discretion.
    5. International friction: Foreign governments and donors periodically object, creating diplomatic exposure.

    Way Forward

    1. Predictable timelines: Fix clear, time-bound decisions on registration, renewal, and restoration to reduce uncertainty.
    2. Proportionate compliance: Scale reporting requirements to the size of the organisation.
    3. Transparent grounds: Publish specific reasons for cancellation to allow effective appeal.
    4. Stakeholder consultation: Consult civil society and faith-based bodies before framing subordinate Rules.

    [2025, GS2, 10 marks] Civil Society Organizations are often perceived as being anti-State actors rather than non-State actors. Do you agree? Justify.”

  • In opposing creamy layer for SC/STs, what the government argued

    Why in the News

    The Centre has filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court opposing the introduction of a “creamy layer” income filter within reservations for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs). It has argued that the historical disadvantage faced by these communities is rooted in untouchability and social exclusion, not economic backwardness, and that any change to reservation policy is for Parliament to decide, not the courts.

    What is the creamy layer concept?

    1. Definition: The creamy layer is an income and status filter that excludes the socially and economically advanced members of a backward class from reservation benefits. Its purpose is to ensure quota benefits reach the genuinely disadvantaged within a group rather than its better-off sections.
    2. Origin and current scope: It was introduced by the 1992 Indra Sawhney judgment as a test for Other Backward Classes (OBCs). It has never been applied to SCs and STs.

    Who does reservation currently apply to in India?

    1. Category-wise quota: Central reservation stands at 15 percent for SCs, 7.5 percent for STs, and 27 percent for OBCs on the non-creamy-layer principle.
    2. Economically Weaker Sections: A 10 percent quota for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) applies to those outside the SC, ST, and OBC categories.
    3. The ceiling: The Indra Sawhney judgment fixed a 50 percent ceiling on total reservations, though the EWS quota and some State laws now exceed it.
    4. Creamy layer coverage: The creamy layer income exclusion currently applies only to OBCs, not to SCs or STs.

    Which constitutional provisions govern reservation?

    1. Article 15(4): Allows the State to make special provisions for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes, SCs, and STs.
    2. Article 16(4): Permits reservation in public appointments for any backward class inadequately represented in State services.
    3. Article 16(4A) and 16(4B): Enable reservation in promotions for SCs and STs and the carry-forward of unfilled reserved vacancies.
    4. Articles 341 and 342: Empower the President to notify the initial lists of SCs and STs; once notified, inclusion or exclusion can be made only by an Act of Parliament.
    5. Article 335: Requires that reservation claims be balanced with the maintenance of administrative efficiency.
    6. Articles 338 and 338A: Establish the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes.
    7. 103rd Constitutional Amendment, 2019: Inserted Articles 15(6) and 16(6) to provide the 10 percent EWS reservation.

    What did the petition seek?

    1. Income-based preferences: The Public Interest Litigation (PIL), filed by a politician and advocate, sought income-based preferences across all reserved categories, including OBCs and EWS.
    2. Elite capture argument: It argued that affluent families within the SC and ST categories monopolise reservation benefits, depriving the most marginalised of access to education and public employment.
    3. Reliance on the 2024 ruling: It relied on the 2024 Supreme Court judgment permitting sub-classification of SCs and STs, in which four of the seven Constitution Bench judges suggested extending the creamy layer principle to these groups.

    What is sub-classification of Scheduled Castes?

    1. Definition: Sub-classification allows a State to divide the single SC list into sub-groups and reserve a portion of the SC quota for the most backward castes within it. The 2024 judgment upheld this power, holding SCs are not a socially homogeneous class.

    Why does the government distinguish SC/ST identification from OBC identification?

    1. Basis of SC status: SCs face historical disadvantage stemming from the practice of untouchability, a form of social exclusion not tied to income.
    2. Basis of ST status: STs are identified by their distinct cultures, geographical isolation, and backwardness.
    3. Basis of OBC status: OBCs are identified primarily through a combination of social, educational, and economic disadvantages, which makes an economic filter relevant to them.
    4. Objective of SC/ST quotas: The stated aim is social equality, overcoming historical discrimination, and inclusive participation in public life, since discrimination against these groups does not occur on the basis of economic conditions.

    What legal precedents did the Centre cite?

    1. Indra Sawhney (1992): Upheld the Mandal Commission report on OBC reservation and introduced the creamy layer test, expressly confining it to OBCs and holding it has no relevance for SCs and STs.
    2. E V Chinnaiah (2005): Held that even if a situation ever required excluding a creamy layer from SCs, only Parliament could take the necessary legislative steps.
    3. Separation of powers: The affidavit argued courts cannot direct the executive to adopt a particular policy merely because a fairer or wiser alternative exists, and the judiciary cannot substitute for the legislature in framing public policy.

    Why is the demand for a creamy layer contested?

    1. The case for it: Affluent SC and ST families capturing quota benefits leaves the poorest within these groups without access, which undercuts the stated goal of reaching the most marginalised.
    2. The case against it: Caste-based discrimination and untouchability persist regardless of a family’s income, so an economic filter would exclude people who still face social stigma.
    3. The judicial split: The 2024 Bench itself divided, with a minority favouring the extension of the creamy layer to SCs and STs, which keeps the question legally open.

    What are the major debates surrounding reservation?

    1. Social justice versus economic upliftment: Whether reservation is a remedy for historical social injustice or a tool for economic advancement, which decides if income can ever be a valid filter.
    2. The 50 percent ceiling: The Indra Sawhney cap is under pressure from State laws and the EWS quota, raising whether the ceiling is still binding.
    3. Sub-classification and creamy layer for SC/ST: The 2024 ruling reopened whether SCs form a homogeneous class and whether the better-off within them should be excluded.
    4. The empirical gap: The absence of updated caste and income data on quota beneficiaries weakens both the elite-capture claim and its rebuttal.
    5. EWS and reserved categories: The exclusion of SCs, STs, and OBCs from the EWS quota is debated as either fair balancing or fresh discrimination.

    What are the challenges to applying a creamy layer to SC/STs?

    1. Persistence of untouchability: Social exclusion continues irrespective of income, so an economic test may exclude those still facing discrimination.
    2. Absence of reliable data: No comprehensive dataset tracks the income profile of SC and ST beneficiaries, making a fair income threshold hard to set.
    3. Constitutional bar on judicial rewriting: Under Articles 341 and 342, only Parliament can alter SC and ST entitlements, limiting judicial intervention.
    4. Risk of under-representation: An income filter could shrink the eligible pool and leave reserved seats unfilled where few qualify.
    5. Definitional complexity: Fixing who counts as advanced within a socially stigmatised group is contested and administratively difficult.

    Conclusion

    The Centre’s position is that SC and ST reservation addresses caste-based social exclusion, not poverty, so the creamy layer test built for OBCs cannot be transposed onto them, and any change is a matter for Parliament. The dispute turns on an unresolved question of whether reservation is fundamentally a social-justice remedy or an economic one. Until Parliament acts or the Supreme Court settles the 2024 split, the creamy layer will not apply to SCs and STs.

    Back2Basics:

    Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992)

    1. What it decided: A nine-judge Supreme Court bench upheld 27 percent OBC reservation based on the Mandal Commission report.
    2. Creamy layer: It introduced the creamy layer exclusion for OBCs and confined it to them.
    3. The ceiling: It capped total reservation at 50 percent, except in extraordinary circumstances.
    4. Promotions: It barred reservation in promotions, a bar later addressed through the 77th Constitutional Amendment and Article 16(4A).

    Reservations in India

    1. About: Reservation is a form of protective discrimination that sets aside seats in education, public employment, and legislatures for historically disadvantaged groups.
    2. Scale: It covers SCs, STs, OBCs, and EWS across central and State institutions, with categories and percentages varying by State.
    3. Constitutional anchor: It flows from the equality code in Articles 14 to 16 read with the Directive Principle in Article 46, which directs the State to promote the interests of weaker sections.

    Way Forward

    1. Generate quota data: Collect updated caste-wise and income-wise data on beneficiaries to ground policy in evidence rather than assertion.
    2. Respect the legislative domain: Leave changes to SC and ST entitlements to Parliament as required by Articles 341 and 342.
    3. Target the most backward: Use the 2024 sub-classification power to reach the poorest castes within the SC list without diluting the social-justice basis.
    4. Strengthen non-quota support: Expand scholarships, coaching, and infrastructure so advancement does not depend on reservation alone.

  • Ten years later, looking back and ahead at GeM

    Why in the News

    The Government e-Marketplace (GeM) completed 10 years, connecting around 1.37 lakh government buyers with 25 lakh sellers/service providers and achieving nearly ₹20 lakh crore cumulative Gross Merchandise Value (GMV).

    What is GeM?

    • GeM: Government e-Marketplace.
    • Launched on 9 August 2016.
    • A digital platform for government procurement of goods and services.
    • Replaced the Directorate General of Supplies and Disposals (DGS&D).
    • Integrates product discovery, bidding, contract award and payment.

    How does GeM Improve Procurement?

    1. End-to-end digitisation: Covers the complete procurement cycle.
    2. Transparency: Creates an auditable digital trail.
    3. Reduced discretion: Limits face-to-face interaction and scope for favouritism.
    4. Single window: Simplifies registration and standardises procurement.
    5. Inclusion: Gives Micro and Small Enterprises (MSEs), start-ups and women-led firms direct access to government buyers.

    What Does the Data Show?

    • Cumulative GMV: About ₹20 lakh crore.
    • Buyers: 1.37 lakh.
    • Sellers/service providers: 25 lakh.
    • Categories: 10,644 product and 350 service categories.
    • MSEs: Around 60% of orders by volume and over 45% of GMV.
    • Measured benefit: IIT Delhi study estimated ₹86,571.69 crore in benefits over the last three financial years through price and process efficiencies.

    What Problems Does GeM Address?

    • Reduces corruption and procurement discretion.
    • Improves Ease of Doing Business (EoDB) for suppliers.
    • Expands opportunities for MSMEs and start-ups.
    • Enables faster procurement.
    • Promotes competitive prices and better use of public funds.
    • Supports domestic manufacturing and Atmanirbhar Bharat.

    What is Public Procurement?

    • Public procurement is the process through which government bodies purchase goods, works and services using public funds.
    • Core principles: Transparency, Fair competition, Non-discrimination, Value for money, and Accountability

    Challenges

    1. Quality assurance: Risk of substandard products in a large digital catalogue.
    2. MSME payment delays: Delayed payments affect working capital.
    3. Bid rigging: Cartelisation can undermine competition.
    4. Digital divide: Smaller sellers may lack connectivity or digital skills.
    5. Grievance redress: Delays in resolving quality, delivery and payment disputes.
    6. Cybersecurity: Concentration of procurement data increases cyber risks.

    Back2Basics: GeM

    • Full form: Government e-Marketplace.
    • Launch: 9 August 2016.
    • Nodal Ministry: Ministry of Commerce and Industry.
    • Predecessor: DGS&D, Directorate General of Supplies and Disposals.
    • Purpose: Transparent and efficient government procurement.
    • Users: Government buyers, sellers and service providers.
    • Focus: Particularly beneficial for MSMEs, start-ups and women entrepreneurs.

    Government Initiatives

    • Public Procurement (Preference to Make in India) Order, 2017: Preference for domestically manufactured goods.
    • Public Procurement Policy for MSEs, 2012: Procurement preference for Micro and Small Enterprises.
    • Vivad se Vishwas for MSMEs: Relief mechanism for eligible MSME contractual disputes.
    • TReDS: Trade Receivables Discounting System, helping MSMEs obtain liquidity against receivables.

    [2025, GS2, 10 marks] E-governance projects have a built-in bias towards technology and back-end integration than user-centric designs. Examine.”

  • Congress slams new rural jobs law amid fall in employment generation

    Why in the News

    Person-days under the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) (VB-G RAM G) fell 49.94% year-on-year in July 2026, its first month of implementation, compared with Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA). The decline has raised concerns about moving from a demand-driven legal guarantee to a more centralised, technology-dependent model.

    What is the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin)?

    1. About: VB-G RAM G is the central rural employment and livelihood scheme that replaced MGNREGA. It is administered by the Union Rural Development Ministry.
    2. Design shift: Access is made increasingly dependent on technology and biometric authentication, and the scheme is centralised rather than run through gram panchayats.
    3. Key change: Critics state it removes the legal guarantee of employment that defined MGNREGA, converting an entitlement into a discretionary programme.

    What is a person-day and why is the July figure significant?

    1. Person-day: A person-day is a unit that measures the amount of work done by one person in a working day, the standard metric for employment generated under rural works schemes.
    2. The fall: Person-days generated in July 2026 were 49.94% lower than those generated under MGNREGA in July of the previous year, roughly halving recorded rural work in the first implementing month.

    Why has the Opposition attacked the new scheme?

    1. Loss of guaranteed work: The scrapping of MGNREGA stripped millions of families of their “right to work”, replaced by a scheme that wiped out around 50% of labourer employment in the first month.
    2. Centralisation: The scheme centralises delivery and imposes a heavy financial burden on State governments, weakening the earlier panchayat-led model.
    3. Technology gating: Making access dependent on technology and biometric authentication makes it harder for workers to claim their rights.
    4. Loss of local autonomy: MGNREGA had empowered gram panchayats and freed workers from dependence on the political whims of the government of the day.
    5. Pending dues: Rs 17,144 crore in pending MGNREGA funds to the States was flagged as unpaid.

    What wider distress does the data point to?

    1. Kharif shortfall: There is a 26.50% shortfall in sowing for the kharif crop, raising the demand for rural wage work at the very moment the scheme has contracted.
    2. Drought assistance gap: The Opposition questioned whether any assistance had been provided to drought-affected States.
    3. Funding pattern dispute: Even BJP-ruled States had demanded a review of the funding pattern of VB-G RAM G, indicating cross-party concern over State fiscal burden.

    Conclusion

    The near-halving of person-days in the first month captures the core risk of replacing a demand-driven legal guarantee with a centralised, technology-gated scheme, that the guarantee itself, not the branding, was what protected rural workers in distress. The data release coincides with a kharif sowing shortfall and State demands to review the funding pattern. The next test is whether the government revises the funding model and restores enrolment before the lean agricultural season deepens rural unemployment.

    What is a demand-driven employment guarantee?

    1. About: It is a legal framework under which the state must provide wage employment on demand to any eligible household, making work an enforceable entitlement rather than a target-based programme.
    2. Rationale: It exists to provide a rural safety net during agricultural distress and to set a wage floor, with the guarantee acting as automatic stabiliser when other work dries up.
    3. Distinguishing feature: Provision is triggered by the worker’s demand, not by a fixed budget or administrative ceiling, so contraction in person-days signals suppressed or unmet demand.

    Key Concerns Regarding Rural Employment Guarantee Schemes

    1. Wage payment delays: Chronic delays in wage disbursal erode the entitlement’s value and deter workers.
    2. Fund devolution to States: Centralised control and delayed release strain State finances and stall works.
    3. Technology exclusion: Biometric and app-based attendance systems exclude workers with poor connectivity or authentication failures.
    4. Suppressed demand: Administrative rationing and closed muster rolls understate genuine demand for work.

    Back2Basics: MGNREGA

    1. Full name: Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005, a UPA-era law.
    2. Ministry: Union Ministry of Rural Development.
    3. Aim: Guaranteed at least 100 days of wage employment in a financial year to every rural household whose adult members volunteer to do unskilled manual work.
    4. Beneficiaries: Adult members of any rural household, without a poverty-line or caste restriction.
    5. Design features: Legal right to work, demand-driven provision, works planned and executed through gram panchayats, and an unemployment allowance if work is not provided in time.

    Government Initiatives / Schemes for Rural Livelihoods

    1. VB-G RAM G: The current central rural employment and livelihood mission that replaced MGNREGA.
    2. Deendayal Antyodaya Yojana – National Rural Livelihoods Mission (DAY-NRLM): Promotes self-help groups and self-employment for rural poor women.
    3. Pradhan Mantri Awaas Yojana – Gramin: Provides pucca housing to rural households.
    4. Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Grameen Kaushalya Yojana: Skill training and placement for rural youth.

    Challenges in Rural Employment Delivery

    1. Payment delays: Wage and material payment delays discourage participation and stall projects.
    2. State fiscal burden: A shift of cost-sharing to States constrains scheme rollout in weaker States.
    3. Technology-driven exclusion: Biometric attendance and app-based systems drop workers who cannot authenticate.
    4. Weak asset quality: Poor planning produces low-value, non-durable assets from works undertaken.
    5. Corruption and leakage: Ghost workers and inflated muster rolls divert funds from genuine beneficiaries.
    6. Suppressed demand recording: Under-registration of work demand hides the true extent of rural distress.

    Way Forward

    1. Restore the legal guarantee: Retain an enforceable right to work as the anchor of the scheme rather than a discretionary target.
    2. Timely fund release: Clear pending dues to States and set statutory timelines for wage payment.
    3. Inclusive technology: Provide offline fallbacks and grievance redress for biometric and connectivity failures.
    4. Countercyclical scaling: Expand allocation automatically in drought and low-sowing years to match rural distress.
    5. Panchayat empowerment: Keep planning and execution with gram panchayats to preserve local accountability.

    [2011] Among the following who are eligible to benefit from the “Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act”?

    (a) Adult members of only the scheduled caste and scheduled tribe households

    (b) Adult members of below poverty line (BPL) households

    (c) Adult members of households of all backward communities

    (d) Adult members of any household