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

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS2

  • Centre notifies four new Labour Codes

    Why In The News?

    The Centre notified all four Labour Codes, introducing major reforms and replacing 29 outdated labour laws dating back to the 1930s.

    1)Introduction to the Labour Codes Notification:

    • Major Reform Announcement: The Centre notified all four Labour Codes, introducing wide-ranging changes in India’s labour framework.
    • Key Focus Areas: The reforms expand social security to gig workers, ensure gender pay parity, enhance women’s workplace rights, and introduce fixed-term employment.
    • Replacement of Old Laws: The Codes replace 29 fragmented labour laws dating back to the 1930s–1950s.

    2)Government’s Stance:

    • Prime Minister’s View: PM Modi described the reforms as one of the most comprehensive labour transformations since Independence.
    • Worker Empowerment: The government highlights that the Codes aim to ensure universal social security, timely wage payments, and safer workplaces.
    • Simplified Compliance: The reforms are expected to promote ease of doing business through simplified compliance mechanisms.
    • Minister’s Statement: Labour Minister Mansukh Mandaviya said the Codes will formalise employment and make the labour ecosystem globally aligned.
    • State-Level Readiness: Most States have already issued draft rules; the Centre is supporting those still finalising rules.

    3)Key Provisions:

    • Women’s Safety and Rights: Expanded rights, including permission for night shifts and enhanced workplace safety.
    • Health and Social Security: Free annual health check-ups for workers above 40 and nationwide ESIC coverage, including hazardous units.
    • Simplified Procedures: A single registration, licensing, and return system for employers.
    • Wage and Safety Standards: Introduction of a national floor wage and creation of a National OSH Board for uniform safety standards.
    • Fixed-Term Employment: Allows fixed-term workers to receive all benefits equivalent to permanent workers.
    • New Work Categories: Gig workers, platform workers, and aggregators are legally defined for the first time.
    • Universal Account Number: Aadhaar-linked UAN ensures portability and easy access to welfare benefits.
    • Inclusion of Plantation Workers: Plantation workers brought under OSHWC and Social Security Codes.

    4)Responses from Stakeholders:

    Trade Union Concerns:

    • Opposition to Codes: Several central trade unions reject the Labour Codes, labelling them anti-worker and pro-employer.
    • Issues with Timing: CTUs argue implementing the Codes amid rising unemployment and inflation will worsen workers’ hardships.
    • Protest Plans: Unions have announced nationwide protests on November 26 and cite earlier strikes against the Codes.
    • Fear of Exploitation: Trade unions warn the reforms could revive a “master-servant” relationship, reducing worker protections.

    BMS Standpoint: The Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh supports implementation but seeks amendments to remove perceived anti-worker provisions in OSH and Industrial Relations Codes.

    Industry View: CII praises the reforms as a transformative step towards a modern and simplified labour ecosystem.

    [UPSC 2021] With reference to casual workers employed in India, consider the following statements: 1.All casual workers are entitled to Employees Provident Fund coverage.

    2.All casual workers are entitled to regular working hours and overtime payment.

    3.The government can, by notification, specify that an establishment or industry shall pay wages only through its bank account. Which of the above statements are correct? Options: (a) 1 and 2 only (b) 2 and 3 only* (c) 1 and 3 only (d) 1, 2, and 3

     

  • [22nd November 2025] The Hindu Op-ED: The new direction for India should be toward Asia

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2024] The West is fostering India as an alternative to reduce dependence on China’s supply chain and as a strategic ally to counter China’s political and economic dominance. Explain this statement with examples.

    Linkage: This question is relevant as the article highlights India’s discomfort with Western strategic pressure and the U.S. attempt to position India as a counter-weight to China. It directly links to the theme that India must prioritise Asian partnerships based on autonomy rather than being shaped by Western geopolitical expectations.

    Mentor’s Comment

    India’s foreign policy stands at its most decisive turning point in decades. Recent global summits have marked a visible discomfort in Western partnerships and a stronger inclination toward Asian platforms such as SCO, BRICS, and ASEAN. If sustained, this pivot could influence not only India’s security and economy but also the balance of power across the 21st century.

    Introduction

    India is emerging as a global economic heavyweight. At a time when geopolitical polarization between the West and China is intensifying, India is being pushed to define where its long-term interests lie. The article argues that India’s most strategic future lies within the Asian ecosystem, economically, technologically and militarily, rather than within Western-led institutional frameworks.

    Why in the News

    Diplomatic signals at recent top summits have shown a clear turning point: India expressed discomfort with the U.S. stance on Russia-China while showing greater comfort engaging Asian multilateral platforms. This reverses decades of Western strategic centrality and marks the first open debate about whether India should integrate with a U.S.-dominated global order or anchor its future with Asia’s rapidly rising power architecture.

    Is India undergoing a decisive Asian pivot?

    1. Growing tilt toward Asian blocs: India’s policy space is increasingly shaped by negotiations with China and Russia rather than the U.S. and Europe.
    2. Limits of multialignment exposed: External pressure from the U.S. forces India to re-evaluate whether neutrality remains viable.

    Why is Western strategic centrality fading for India?

    1. Summit unease and leadership signalling: Interactions at the G-7 and Busan Summit highlighted visible discomfort between Indian and U.S. leadership.
    2. U.S. pressure on trade and Russia policy: Washington expects India to align its tariff playbook and Russian relations to Western priorities.
    3. Security divergence: U.S.-driven defence expectations conflict with India’s commitment to independent threat assessment.

    Why does Asia offer a stronger pathway for India’s growth?

    1. Demographic and economic centre of gravity: Two-thirds of global population and global wealth lie in Asia, creating large consumer and innovation markets.
    2. Rise of continental and maritime platforms: BRICS, SCO and ASEAN integrate security with economic restructuring outside WTO constraints.
    3. Technological and industrial complementarities: Asian RCEP supply chains, semiconductor hubs, manufacturing and defence technologies align with India’s development goals.

    What hard decisions are demanded from India now?

    1. Strategic autonomy based on Indian capacity: Policy alignment must reflect national strengths rather than expectations of great powers.
    2. Growth-labour dynamic within Asia: Asia offers the highest growth rate and workforce depth but demands competitiveness and industrial performance from India.
    3. Reducing dependency on imported defence systems: Innovation in AI, cyber capability, missiles and marine strength becomes essential.

    How does the global AI and military innovation race shape India’s choices?

    1. Shift from land-based warfare to technology-centric warfare: Cyber, naval and AI superiority determine 21st-century power projection.
    2. Asian innovation ecosystem more open than Western models: Western blocs impose regulatory constraints while Asia prioritises co-development and technology transfer.
    3. Defence industrialisation as a growth multiplier: AI-driven defence manufacturing advances both national security and economic output.

    Conclusion

    India is not compelled to choose between the West and Asia, but strategic realities suggest that Asia provides the most fertile ground for technological development, economic partnerships and military advancement. A calibrated pivot anchored in strategic autonomy and innovation may be the key to India becoming a rule-shaping, rather than rule-following, global power by mid-century.

  • NSA hosts 7th meeting of Colombo Security Conclave in Delhi

    Why In The News?

    At the 7th NSA-level Colombo Security Conclave meeting, member states prioritised cooperation on five pillars: maritime security, counterterrorism and radicalisation, trafficking and transnational crime, cybersecurity and critical infrastructure protection, and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, aiming to strengthen regional security coordination.

    About Colombo Security Conclave (CSC):

    • Regional Grouping: A security platform comprising India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Maldives, and Mauritius; Seychelles is an observer.
    • Objective: To enhance regional security and address transnational threats of common concern.
    • Origin: Began in 2011 as the Trilateral Maritime Security Cooperation between India, Maldives, Sri Lanka.
    • Hiatus: Became inactive after 2014 due to India-Maldives tensions.
    • Revival: Rebranded as CSC in 2020; Mauritius and later Bangladesh joined.
    • Participation: Involves NSAs and Deputy NSAs of member states.
    • Key Areas of Cooperation:
      • Maritime safety and security
      • Counterterrorism and radicalisation
      • Combating trafficking and transnational organised crime
      • Cybersecurity and protection of critical infrastructure
      • Humanitarian assistance and disaster relief
    [UPSC 2017] Consider the following in respect of Indian Ocean Naval Symposium (IONS)

    1. Inaugural IONS was held in India in 2015 under the chairmanship of the Indian Navy.

    2. IONS is a voluntary initiative that seeks to increase maritime co-operation among navies of the littoral states of the Indian Ocean Region.

    Which of the above statements is/are correct ? (a) 1 only (b) 2 only* (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2

     

  • Search on for five declared foreigners by Assam tribunal

    Why In The News?

    Police in Assam’s Sonitpur district are searching for five people declared non-citizens by a Foreigners’ Tribunal after they repeatedly failed to appear for hearings, prompting the tribunal to issue an ex-parte order.

    1) About Foreigners Tribunal (FT):

    • Legal Basis: Quasi-judicial bodies established under the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964, issued under Section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946.
    • Purpose: Allows State authorities to refer cases of individuals suspected to be foreigners for determination.
    • Composition: Headed by members drawn from judges, advocates, or civil servants with judicial experience.
    • Powers: Possesses civil court powers-summoning individuals, examining on oath, and requiring document production.

    2) Are Foreigners Tribunals Only for Assam?

    • Nationwide Applicability: The 1964 Order applies across all of India, but FTs currently operate only in Assam.
    • Other States: Suspected illegal immigrants are dealt with by local courts under the Foreigners Act, 1946.
    • 2019 Amendment: Earlier only the Centre could set up FTs; after the amendment, states also have the power to establish them.

    3) Foreigners Tribunal – Functioning:

    • Notice Period: Tribunal must issue a notice to the suspected foreigner within 10 days of receiving a reference.
    • Response Time: The individual gets 10 days to reply, and another 10 days to submit supporting evidence.
    • Time for Disposal: Tribunal must dispose of cases within 60 days.
    • Outcome: If unable to prove citizenship, the person may be sent to a detention centre (transit camp) for future deportation.

    4) Immigration and Foreigners Order, 2025:

    • Replaces: Supersedes the Foreigners (Tribunal) Order, 1964 under the new Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025.
    • New Powers:
      • FTs can now issue arrest warrants and detain individuals unable to prove citizenship-previously done through executive orders.
      • Warrants may be issued if a suspect fails to appear.
    • Expanded Judicial Authority: FTs now possess powers of:
      • A civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
      • A judicial magistrate (First Class) under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
    • Key Powers Include:
      • Summoning and enforcing attendance.
      • Examining persons on oath.
      • Requiring discovery and production of documents.
      • Issuing commissions for witness examination.
      • Directing personal appearance.
      • Issuing arrest warrants for non-appearance.
    Ex-Parte Order:

    An ex parte decree is issued when a defendant fails to appear despite receiving summons, allowing the court to hear only the plaintiff’s case and pass a decision in the defendant’s absence.

     

    [UPSC 2009] Consider the following statements :

    1. Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) was set up during the Prime Ministership of Lal Bahadur Shastri.

    2. The Members for CAT are drawn from both judicial and administrative streams.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct ?

    Options: (a) 1 only (b) 2 only* (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2

     

  • SC clarifies Governor’s powers: How SC answered 14 questions President posed

    Introduction

    The Supreme Court’s opinion on the President’s 14 queries recalibrates the balance between Raj Bhavan and elected state governments. It ends the uncertainty around “pocket veto”, clarifies that gubernatorial discretion is narrow, and rejects any judicial power to impose timelines on constitutional authorities. The ruling is significant because it formalises procedural discipline without enabling judicial overreach, and reveals continued ambiguity that may trigger future litigation.

    Why in the news?

    The Supreme Court delivered a rare and highly consequential opinion under Article 143, addressing 14 constitutional doubts raised by the President regarding the Governor’s powers on Bills, aid and advice, delay, and discretion. It is a big development because the Court categorically ruled out the Governor’s “pocket veto”, reaffirmed that discretion is exceptional, not routine, and clarified that the judiciary cannot impose procedural timelines on constitutional posts. This marks a striking departure from previous ambiguities in Centre-State relations and reopens debate on federal accountability.

    What constitutional options are available to a Governor when a Bill is presented?

    1. Four Constitutional Options: Return the Bill, reserve it for the President, assent, or withhold assent; these options arise strictly from Article 200.
    2. Bar on Pocket Veto: The ruling prohibits an indefinite delay, emphasising that constitutional silence cannot be exploited to stall legislation.
    3. Return of Bill Allowed Only Once: The Governor cannot repeatedly send the same Bill back once the House re-passes it.
    4. No Withhold After Re-passage: Once the legislature re-adopts a Bill, the Governor must assent, ensuring legislative primacy.

    Is the Governor bound by aid and advice of the Council of Ministers?

    1. Binding Advice Rule: Aid and advice are mandatory except in constitutionally specified discretionary functions.
    2. No Unfettered Discretion: The Governor’s disagreement with political outcomes does not justify refusing advice.
    3. Improper Refusal: The Court held that a Governor cannot withhold assent simply because a new government would not prefer the Bill.

    Are the Governor’s discretionary powers unlimited?

    1. Narrow Discretion: Discretion is “exceptional”, not a general supervisory authority over the legislature.
    2. Subjective Satisfaction Allowed Only for President’s Reservation: Under Article 200, the Governor may reserve a Bill if doubts on constitutionality exist.
    3. Judicial Review Retained: Reserving a Bill on irrelevant grounds is open to legal challenge.
    4. Discretion Must Meet Constitutional Purpose: Decisions must align with constitutional morality, not political preference.

    Can timelines be imposed on Governors or the President?

    1. No Judicially Enforceable Deadlines: The Court cannot prescribe rigid timelines because the Constitution does not contain them.
    2. Institutional Respect Principle: Judiciary recognises the separation of powers and avoids issuing operational directives to constitutional authorities.
    3. Practical Concern Highlighted: While Governors should act “reasonably expeditiously”, this remains non-justiciable.

    Are actions under Article 200 justiciable?

    1. Yes, on Limited Grounds: Courts may intervene if the Governor acts on irrelevant considerations or violates constitutional limits.
    2. Reasonableness Standard Applies: Judicial review ensures the Governor does not misuse constitutional silence to stall governance.
    3. Invalid Withholding Possible: A Governor withholding assent after re-passage would be unconstitutional and challengeable.

    Can a Governor substitute his decision with the President’s under Article 201?

    1. Permissible Only for Constitutionality Doubts: The Governor may reserve Bills only when genuine constitutional issues arise.
    2. No Arbitrary Referral: Relying on the President for policy disagreements is unconstitutional.

    Can courts adjudicate contents of Bills?

    1. Judicial Review Limited: Courts cannot examine legislative content before enactment except for exceptional situations.
    2. No Pre-Enactment Censorship: Validity can be tested only after the Bill becomes law.
    3. Reiterates Separation of Powers: Judiciary cannot intrude into legislative functioning.

    Can the President exercise constitutional powers in place of the Governor under Article 142?

    1. Court Rejects the Assumption: No constitutional fiction allows the President to step into the Governor’s role.
    2. Limits to Article 142: It cannot rewrite constitutional architecture.

    Conclusion

    The opinion reaffirms constitutional restraint, narrows gubernatorial discretion, disallows “pocket vetoes”, strengthens legislative sovereignty, and emphasises judicial non-interference in executive timelines. Yet the Court’s hesitation to set procedural limits leaves space for future litigation, signalling continuing tensions in Indian federalism.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2022] Discuss the essential conditions for exercise of the legislative powers by the Governor. Discuss the legality of re-promulgation of ordinances by the Governor without placing them before the Legislature.

    Linkage: This PYQ is directly relevant as the latest SC Article 143 opinion clarifies the Governor’s narrow legislative powers and rejects misuse like delay or withholding assent. It links to the issue of constitutional propriety, making re-promulgation without placing ordinances before the legislature clearly unconstitutional.

  • Is federalism in retreat under single party hegemony?

    INTRODUCTION

    The rationalisation of GST ushered in a new era of indirect taxation but triggered concerns among several States regarding declining revenue autonomy. Disputes around compensation, centrally-sponsored schemes, disaster relief funding, and Finance Commission recommendations have reached the Supreme Court, raising a fundamental question: Is Indian federalism being structurally reshaped under a single-party political hegemony?

    The conversation in the article traces how fiscal and political federalism has shifted from cooperative frameworks in the 1990s to competitive and increasingly centralised dynamics post-2014.

    WHY IN THE NEWS

    The article is significant because it captures the unprecedented stress on fiscal federalism under GST, the decline of traditional accommodation politics, and the growing disconnect between richer southern States and the Union’s redistributive design. For the first time since liberalisation, States across the political spectrum are questioning the vertical imbalance and the shrinking autonomy embedded in taxation, grants, and centrally sponsored schemes. The issue is compelling because these structural tensions coincide with the rise of a dominant national party, altering how bargaining, negotiation, and regional representation historically shaped Indian federalism.

    Shifts in Federalism: From Accommodation to Assertion

    1. Federal Coalition Politics: Provided space for regional parties to influence national policy in the 1990s; reforms had federal character, and Centre-State interaction increased.
    2. Decline of Accommodation: Rise of single-party majority reduced negotiation; regional anxieties and political identities feel less represented.
    3. BJP’s Unitary Political Vision: Emphasises uniformity over accommodation, reducing incentives for coalition-based bargaining.

    How Has GST Altered the Fiscal Architecture?

    1. Loss of Tax Autonomy: States surrendered sovereign taxation power; they now depend on shared revenues and compensation.
    2. Compensation Tensions: Delays triggered mistrust; design issues, particularly Finance Commission-linked vertical imbalance, create sustained stress.
    3. Redistributive Principle: Southern States argue that redistributive transfers have become structurally rigid without acknowledging their economic efficiency.

    What Is Driving Regional Inequality and Fiscal Stress?

    1. Unequal Growth Patterns: Southern States showed high economic growth but lack employment-intensive outcomes; inequality persists.
    2. Structural Vertical Imbalance: Centre retains key taxation powers while States bear expenditure responsibilities; this misalignment fuels fiscal dissatisfaction.
    3. Urbanisation and Labour Migration: Remittances from poorer northern States sustain the growth of southern economies, deepening interdependence yet also friction.

    How Has Single-Party Dominance Reshaped Political Federalism?

    1. Reduced Federal Bargains: With weaker regional representation at the Centre, the cooperative ethos has weakened.
    2. Rise of Central Schemes: States perceive centralisation in scheme design, financing patterns, and conditionalities.
    3. Executive Federalism: More meetings, consultations, and vertical controls replacing political negotiation platforms like the Planning Commission.

    Why Are Delimitation and Census Triggering Concerns?

    1. Southern States’ Anxiety: Fear losing political weight due to lower population growth relative to northern States.
    2. Economic Contribution vs Representation: High-growth States feel the political architecture does not reward efficient governance.
    3. One Nation, One Election Debate: Seen as another centralising push, weakening federal political competition.

    CONCLUSION

    The article concludes that the crisis in Indian federalism is not merely episodic but structural, rooted in post-GST fiscal architecture, weakened accommodation politics, regional disparities, and the rise of a dominant national party. The challenge is to redesign mechanisms of trust, negotiation, and fiscal balance so that India’s federal compact remains resilient to political shocks and centred on cooperative problem-solving.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2024] What changes has the Union Government recently introduced in the domain of Centre-State relations? Suggest measures to be adopted to build the trust between the Centre and the States and for strengthening federalism.

    Linkage: This PYQ directly aligns with the article’s core themes of growing centralisation, GST-driven fiscal stress, and weakening accommodation politics between the Centre and States. It links perfectly with the discussion on fiscal imbalance, GST Council tensions, Finance Commission changes, and the impact of single-party dominance on federal bargaining.

  • SC advisory on Presidential Reference on Governors’ timelines

    Why In The News?

    The Supreme Court will issue an advisory opinion on a Presidential Reference questioning its authority to impose timelines and prescribe procedures for Governors and the President when handling State Bills sent for assent or consideration.

    1) About the Judgement:

    • Scheduled Advisory Opinion: The Supreme Court is set to deliver its advisory opinion on a Presidential Reference questioning whether the Court can impose timelines and procedures for Governors and the President when dealing with State Bills.
    • Bench’s Position: The five-judge Bench led by CJI B.R. Gavai held that the Court cannot remain inactive if a constitutional authority fails to perform its duties.
    • Political–Federal Context: The matter arises amid friction between Opposition-ruled States and Governors, with delays in assenting to key State legislation.
    • April 8 Judgment Trigger: The reference stems from the Supreme Court’s April 8 judgment that imposed a three-month deadline on Governors and the President to act on Bills.
    • Impact on Governance: The Court ruled that Governors cannot impede governance by indefinitely withholding action on welfare legislation.
    • Union Government’s Objection: The Centre argued that the April 8 ruling creates a “one-size-fits-all” approach that may be inappropriate given the varied nature of Bills.
    • Argument on Judicial Overreach: Solicitor General Tushar Mehta contended that the Court cannot assume legislative functions by compelling Governors to grant assent through mandamus.

    2) Presidential Reference Under Article 143:

    • Meaning and Scope: Article 143 allows the President to seek the Supreme Court’s advisory opinion on questions of law or fact of public importance.
    • Article 143(1) – Optional Opinion: The Supreme Court may accept or decline to answer references under this clause. Example: refusal in the 1993 Ram Janmabhoomi reference.
    • Article 143(2) – Mandatory Opinion: For disputes involving pre-Constitution treaties or agreements, the Court must render its opinion.
    • Nature of Advice: The advisory opinion is not binding on the President but carries significant legal authority.
    • Bench Requirement: Article 145(3) mandates that a minimum five-judge Bench must hear Presidential References.
    • Historical Origins: The power originates from the Government of India Act, 1935. Comparative jurisdictions: Canada accepts advisory opinions; the U.S. does not.
    • Past References: About 15 previous references include the Delhi Laws Act (1951), Kerala Education Bill (1958), Berubari (1960), Keshav Singh (1965), Presidential Poll case (1974), Third Judges Case (1998).
    • Key Question in Present Reference: Whether courts can impose timelines on Governors/President that are not expressly provided in Articles 200 and 201, and whether Article 142 enables the Court to frame such directions.
    • Limit on Overturning Judgments: As held in the 1991 Cauvery decision, Article 143 cannot be used to review or overturn settled Supreme Court judgments.
    • Constitutional Significance: The reference may clarify the constitutional roles of the President/Governors, promote federal balance, and remove procedural ambiguities.
    • Challenges of the Advisory Process: Advice is nonbinding, references may become politicized, “public importance” is undefined, and there is no timeline for the Court to respond.

    3) Relevant Constitutional Provisions & Case Law on Governors’ Powers to reserve state bills:

    • Article 200 – Governor’s Options: The Governor may assent, withhold assent with reasons, return a non-Money Bill once, or reserve the Bill for the President. Upon reconsideration and re-passage, the Governor must assent.
    • Article 201 – President’s Options: The President may assent, withhold assent, or return a non-Money Bill; unlike the Governor, the President is not bound even if the Bill is re-passed.
    • No Absolute or Pocket Veto: The Supreme Court held in the 2023 Tamil Nadu case that Governors cannot exercise a pocket veto; “as soon as possible” implies reasonable promptness.
    • Restriction on Reserving Bills: After a Bill is re-passed without amendments, the Governor must assent; it cannot be reserved again unless the content has changed.
    • Aid and Advice Principle: The Governor must act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers except in limited situations concerning High Court or Supreme Court powers.
    • Judicial Timelines and Reviewability: The Supreme Court imposed definitive timelines for Governor’s action under Article 200 and held that inaction is subject to judicial review.
    [UPSC 2012] Question: Which of the following are the discretionary powers given to the Governor of a State?

    1. Sending a report to the President of India for imposing the President’s rule

    2. Appointing the Ministers

    3. Reserving certain bills passed by the State Legislature for consideration of the President of India

    4. Making the rules to conduct the business of the State Government

    Select the correct answer using the code given below: Options: (a) 1 and 2 only (b) 1 and 3 only* (c) 2, 3 and 4 only (d) 1, 2, 3 and 4

     

  • SC strikes down provisions of Tribunal Reforms Act, tells govt. to set up panel

    Why In The News?

    Supreme Court struck down provisions of the Tribunal Reforms Act 2021, saying they gave government excessive control over tribunal appointments, functioning and salaries, undermining independence.

    1) About the Supreme Court Judgement on the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021:

    • Striking Down Provisions: The Supreme Court struck down provisions of the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021 that gave the Union government dominant control over appointments, functioning, and salaries of tribunal chairpersons and members.
    • Need for Independence: The Court held that Parliament must structure the tribunal system to ensure independence, impartiality, and effective adjudication as constitutional requirements.
    • Violation of Constitutional Principles: Laws that enable executive control, curtail tenure, or weaken autonomy violate foundational constitutional values.
    • National Tribunal Commission: The Bench directed the Centre to establish a National Tribunal Commission within four months to ensure independence and transparency.
    • Repackaged Ordinance: The 2021 Act was a “repackaged version” of the earlier ordinance struck down in July 2021.
    • Ignoring Defects: Parliament had ignored the defects pointed out earlier by the Supreme Court, transferring the same provisions into the 2021 Act with minor changes.
    • Rejection of Parliament’s Argument: The Court dismissed the claim that Parliament has discretion to ignore Supreme Court decisions.
    • Judicial Review as a Basic Feature: The Court insisted that judicial review is a basic feature of the Constitution, and Parliament cannot brush aside the supremacy of the Constitution.

    2) Power of Judicial Review:

    • Meaning: Judicial review is the power of courts to examine the lawfulness of decisions or actions of public authorities.
    • Process Review: It reviews how a decision was made, not the correctness of the decision itself.
    • Procedure Established by Law: A law is valid only if enacted following the proper legislative procedure.
    • Due Process of Law: Ensures that laws are fair and just; India follows Procedure Established by Law.
    • Scope: Extends to reviewing actions of the legislature, executive, and administrative bodies.
    • Functions: Helps legitimize government action and protects the Constitution from undue encroachment.
    • Basic Structure: Judicial review forms part of the basic structure doctrine (Indira Gandhi vs Raj Narain, 1975).
    • Judicial Functions: Includes interpretational and observer roles of the judiciary.
    • PILs and Suo Moto: Courts can intervene through Public Interest Litigation and suo moto cases.
    • Types:
      • Review of Legislative Actions: Ensures laws comply with the Constitution.
      • Review of Administrative Actions: Enforces constitutional discipline on administrative bodies.
      • Review of Judicial Decisions: Allows correction of prior judicial decisions.
    • Importance: Ensures supremacy of the Constitution, prevents misuse of power, protects rights, maintains federal balance, and upholds judicial independence.
    • Problems: May limit government functioning, create overreach, lead to rigidity, risk judicial bias, and diminish public faith through repeated interventions.
    • Indian Context: India follows separation of functions, not strict separation of powers, but has checks and balances empowering courts to strike down unconstitutional laws.

    3) Tribunals:

    • Nature: Tribunals are quasi-judicial bodies aimed at reducing caseloads and providing technical expertise.
    • Constitutional Basis: Articles 323A and 323B added via the 42nd Amendment (1976) empower creation of tribunals.
    • Article 323A: Enables Parliament to form administrative tribunals for service matters.
    • Article 323B: Allows Parliament and state legislatures to create tribunals on subjects like taxation and land reforms.
    • 2010 SC Clarification: Subjects under Article 323B are not exclusive—legislatures may create tribunals for any subject in the Seventh Schedule.
    • Composition: Tribunals include judicial and technical members.
    • Jurisdiction: Defined, subject-specific jurisdiction; some have appellate powers.
    • Appeals: Generally lie with High Courts, though some go directly to the Supreme Court.
    • Chandra Kumar Judgment (1997): Appeals from tribunals must reach a division bench of High Courts.
    • Current Position: Tribunals may function as substitutes for High Courts or remain subordinate.

    Significance of Tribunals:

    • Specialization:
      • Ensures cases are handled by individuals with deep legal and technical expertise.
    • Speedy Resolution:
      • Enables timely resolution in crucial matters like tax, service disputes, and environmental issues.
    • Reduced Case Load:
      • Helps ease the burden on regular courts and reduces judicial backlog.
    • Accessibility:
      • Tribunals often have geographically dispersed benches, improving access for litigants.
    • Efficiency in Service Matters:
      • Bodies like CAT expedite government service-related disputes.

    Concerns with Tribunals:

    • Independence Issues:
      • Government-controlled appointments raise concerns about executive influence.
      • In 2019, the Supreme Court warned that lack of judicial dominance violates the separation of powers.
    • Pendency of Cases:
      • Example: Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) had 18,829 pending cases in 2021.
    • Human Resource Constraints:
      • Lack of staffing contributes to rising pendency.
    • Tenure Problems:
      • Short tenure and reappointment provisions increase executive control.
    • Non-Uniform Procedures:
      • Wide variations cause inconsistency and confusion for litigants.
    • Overlapping Jurisdictions:
      • Leads to conflicts between courts and tribunals.
    • Technical Member Issues:
      • Some technical members lack legal qualifications.
    [UPSC 2019] Consider the following statements:

    1. The 44th Amendment to the Constitution of India introduced an Article placing the election of the Prime Minister beyond judicial review.

    2. The Supreme Court of India struck down the 99th Amendment to the Constitution of India as being violative of the independence of judiciary.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    Options: (a)  1 only (b) 2 only* (c)  Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2

  • 2.25 Crore Ineligible Beneficiaries removed  from Free Ration Scheme

    Why in the News?

    About 2.25 crore ineligible people were removed from the NFSA free ration list in the past 4–5 months to ensure benefits reach only rightful beneficiaries.

    About Free Ration Scheme:

    • Foodgrain Allocation: The scheme provides 5 kg of free foodgrains (wheat or rice) per person per month to poor households for basic sustenance.
    • Criteria for Ineligibility: Ineligible individuals included those owning four-wheelers, earning above the income threshold, holding company directorships, or deceased persons.
    • Verification Process: The Centre identified suspect entries and shared them with States for verification and deletion.
    • Role of State Governments: States are responsible for identifying beneficiaries, issuing ration cards, and continuously updating lists.
    • Current Coverage: The scheme currently covers around 80.56 crore people, with scope to add about 0.79 crore more beneficiaries.
    • Ration Card & Distribution Network: India has over 19 crore ration card holders and around 5 lakh fair price shops.
    • Beneficiary Categories:
      • Antyodaya Anna Yojana (AAY): 35 kg per household per month
      • Priority Households (PHH): 5 kg per person per month

    About National Food Security Act, 2013 (NFSA):

    • Enactment: NFSA was signed into law on 12 September 2013, with effect from 5 July 2013.
    • Coverage Goal: It aims to provide subsidized food grains to about two-thirds of India’s population, covering 75% rural and 50% urban populations.
    • Legal Entitlements: It converts food security schemes into legal entitlements for eligible households.
    • Subsidized Prices: Mandated Targeted Public Distribution System prices:
      • Rice – ₹3/kg
      • Wheat – ₹2/kg
      • Coarse grains – ₹1/kg
    • Household Head Provision: The eldest woman aged 18 or above in a household is designated as the head for issuing ration cards.
    • Nutritional Support: Pregnant women, lactating mothers, and children (6 months–14 years) receive free meals under ICDS and Mid-Day Meal schemes.
    • Maternity Benefits: Pregnant and lactating women are entitled to a ₹6,000 maternity benefit, paid in installments.
    • Entitlements Under NFSA:
      • Priority Households: 5 kg foodgrains per person per month
      • AAY Households: 35 kg per month
      • Universal coverage of ICDS and Mid-Day Meals
    [UPSC 2018] With reference to the provisions made under the National Food Security Act, 2013, consider the following statements:

    1. The families coming under the category of ‘below poverty line (BPL)’ only are eligible to receive subsidies food grains.

    2. The eldest woman in a household, of age 18 years or above, shall be the head of the household for the purpose of issuance of a ration card.

    3. Pregnant women and lactating mothers are entitled to a ‘take-home ration’ of 1600 calories per day during pregnancy and for six months thereafter.

    (a) 1 and 2 (b) 2 only* (c) 1 and 3 (d) 3 only

     

  • Independence of Election Commission Of India(ECI)

    Why in the news?

    Amidst SIR exercise, the Opposition raised questions on the independence of ECI.

    About Election Commission of India(ECI)

    The Election Commission of India (ECI), established under Article 324, is responsible for ensuring free, fair, and impartial elections. Its independence is essential for democratic legitimacy.

    Constitutional Safeguards Ensuring Independence

    1.Security of Tenure – CEC-The Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) can be removed only through a process similar to that of a Supreme Court judge- by a special majority of Parliament on grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity.

    2.Protection for Election Commissioners (ECs)-ECs can be removed only on the recommendation of the CEC, preventing arbitrary dismissal by the executive.

    3. Financial Independence-ECI’s expenses are charged on the Consolidated Fund of India, insulating it from executive control through budget cuts.

    4. Plenary Powers under Article 324-ECI can act when existing laws are inadequate, allowing it functional autonomy during elections

    Independence After the 2023 Act

    Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023. This Act overrides the 2023 Supreme Court directive that required a three-member committee :PM + Leader of Opposition + CJI.

    Key Provisions and Their Impact

    1.New Appointment Committee-Appointments to CEC and ECs now made by a three-member panel:

    • Prime Minister (Chairperson)
    • Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha
    • Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the PM

    Impact: Replaces the CJI with a Cabinet minister, increasing executive dominance over appointments, raising concerns about ECI independence.

    2. Service Conditions-CEC and ECs will have the same salary and perks as Cabinet Secretary.

    Impact: This equates their status with high-ranking executive officers, which critics argue may reduce institutional insulation from the government.

    3.Term of Office-Fixed tenure of 6 years or until age 65, whichever earlier.

    Impact: Fixed tenure supports stability, but early retirement age could shorten term length.

    4. Removal & Suspension-No change: CEC retains constitutional protection; ECs removable only on CEC’s recommendation.

    Challenges to Independence (Post-2023 Act)

    • Executive-Dominated Appointments: A selection panel with a government majority may undermine the Commission’s neutrality.
    • Exclusion of CJI: Removing the Chief Justice from the panel weakens institutional checks and balances.
    • Status Dilution: Equating the CEC/ECs with a bureaucratic rank risks undermining their constitutional stature.
    • Post-Retirement Incentives: Possibility of government-appointed positions may affect independent decision-making.
    • Administrative Dependence: Continued reliance on government machinery for staffing and logistics limits functional autonomy.

    The Election Commission of India, protected by the Constitution, ensures free elections; the 2023 Act clarifies appointments, and strengthening autonomy and capacity can further reinforce its credibility and democratic role.

    [UPSC 2012] Consider the following statements:

    1. Union Territories are not represented in the Rajya Sabha.
    2. It is within the purview of the Chief Election Commissioner to adjudicate election disputes.
    3. According to the Constitution of India, the Parliament consists of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha only.

    Options: (a) 1 only (b) 2 and 3 (c) 1 and 3 (d) None*