PYQ Relevance
[UPSC 2022] Discuss global warming and mention its effects on the global climate. Explain the control measures to bring down the level of greenhouse gases which cause global warming, in the light of the Kyoto Protocol, 1997.
Linkage: If such a theme on international climate governance and mechanisms can be asked, then India’s Climate Finance Taxonomy also becomes a significant area. It connects global agreements like the Paris Agreement (Article 6.4) with India’s domestic instruments such as the Carbon Credit Trading Scheme and green bonds. |
Mentors Comment
In May 2025, the Ministry of Finance released the draft Climate Finance Taxonomy, India’s first attempt to formally define what counts as climate-aligned investment. The framework seeks to mobilise green finance, prevent greenwashing, and give clarity to investors. Its success, however, depends on strong review systems, accountability, and stakeholder engagement.
Introduction
The draft taxonomy marks a turning point in India’s climate governance. This is India’s first unified framework for climate finance, introduced amid rising greenwashing risks and investor uncertainty. Arriving alongside the operationalisation of the Carbon Credit Trading Scheme and the rise of green bonds, it comes at a moment of growing pressure to align finance with net-zero goals. As a “living framework,” it promises adaptability to evolving national and global priorities. But without transparency, legal coherence, and institutional accountability, the taxonomy risks undermining India’s climate finance ecosystem instead of strengthening it.
The Review Architecture for a Living Framework
- Two-tier review system: Suggestion of annual reviews for short-term corrections and five-year reviews for deep reassessment.
- Annual reviews: Triggered by implementation gaps, international obligations, or stakeholder feedback, with structured timelines, documentation protocols, and public consultation.
- Five-year reviews: Linked with India’s NDC cycle and global stocktake under the UNFCCC; ensures long-term resilience in a changing climate finance ecosystem.
Key aspects of the Substantive Review
- Legal coherence: Taxonomy must align with Energy Conservation Act, SEBI norms, Carbon Credit Trading Scheme, and India’s international commitments.
- Harmonisation: Review should remove overlaps, clarify redundancies, and integrate with green bonds, blended finance, and environmental risk disclosures.
- Content clarity: Definitions must remain readable, coherent, and technically precise. Quantitative thresholds (e.g., emissions reduction, energy efficiency benchmarks) must be regularly updated with empirical data.
- Inclusivity: Framework must remain accessible to MSMEs, informal sector, agriculture, and small manufacturing with staggered compliance timelines and proportionate expectations.
Strengthening Governance through Accountability Structures
- Standing unit in the Ministry of Finance: Dedicated body within the Department of Economic Affairs or an expert committee involving financial regulators, climate science institutions, civil society.
- Public dashboards: Mechanisms to receive inputs, document experiences, and publish reports.
- Transparency: Annual review summaries and five-year revision proposals should be made public in consolidated formats to enhance investor trust and policy coherence.
Significance of the Climate Finance Taxonomy for India’s Green Transition
- Carbon Credit Trading Scheme: Soon to be fully operational, requiring clear rules for market credibility.
- Green bonds: Entering mainstream portfolios and stock exchanges, need alignment with taxonomy standards.
- Public investment flows: Rising pressure to align fiscal spending with long-term climate goals.
- Risk of failure: A weak or opaque taxonomy could undermine India’s net-zero transition by encouraging greenwashing and eroding investor trust.
Conclusion
India’s climate taxonomy is more than a definitional exercise, it is a governance tool that can determine the credibility of India’s climate finance system. A “living document” is meaningful only if it is kept alive through active review, structured revision, and transparent engagement. By embedding legal coherence, inclusivity, and accountability, India can ensure the taxonomy becomes a reliable foundation for mobilising investments, reducing greenwashing, and achieving its climate goals.
Value Addition
|
- Article 6.4 of the Paris Agreement: Provides a framework for carbon market instruments with legal and editorial review mechanisms; offers a model for India’s taxonomy to ensure transparency, credibility, and alignment with global norms.
- Carbon Market Types:
-
- Compliance Markets: Mandated by law (e.g., EU ETS, upcoming India’s Carbon Credit Trading Scheme).
- Voluntary Markets: Corporate/individual offsetting of emissions beyond legal requirements.
- Green Bonds in India:
-
- First Sovereign Green Bonds issued in 2023 worth ₹16,000 crore.
- Used for renewable energy, clean transport, and climate adaptation projects.
- Support India’s target of net-zero by 2070 and deepen climate finance flows.
|
Mapping Microthemes
- GS Paper II: Governance, public consultation, accountability mechanisms.
- GS Paper III: Climate finance, carbon markets, sustainable development, green bonds, energy efficiency.
- GS Paper IV: Ethical finance, transparency, preventing greenwashing.
Practice Mains Question
India’s draft Climate Finance Taxonomy has been called a “living framework.” Discuss its significance for India’s climate governance and examine the challenges of ensuring credibility, inclusivity, and accountability.
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Why in the News?
On August 12, 2025, The Wire’s editors Siddharth Varadarajan and Karan Thapar were summoned by the Assam Police under Section 152 of the BNS, even as the Supreme Court had that very day issued protection while examining the constitutional validity of the new sedition law. This open defiance of judicial authority and the use of procedurally defective summons marks a serious blow to press freedom. What makes this moment significant is that the law being challenged is wider and harsher than colonial sedition provisions, despite India claiming to have moved away from such colonial baggage.
Introduction
The sedition debate in India has returned in a new form. While Section 124A IPC was suspended in 2022, the government introduced Section 152 of the BNS, which critics say is “sedition by another name.” The law widens state powers and lowers the threshold for prosecution, making legitimate criticism vulnerable to criminalisation. Recent cases against journalists show how easily this provision can be misused.
Section 152 and Its Differences from the Old Sedition Law
- Expanded scope: Goes beyond “disaffection” against government, criminalising acts deemed to endanger sovereignty, unity, and integrity.
- Lower bar for prosecution: Words like “knowingly” dilute intent requirements; mere criticism can be dragged into criminality.
- Colonial continuity: Despite being marketed as decolonisation, Section 152 retains the same suppressive essence as 124A IPC.
The Wire Case and Procedural Violations
- Summons despite SC protection: Assam Police issued notices on the very day of SC’s order, reflecting executive defiance.
- Lack of transparency: Summons omitted FIR dates, details of offence, and copies of FIR, violating BNSS safeguards.
- Political overtones: Linked to The Wire’s report on Operation Sindoor, raising concerns of vendetta-driven policing.
Threats to Press Freedom
- Chilling effect: Journalists may self-censor for fear of harassment.
- Vague definitions: Broad terms like “unity” and “sovereignty” give unchecked power to authorities.
- Targeting dissent: Questioning government policy risks being equated with undermining national integrity.
Judicial Response and Challenges
- Supreme Court scrutiny: SC is examining the constitutional validity of Section 152.
- Precedent of 2022: Earlier suspension of sedition cases showed judicial recognition of misuse.
- Executive overreach: Assam Police’s defiance underlines the need for stronger judicial safeguards and guidelines.
Broader Democratic Implications
- Freedom of expression at stake: Democracy thrives on criticism; silencing it weakens accountability.
- Comparative perspective: UK repealed sedition in 2009; US limits it only to violent overthrow.
- Governance paradox: Instead of transparency, India risks sliding into a majoritarian security state.
Way Forward
- Clear legislative safeguards: Narrow the scope of Section 152 with precise definitions of terms like “unity” and “sovereignty” to prevent misuse.
- Judicial guidelines: The Supreme Court can lay down binding principles (on the lines of Kedar Nath Singh and Shreya Singhal) that limit sedition to cases of direct incitement to violence or armed rebellion
- Independent oversight: A judicial or quasi-judicial body should vet sedition cases before FIR registration, reducing frivolous prosecutions.
- Strengthening press freedom: Institutional mechanisms like a Media Commission or independent ombudsman can address grievances without criminalisation.
- Comparative best practices: India can draw from the UK model of repeal and the US model of narrow application, balancing national security with democratic freedoms.
- Civic education: Promoting awareness among citizens, journalists, and law enforcement about constitutional morality and reasonable restrictions can ensure a culture of restraint and accountability.
Conclusion
Section 152 represents the persistence of colonial-style suppression under a new name. Unless the judiciary firmly strikes it down or introduces robust safeguards, it will continue to erode press freedom and democratic dissent, pillars without which India’s constitutional promise cannot stand strong.
Value Addition
|
Constitutional Angle
- Article 19(1)(a): Freedom of speech.
- Article 19(2): Reasonable restrictions (sovereignty, unity, public order, etc.).
- Basic Structure Doctrine: Democracy, liberty, and rule of law as inviolable.
Judicial Precedents
- Kedar Nath Singh vs State of Bihar (1962): Sedition valid only when incitement to violence/public disorder is proven.
- Shreya Singhal vs Union of India (2015): Vague terms in laws (like IT Act Section 66A) struck down for chilling free speech.
- SC Order 2022: Suspended all 124A cases, acknowledging misuse.
Reports & Perspectives
- Law Commission of India (2018): Recommended clearer safeguards; questioned necessity of sedition.
- Global practices: UK repealed sedition; US restricts it narrowly.
- BNSS debate: Marketed as decolonisation but seen as repackaging colonial control.
|
Mapping Microthemes
- GS Paper II: Freedom of speech, judiciary, Centre-State federalism
- GS Paper III: Internal security vs. dissent.
- GS Paper IV: Misuse of power, ethics in public life, constitutional morality.
PYQ Relevance
[UPSC 2014] What do you understand by the concept “freedom of speech and expression”? Does it cover hate speech also? Why do the films in India stand on a slightly different plane from other forms of expression? Discuss.
Linkage: The 2014 question on freedom of speech, hate speech, and films mirrors today’s debate on Section 152. Just as films face stricter scrutiny due to mass impact, the new sedition law risks wrongly placing legitimate criticism and dissent in the same bracket as hate speech or violent incitement. This makes the boundary of free expression a central issue in both contexts. |
Practice Mains Question
“Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita is sedition in a new form. Discuss in the context of press freedom and democratic governance in India.”
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Introduction
In the 1960s, India was reeling under the threat of famine, dependent on food aid like PL-480 imports from the U.S. It was during this crisis that M.S. Swaminathan, in collaboration with Norman Borlaug and with strong political support from leaders like Lal Bahadur Shastri and C. Subramaniam, spearheaded the Green Revolution. By introducing high-yielding dwarf wheat varieties, India moved from “ship-to-mouth” dependence to food self-sufficiency.
His story is not just about agricultural science, it is about leadership, political will, and atmanirbharta in its truest sense. Today, as India aspires for Viksit Bharat and faces the challenge of climate change, his legacy offers critical lessons.
M.S. Swaminathan in the news today:
- Centenary Year: 2025 marks 100 years since the birth of Swaminathan, celebrated with the release of a biography M.S. Swaminathan: The Man Who Fed India.
- Historical Significance: His leadership in the 1960s achieved food self-sufficiency, India’s most successful experiment in aatmanirbharta.
- Relevance Today: India now faces a new agricultural crisis due to climate change, water stress, and soil degradation, making Swaminathan’s lessons critical for the future.
- Striking Contrast: In the 1960s, India relied on foreign food aid; today, India is a food grain exporter, largely due to the foundation Swaminathan built.
Collaboration and scientific exchange in shaping the Green Revolution
- Cross-fertilisation of ideas: Swaminathan’s initial experiments with radiation-induced mutations failed. A Japanese scientist’s input on dwarf wheat and Norman Borlaug’s Mexican varieties changed the course.
- Networking with global scientists: Swaminathan leveraged his contacts to bring Borlaug’s seeds to India, overcoming bureaucratic hurdles.
- Lesson: Science thrives on openness, collaboration, and reduced bureaucracy, not isolation.
The role of political leadership in Swaminathan’s success
- Direct dialogue with scientists: C. Subramaniam (Agriculture Minister) listened directly to Swaminathan, bypassing bureaucratic resistance.
- Evidence-based decisions: Lal Bahadur Shastri personally visited fields to see the new wheat varieties before approving large-scale imports.
- Leadership support: Indira Gandhi carried forward the momentum after Shastri’s death, ensuring continuity.
- Lesson: Strong political will + scientific advice = transformative policy outcomes.
Challenges and criticisms of the Green Revolution
- Opposition from multiple fronts: Finance Ministry resisted spending ₹5 crore in forex; Planning Commission doubted the seeds; Left parties opposed U.S. connections (Rockefeller Foundation funding).
- Environmental fallout: Excessive water use, soil degradation, and fertilizer dependence became long-term challenges.
- Swaminathan’s foresight: He himself warned against unsustainable practices and advocated for “evergreen revolution”, productivity with sustainability.
Lessons from Swaminathan’s legacy for Viksit Bharat
- Science-Policy Linkages: Scientists must be given autonomy, direct access to policymakers and freedom from bureaucratic bottlenecks.
- R&D Investment: India spends 0.43% of agricultural GDP on R&D, half of China’s share; none of India’s agricultural institutes are in the world’s top 200, while China has eight in the top 10.
- Sustainability: A climate-resilient agriculture strategy is urgent to prevent food insecurity in the era of global warming.
- Atmanirbharta parallel: Just as Swaminathan made India self-sufficient in food, similar investments are needed in the digital economy, AI and green technologies.
Conclusion
M.S. Swaminathan’s work reminds us that nation-building rests on the fusion of science and statesmanship. His Green Revolution made India food-secure, but his vision of an “evergreen revolution”, where productivity meets sustainability, remains unfulfilled. To truly honour him, India must invest in agricultural research, empower scientists, and align policy with long-term sustainability. The man who fed India has left us with not just a legacy but also a roadmap for the future.
Value Addition
|
Key Achievements
- Food Self-Sufficiency: India moved from being a food-deficit, aid-dependent country (“ship-to-mouth”) to self-sufficiency in food grains by the 1970s.
- Wheat Production Boom: From 12 million tonnes (1965), 23 million tonnes (1971), over 100 million tonnes (2020s).
- Avoided Famines: Helped avert large-scale famine during population boom (India’s population doubled between 1950–1980).
- Global Recognition: M.S. Swaminathan + Norman Borlaug collaboration hailed as a model of science-policy partnership.
Criticisms & Limitations
- Regional Imbalance: Benefits concentrated in Punjab, Haryana, Western UP; other states lagged behind.
- Mono-cropping: Focus on wheat and rice discouraged diversification → vulnerability in nutrition and soil health
- Environmental Degradation:
-
- Over-extraction of groundwater → water table crisis in Punjab & Haryana.
- Excessive fertilizer/pesticide use → soil toxicity & health hazards.
- Inequality: Large farmers gained more due to access to credit, irrigation, inputs → widening rural inequality.
- Neglect of Coarse Grains & Pulses: Led to declining production of millets, crucial for nutrition and climate resilience.
Reports & Data
- NITI Aayog (2021): 89% of India’s groundwater used for irrigation → unsustainable.
- FAO Report (2019): Green Revolution improved calorie sufficiency but failed in ensuring nutrition security.
- ICAR Data: Only 0.43% of agricultural GDP is spent on R&D in India vs ~0.86% in China.
Concepts Introduced
- Evergreen Revolution (Swaminathan): Increasing productivity in perpetuity without ecological harm → focus on sustainability.
- Second Green Revolution: Emphasis on pulses, oilseeds, and eastern states under the National Food Security Mission (2007).
- Climate-Resilient Agriculture: Shift towards water-use efficiency, precision farming, and millets revival (2023: International Year of Millets).
Comparative Perspective
- China vs India: China diversified faster into horticulture, aquaculture, and biotech crops; India stayed wheat-rice centric.
- Mexico: Norman Borlaug’s work initially focused there, but India scaled it into a nationwide revolution.
- Africa: “Green Revolution for Africa” attempts underway, but limited success due to weak infrastructure.
|
Mapping Microthemes for GS Papers
- GS Paper I: Post-independence consolidation, Nehruvian vision, famine & food security history.
- GS Paper II: Science-policy interface, role of political leadership, bureaucratic hurdles in governance.
- GS Paper III: Food security, Green Revolution, R&D in agriculture, climate change impact, sustainable agriculture.
- GS Paper IV: Leadership ethics, scientific integrity, foresight (Swaminathan warning about sustainability).
PYQ Relevance
[UPSC 2019] How was India benefited from the contributions of Sir M.Visvesvaraya and Dr. M. S. Swaminathan in the fields of water engineering and agricultural science respectively?
Linkage: Dr. M.S. Swaminathan’s pioneering role in the Green Revolution transformed India from a food-deficit nation into a self-sufficient one, ensuring food security and laying the foundation for agricultural atmanirbharta. |
Practice Mains Question
“The Green Revolution transformed India from a food-deficit nation to a self-sufficient one. Critically evaluate its successes and limitations in light of M.S. Swaminathan’s vision of an evergreen revolution.”
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Why in the News?
The government is considering measures to ensure uniform application of the ‘creamy layer’ condition in OBC reservations across central and state government jobs, public sector enterprises, universities, and autonomous bodies.
About the Concept of Creamy Layer:
- Origin: Emerged from Indra Sawhney vs Union of India (1992); excluded affluent Other Backward Class (OBC) groups from reservations.
- 1993 DoPT Rules: Defined creamy layer – children of Group A/Class I officers, early-promoted officials, Group B parents, senior armed forces, high constitutional functionaries, professionals, traders, and large landowners.
- Income Criteria:
- Ceiling: ₹1 lakh in 1993, revised to ₹8 lakh in 2017.
- Exclusions: Salary and agricultural income not counted.
2004 Clarification & Implementation Issues:
- Clarification: DoPT directed separate assessment of salary and other income (except agriculture).
- Rule: If either exceeded limit (₹2.5 lakh then) for 3 consecutive years → creamy layer.
- Problem: Poor enforcement (2004–14) due to political sensitivities; stricter checks after 2014.
- Impact: Between CSE 2015–23, over 100 OBC caste certificates rejected under new interpretations.
Equivalence Efforts:
- Consultations: Involved Social Justice, Education, Law, Labour Ministries, DoPT, NITI Aayog, NCBC.
- Goal: Standardise creamy layer rules across universities, Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs), and autonomous bodies.
- Proposal: Retrospective relief suggested by Home Minister Amit Shah and NCBC.
Key Proposals Under Consideration:
- University Teachers: Salaries start at Group A-equivalent → children to be creamy layer.
- Autonomous Bodies: Posts aligned with central pay scales.
- Non-Teaching Staff: Categorisation based on equivalence with government jobs.
- PSU Executives: Already included since 2017; those ≤₹8 lakh excluded.
- Aided Institutions: Staff categorised based on parity with govt. employees.
Likely Beneficiaries:
- Lower Govt. Staff: Children of employees earning just above ₹8 lakh gain most.
- Correction of Anomalies: Ensures parity between teachers and aided staff.
- State PSU Issues: Fixes cases like fuel pump attendants in PSUs being declared creamy layer.
- Private Sector: No change; creamy layer based only on income/wealth criteria.
| [UPSC 2023] Consider the following organizations/bodies in India:
1. The National Commission for Backward Classes
2. The National Human Rights Commission
3. The National Law Commission
4. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
How many of the above are constitutional bodies?
Options: (a) Only one *(b) Only two (c) Only three (d) All four |
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Why in the News?
The Opposition (INDI Alliance bloc) is considering moving a motion of removal of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) in Parliament.
About Election Commission of India (ECI):
- Establishment: Permanent constitutional body set up on 25 January 1950 (National Voters Day).
- Constitutional Basis: Articles 324–329, Part XV of the Constitution.
- Mandate: Conducts elections to Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, State Legislative Assemblies, and the offices of President and Vice President.
- Structure: Since 1993, functions as a three-member body with Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and two Election Commissioners.
- Status of CEC: Same salary, status, and perks as a judge of the Supreme Court of India.
Appointment to ECI:
- Law: Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023 (replaced 1991 Act).
- Appointing Authority: President of India.
- Selection Committee: Prime Minister (Chairperson), Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha, and a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister.
- Eligibility: Must have served as a Secretary-level officer in Government of India with proven integrity and election management experience.
- Tenure: 6 years or until 65 years of age, whichever is earlier.
Removal:
- CEC: Removed like a Supreme Court judge (Article 324(5)) on grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity. Requires a motion passed by two-thirds majority in both Houses of Parliament and Presidential order.
- Other Election Commissioners: Removed only on recommendation of the Chief Election Commissioner.
| [UPSC 2012] Consider the following statements with reference to India:
1. The Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners enjoy equal powers but receive unequal salaries
2. The Chief Election Commissioner is entitled to the same salary as in provided to a judge of the Supreme Court
3. The Chief Election Commissioner shall not be removed from his office except in like manner and on like grounds as a judge of the Supreme Court
4. The term of office of the Election Commissioner is five years from the date he assumes his office or till the day he attains the age of 62 years, whichever is earlier
Which of these statements are correct?
Options: (a) 1 and 2 (b) 2 and 3* (c) 1 and 4 (d) 2 and 4 |
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Why in the News?
The Union Minister of State for the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution has provided crucial information regarding the Anna-Chakra Tool to the Parliament.
About Anna-Chakra:
- Purpose: Digital tool to optimise supply chain of the Public Distribution System (PDS).
- Developed by: World Food Programme (WFP) and Foundation for Innovation and Technology Transfer (IIT-Delhi).
- Implementation: Adopted in 30 States/UTs, except Manipur.
- Coverage: Supports 4.37 lakh Fair Price Shops and 6,700 warehouses.
- Savings: Reduces logistics/fuel costs, saving about ₹250 crore annually.
- Environmental Impact: Route optimisation reduces travel distance by 15–50%, cutting CO₂ emissions.
Back2Basics: Public Distribution System (PDS) in India:
- Objective: Provides subsidised food grains to poor households, ensuring food security.
- History: Originated in inter-war years; expanded after 1960s food shortages.
- Reforms: Revamped PDS (1992) extended coverage to rural and poverty-prone areas.
- Structure:
- Centre (FCI) – procurement, storage, transportation, bulk allocation.
- States – distribute food grains to families via Fair Price Shops.
- Coverage: Serves ~800 million people through 5 lakh+ Fair Price Shops.
- Items Distributed: Wheat, rice, sugar, kerosene; some states add pulses and oils.
- Significance: Shields poor households from food price shocks and economic distress.
|
| [UPSC 2008] Consider the following statements:
1. Regarding the procurement of food grains, Government of India follows a procurement target rather than an open-ended procurement policy.
2. Government of India announces minimum support prices only for cereals.
3. For distribution under Targeted Public Distribution System (TPDS), wheat and rice are issued by the Government of India at uniform Central issue prices to the States/Union Territories.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?”
Options: (a) 1 and 2 (b) 2 only (c) 1 and 3* (d) 3 only |
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Why in the News?
SEBI has released a consultation paper proposing changes in Minimum Public Shareholding (MPS) and Minimum Public Offer (MPO) norms for listed companies.
What is Minimum Public Offer (MPO)?
- Meaning: When a company launches an Initial Public Offer (IPO), it must sell a minimum number of shares to the public.
- Analogy: Like a new shop ensuring enough goods are displayed for customers — otherwise trading is thin and controlled by a few.
|
What is Minimum Public Shareholding (MPS)?
- Concept: A company is like a cake. Promoters (founders/owners) usually keep most of it, but SEBI mandates at least 25% must be shared/sold with the public.
- Purpose:
- Broader ownership and participation.
- Fairer prices by reducing manipulation.
- Greater accountability of companies.
What SEBI is proposing?
- Flexibility: Large companies find it difficult to release big chunks of shares at once; rules will be eased.
- Extended Timelines:
- Companies valued at ₹50,000–1,00,000 crore now get up to 10 years (instead of 5) to meet 25% MPS.
- They must reach 15% in 5 years first, then 25% in 10 years.
- Reduced Burden: For very large companies, the initial Minimum Public Offer (MPO) will be lowered.
Significance of the Move:
- Market Stability: Selling too many shares too quickly is like flooding the market — prices may fall even if the company is strong.
- Benefits:
- More big companies will list in India.
- Investors can enter gradually without sudden shocks.
- Encourages fund-raising while maintaining fair trading.
| [UPSC 2024] Consider the following statements:
I. India accounts for a very large portion of all equity option contracts traded globally, thus exhibiting a great boom.
II. India’s stock market has grown rapidly in the recent past, even overtaking Hong Kong’s at some point in time.
III. There is no regulatory body either to warn small investors about the risks of options trading or to act on unregistered financial advisors in this regard.
Which of the statements given above are correct?”
Options: (a) I and II only * (b) II and III only (c) I and III only (d) I, II and III |
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Why in the News?
This newscard is an excerpt from the article originally published in The Hindu.
Who was Henry Vivian Louis Derozio?
- Birth–Death: Born 1809, died- 22 in 1831; Indo-Portuguese origin.
- Identity: Radical thinker, poet, and educator in British India.
- Recognition: Called the first national poet of modern India; pioneer of Anglo-Indian poetry.
- Influences: Inspired by Enlightenment ideals and the French Revolution.
- Career: Became lecturer at Hindu College, Calcutta in 1826 at just 17.
- Role: Inspired students with rationalism, liberty, and free thought.
- Writings: Poems (1827), The Fakeer of Jungheera (1828), and To India – My Native Land (first modern patriotic poem in English).
- Themes: Expressed India’s decline with images of a caged eagle and a broken instrument; advocated freedom and abolition of slavery.
- Dismissal: Removed from Hindu College in 1831 on charges of spreading atheism.
The Young Bengal Movement:
- Formation: Radical group of his students, also called Derozians.
- Association: Founded the Academic Association, debating social and political reform.
- Ideals: Advocated rationalism, women’s rights, freedom of thought; opposed caste, superstition, idolatry.
- Political Role: In 1843, with George Thompson, formed India’s first political party – Bengal British India Society.
- Notable Member: Radhanath Sikdar, mathematician who first calculated Mount Everest’s height and openly resisted colonial injustices.
- Perception: Described by missionary Alexander Duff as a “new race of men”; historian Rosinka Chaudhuri called them India’s “first radicals.”
- Legacy and Intellectual Impact:
-
- Awakening: Though short-lived, the movement sparked Bengal’s intellectual revolution.
- Seeds of Reform: Laid foundation for later reformist and nationalist currents.
- Independence of Mind: Marked a sharp break from Macaulay’s vision of Anglicised Indians — Derozians were assertive and original.
| [UPSC 2021] Who among the following was associated as Secretary with Hindu Female School which later came to be known as Bethune Female School?
Options: (a) Annie Besant (b) Debendranath Tagore (c) Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar * (d) Sarojini Naidu |
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Why in the News?
A 2025 survey by the West Bengal Forest Department shows an increase in saltwater crocodile population in the Sundarbans Biosphere Reserve (SBR).
About Saltwater Crocodile (Crocodylus porosus):
- Largest living reptile and the largest of all crocodilians.
- Males grow much larger than females; females usually 2.5–3 m in length.
- Habitat: mangrove forests, swamps, rivers, and coastal waters; tolerant of varying salinity.
- Distribution in India: Odisha, West Bengal (Sundarbans), Andaman & Nicobar Islands.
- Behaviour: Apex predator, feeds on carcasses and diverse prey; communicates through barks, hisses, growls, chirps.
- Conservation Status:
- IUCN Red List: Least Concern.
- CITES: Appendix I (except populations of Australia, Indonesia, PNG → Appendix II).
- Wildlife Protection Act (1972): Schedule I.
- Conservation Efforts: Bhagabatpur Crocodile Project (1976, West Bengal) – breeding and conservation programme; 577 crocodiles released till 2022.
Other Crocodile Species in India:
- Gharial: Critically Endangered; survives in only 2% of former range; Found in small stretches of Chambal and a few other rivers.
- Mugger/Marsh Crocodile: Vulnerable; found in freshwater lakes, rivers, marshes.
|
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Why in the News?
The Union Home Minister is set to introduce three bills in the Lok Sabha to provide legal framework for removal of the Prime Minister, Union Ministers, Chief Ministers and Ministers in States and UTs who are “arrested and detained in custody on account of serious criminal charges.”
Which are the three Bills?
- 130th Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2025 (discussed below)
- Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, 2025 – Provides clarity on removal of CM and Ministers in J&K.
- Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill, 2025 – Defines similar provisions for Puducherry and other UTs.
About the 130th Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2025:
- Scope: Applies to Prime Minister, Chief Ministers, and Ministers at Union, State, and Union Territory levels.
- Grounds for Removal: Arrest and detention for 30 consecutive days for an offense punishable by five years or more.
- Reappointment: Possible after release from custody.
- Objective: Prevent prolonged tenure of arrested leaders in office (e.g., recent case involving Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal).
Amendments proposed to the following Articles:
|
Current Provision |
Limitation |
Changes Proposed |
| Article 75 (Union – PM & Union Ministers) |
PM appointed by President; Ministers appointed on PM’s advice. They hold office during the pleasure of the President. Removal is political (loss of confidence, resignation, dismissal). |
No explicit mechanism to remove PM/Ministers if detained/arrested for long periods. |
New provision: If PM or any Union Minister is detained in custody for 30 consecutive days for a serious offense (≥5 years punishment), they must resign by 31st day or automatically cease to hold office. They may be reappointed after release. |
| Article 164 (States – CM & State Ministers) |
CM appointed by Governor; Ministers appointed on CM’s advice. They hold office during the pleasure of the Governor. Council of Ministers collectively responsible to State Assembly. |
No clear rule for automatic removal if CM/Ministers remain in custody. |
Similar to Union level: If CM or Minister is detained in custody for 30 consecutive days under serious charges (≥5 years punishment), they automatically lose office. Reappointment allowed after release. |
| Article 239AA (Union Territory of Delhi – CM & Ministers) |
Special status for Delhi (NCT). CM and Council of Ministers aid & advise LG. They hold office as per political responsibility to the Assembly. |
No explicit provision for automatic removal on detention. |
A new Section 5A to be inserted: CM/Ministers of NCT of Delhi cease office if detained for 30 days under serious charges (≥5 years). Reappointment possible after release. |
Rationale and Significance:
- At present, the Constitution has no provision for automatic removal of ministers in custody.
- Bill ensures that office bearers uphold public trust and do not undermine governance during detention.
- The statement of objects emphasized that elected representatives must rise above political interests and maintain conduct beyond suspicion.
- Promotes integrity of democracy by aligning ministerial positions with constitutional morality and accountability.
| [UPSC 2020] Consider the following statements:
1. According to the Constitution of India, a person who is eligible to vote can be made a minister in a State for six months even if he/she is not a member of the Legislature of that State.
2. According to the Representation of People Act, 1951, a person convicted of a criminal offence and sentenced to imprisonment for five years is permanently disqualified from contesting an election even after his release from prison.
Options: (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2* |
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
