💥UPSC 2026, 2027 UAP Mentorship September Batch
Talk to Mentor

Archives: News

Bills/Act/LawsDOMREthicsExplainedHistorical SitesIOCRop-ed snapPIBPlaces in newsPrelims OnlySC JudgementsSchemesSpeciesStatesworld map
October 2025
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Goods and Services Tax (GST)

[5th September 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: GST 2.0 is a landmark in India’s Tax Journey

op-ed snap | Economics | Mains Paper 3: Indian Economy

PYQ Relevance

[UPSC 2020] Explain the rationale behind the Goods and Services Tax (Compensation to States) Act of 2017. How has COVID-19 impacted the GST compensation fund and created new federal tensions?

Linkage: The GST (Compensation to States) Act, 2017 was meant to assure states of revenue stability post-GST rollout, but COVID-19 strained the fund, creating federal tensions over delayed compensation. In contrast, GST 2.0 reflects cooperative federalism, with consensus on slab rationalisation, inverted duty correction, and GSTAT. This marks a shift from fiscal disputes to collaborative reform, strengthening trust in India’s tax federalism.

Mentor’s Comment

The 56th meeting of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Council has ushered in a decisive set of reforms, marking a new chapter in India’s fiscal federalism. By moving towards a simplified two-rate structure and addressing long-standing distortions, GST 2.0 promises to reshape consumption patterns, boost competitiveness, and build a fairer system. For UPSC aspirants, this development offers lessons on economic governance, cooperative federalism, social security, and inclusive growth.

Introduction

The 56th GST Council meeting (September 3, 2025) has been hailed as a watershed in India’s taxation history. For the first time since the rollout of GST in 2017, the complex multi-slab structure has been significantly rationalised. The new structure introduces just two core slabs, 18% (Standard Rate) and 5% (Merit Rate), with a 40% demerit rate for a few goods, while several essentials are exempt. These reforms are not limited to technical tax changes; they are a “people’s reform” with direct impact on households, farmers, industries, and the healthcare sector.

The significance of GST 2.0 reforms

  1. Historic simplification: Earlier GST had 5%, 12%, 18%, and 28% slabs. The new 2-rate system with exemptions marks the biggest simplification since 2017.
  2. People-centric relief: Daily-use goods like soap, shampoo, bicycles, and kitchenware now taxed at 5%; essentials like milk, paneer, parathas exempt. This makes taxation citizen-friendly.
  3. Social security boost: All life and health insurance products are exempted from GST for the first time, improving affordability and raising insurance penetration.
  4. Correcting distortions: Long-pending inverted duty structures, particularly in textiles and fertilizers, have been corrected.
  5. Institutional strengthening: The announcement of GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) by year-end promises faster dispute resolution.

Impact of reforms on households and social security

  1. Cheaper essentials: Items like soap, shampoo, toothpaste, bicycles, and kitchenware moved to the 5% slab.
  2. Exemptions on food: UHT milk, paneer, chapatis, and parathas exempt, easing burden on middle and low-income families.
  3. Insurance relief: GST exemption on life and health insurance makes coverage accessible to senior citizens and low-income groups.
  4. Healthcare affordability: Cancer drugs, medicines for rare diseases, and critical devices made cheaper through exemptions and cuts.

Benefits of GST 2.0 for farmers and rural India

  1. Lower cultivation cost: Fertilisers, sulphuric acid, and ammonia shifted from 18% to 5%.
  2. Cheaper farm equipment: Tractors and machinery brought to 5% slab, improving productivity and rural income.
  3. Structural correction: By rationalising inputs and outputs, GST 2.0 reduces price distortions and supports agricultural sustainability.

Implications for industries and employment

  1. Labour-intensive sectors: Handicrafts, marble, granite, and leather goods get rate reductions, boosting employment.
  2. Textile competitiveness: GST on man-made fibres and yarn reduced to 5%, resolving a major inverted duty issue. This is expected to improve exports and domestic value-addition.
  3. Infrastructure multiplier: Cement rate cut from 28% to 18% to spur housing and infrastructure.
  4. Green economy boost: Cuts on renewable energy devices and auto components support sustainable growth.

Institutional reforms under GST 2.0

  1. Operationalisation of GSTAT: To be functional by year-end, ensuring quicker dispute resolution and taxpayer confidence.
  2. Process reforms: Provisional refunds for inverted duty structures, risk-based compliance, and harmonised valuation rules reduce business uncertainty.
  3. Ease of doing business: These reforms align India’s tax system with global best practices and make compliance less cumbersome.

Phased rollout and implementation strategy

  1. Gradual rollout: Effective from September 22, 2025, reforms are phased to balance fiscal stability and consumer benefits.
  2. Revenue neutrality: Phasing prevents sudden fiscal shocks while stimulating demand and investment.
  3. Stakeholder partnership: Council’s decisions reflect responsiveness to industry, consumers, and state governments.

Conclusion

GST 2.0 represents not just a fiscal reform but a societal shift. By rationalising slabs, correcting distortions, and easing compliance, it strengthens the foundation for a Viksit Bharat 2047. The reforms are inclusive, covering farmers, workers, households, and industries alike, while building institutions like GSTAT. The success of these reforms will ultimately depend on smooth implementation and sustained cooperative federalism.

Value Addition

Economic Reforms: GST 2.0 and Global Best Practices

Two-rate model adoption: GST 2.0 moves from a complex four-slab structure (5%, 12%, 18%, 28%) to a simplified two-rate system (5% Merit Rate and 18% Standard Rate), with a 40% demerit rate for select goods. This mirrors global practices where most advanced economies prefer fewer slabs for simplicity.

International parallels:

  1. Canada follows a dual rate Goods and Services Tax/Harmonized Sales Tax model, with exemptions for essentials like food and healthcare.
  2. Australia operates a uniform GST at 10% but exempts basic food, health, and education, similar in spirit to India’s exemptions on milk, paneer, chapati, and healthcare.
  3. Singapore maintains a single GST rate (currently 9%) with targeted exemptions.

Benefits of convergence:

  1. Ease of compliance: Fewer slabs reduce classification disputes and litigation.
  2. Predictability for businesses: Encourages investment by aligning India’s tax structure with global investors’ expectations.
  3. Revenue neutrality with inclusivity: Exemptions for essentials ensure equity while maintaining fiscal stability.

Reform trajectory: GST 2.0 represents a shift towards global standards without fully copying them, adapting the model to India’s socio-economic realities — balancing growth, inclusion, and fiscal prudence.

 

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Freedom of Speech – Defamation, Sedition, etc.

Should Commercial speech on digital platform be regulated

Explained | Governance | Mains Paper 2: Governance, Transparency & Accountability, Citizens Charters

Introduction

On August 25, 2025, the Supreme Court of India asked the Union government to frame guidelines for regulating social media content, noting that influencers often commercialise speech in ways that offend vulnerable groups. The case arose from derogatory remarks made by comedians about persons with Spinal Muscular Atrophy. While well-intentioned, the order has raised concerns about overregulation of free speech.

Why in the news

The Supreme Court of India’s intervention is significant because it directs the executive to draft specific rules for social media despite existing laws such as the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act) already providing mechanisms. For the first time, the Court has nudged the government toward formal regulation triggered by a single incident, raising alarms of censorship and judicial overreach.

The presence or absence of a regulatory vacuum

  1. Existing provisions: FIRs can be filed under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Information Technology Act, 2000. The IT Act already empowers courts or the executive to order takedowns.
  2. Opaque enforcement: Takedowns often occur without notifying the affected individual, undermining natural justice.
  3. Critics’ view: No regulatory vacuum exists; additional rules may be an overreaction to a single case.

The question of dignity as a ground for restricting free speech

  1. Constitutional limits: Article 19(2) of the Constitution of India exhaustively lists permissible restrictions, security of the state, public order, decency, morality, etc. Dignity is not among them.
  2. Judicial precedents: In Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India (2016), the Supreme Court of India upheld criminal defamation, indirectly protecting individual dignity, but did not treat dignity as an independent ground.
  3. Slippery slope risk: Recognising dignity as a separate basis for restriction could legitimise expansive censorship.

The risk of silencing uncomfortable speech

  1. Chilling effect: Overbroad regulations may deter comedians, satirists, and artists from bold expression.
  2. Supreme Court stance: In March 2025, in Imran Pratapgadhi v. State of Gujarat, the Court quashed charges against a Member of Parliament, reaffirming that Article 19(1)(a) protects even disturbing or offensive views.
  3. Censorship creep: Proposals like the Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill may expand state control over independent creators.

The place of commercial speech in free expression

  1. Judicial recognition: In Sakal Papers Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (1962) and Tata Press Ltd. v. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited (1995), the Supreme Court of India affirmed that commercial speech falls under Article 19(1)(a).
  2. Commerce and speech: Just as newspapers rely on advertisements, comedians and influencers rely on monetisation. Profit motive does not make speech less deserving of protection.
  3. Criticism: Comedy and satire do not neatly fall into the narrow category of “commercial speech,” traditionally reserved for advertisements.

Judicial polyvocality and consistency of precedent

  1. Court’s nature: Divergent views are part of common law, but binding precedent ensures continuity.
  2. Problem here: Directing the executive to draft rules risks giving regulations undue legitimacy and making constitutional challenges harder.
  3. Judicial discipline: When coordinate Benches depart from earlier rulings, proper procedure is referral to a larger Bench.

Safeguards needed in future regulations

  1. Transparent review: Any regulation must ensure robust review mechanisms and fairness in takedown procedures.
  2. Broad consultation: Stakeholder engagement should extend beyond industry associations to include civil society and affected communities.
  3. Opacity concerns: Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and its rules (2009) are already opaque; future regulations must not repeat these flaws.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s intention to protect dignity is laudable, but creating fresh regulations risks undermining the freedom of expression. India already has legal frameworks to tackle offensive content. Expanding restrictions based on vague concepts like dignity may lead to excessive censorship, weaken democratic discourse, and erode artistic freedom.

Value Addition

Social Media Regulation in India

Existing legal framework:

  1. Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act) – Section 69A empowers the government to block content in the interest of sovereignty, security, or public order.
  2. Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 – impose obligations on intermediaries (traceability, grievance redressal, content takedown within 24 hours).
  3. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) – contains provisions criminalising hate speech, obscenity, and defamation.

Judicial interventions:

  1. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) – struck down Section 66A of the IT Act for being vague and unconstitutional.
  2. Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India (2016) – upheld criminal defamation, linking dignity and reputation to Article 21.
  3. Concerns: Opaque takedown orders, executive overreach, limited transparency, chilling effect on creators.

Comparative Global Perspective

  • European Union (EU):
    • Digital Services Act (DSA), 2022 – imposes strict obligations on platforms to remove illegal content, ensures algorithmic transparency, and penalises non-compliance heavily.
    • Focus on user rights, platform accountability, and transparency reports.
  • United States:
    • Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, 1996 – grants platforms immunity for third-party content but allows them to moderate in “good faith.”
    • Debate ongoing about reforming Section 230 to tackle misinformation and hate speech.
  • United Kingdom: Online Safety Act, 2023 – places a “duty of care” on platforms to protect children and curb illegal content.
  • Australia: Online Safety Act, 2021 – empowers the eSafety Commissioner to order removal of harmful content (cyberbullying, image-based abuse, terrorist material).
  • China: Heavily restrictive model – extensive censorship, mandatory real-name verification, and state monitoring of digital platforms.
  • Global South: Many countries (e.g., Nigeria, Pakistan) have passed restrictive social media laws under the pretext of national security, raising concerns about authoritarian misuse.

International Bodies and Global Norms

  • United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC): Stresses that restrictions on online speech must comply with Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) – legality, necessity, and proportionality.
  • UNESCO: Advocates for a multi-stakeholder approach to digital governance, focusing on protecting human rights, access to information, and pluralism.
  • OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development): Encourages transparency and accountability frameworks for digital platforms.
  • Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT): A tech industry-led initiative to remove extremist content online.

Good Examples

  • Germany: Network Enforcement Act (NetzDG), 2017 – requires platforms to remove “manifestly unlawful” content (hate speech, fake news) within 24 hours. Criticised for overblocking but effective in quick takedowns.
  • France: Passed “Avia Law” (2020) against online hate but was struck down by the Constitutional Council for disproportionate restrictions. Illustrates the tension between free speech and regulation.
  • EU’s GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) indirectly regulates platforms by holding them accountable for data privacy and targeted advertising.

Way Forward for India

  • Principle-based framework: Regulations should follow constitutional safeguards (Article 19(2)), ensure proportionality, and avoid vague categories like “dignity.”
  • Transparency and due process: Mandatory publication of takedown orders, notice to affected parties, and avenues for appeal.
  • Independent oversight: Instead of executive dominance, an independent regulator (like an ombudsman or tribunal) could review takedown requests.
  • Stakeholder-driven approach: Consultation must involve civil society, creators, tech companies, and vulnerable communities.
  • Digital literacy: Public campaigns to counter hate speech and misinformation organically, rather than relying solely on punitive regulation.
  • Learning from global practices: India could adapt elements of the EU’s Digital Services Act (transparency), US’s Section 230 immunity, and Australia’s safety-first approach, while avoiding China’s over-control.

UPSC Relevance

[UPSC 2013] Discuss Section 66A of IT Act, with reference to its alleged violation of Article 19 of the Constitution.

Linkage: Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 was struck down in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) for being vague and violating Article 19(1)(a) beyond the limits of Article 19(2). The present debate on regulating commercial speech on digital platforms raises a similar concern, as introducing “dignity” as a restriction risks the same arbitrariness. Both highlight the constitutional need for clear, proportionate, and narrowly defined limits on free speech in India.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Foreign Policy Watch: India-China

India-China: the making of a border

Explained | International Relations | Mains Paper 2: India & Its Neighborhood - Relations

Introduction

The India–China boundary, stretching for about 3,488 km, is one of the longest disputed borders in the world. Unlike clearly demarcated international frontiers, this boundary runs through the Himalayas and remains unsettled in large parts. The two major areas of dispute are Aksai Chin in the western sector, occupied by China but claimed by India, and Arunachal Pradesh (particularly the Tawang tract) in the eastern sector, claimed by China but under Indian control. Rooted in the legacies of the British and Manchu empires, the boundary was never precisely defined. After independence, India relied on British-era maps while China pressed for historical and strategic claims. This divergence led to the 1962 war and continues to shape relations between the two Asian powers.

Why the India–China border issue matters

The unresolved India–China border remains a major geopolitical challenge in Asia. Unlike other international boundaries, this border runs through inhospitable Himalayan terrain where neither country historically maintained a permanent presence. The 1962 war, following India’s rejection of Chinese proposals, left scars of mistrust. Later attempts, such as Rajiv Gandhi’s 1988 Beijing visit, restored engagement but not resolution. The dispute is about sovereignty, strategy, and national prestige, making it a flashpoint with global implications.

The imperial legacy and a contested border

  1. Colonial inheritance: The India–China border was a product of the British and Manchu empires, drawn imprecisely through the Himalayas.
  2. Absence of settlement: After independence, India relied on colonial maps and dismissed Chinese calls for negotiations.
  3. Strategic miscalculation: India’s faith in maps was not supported by control on the ground, leaving space for China’s proactive steps in Aksai Chin.

The emergence of conflict in Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh

  1. Chinese presence in Aksai Chin: China constructed a highway from Xinjiang to Tibet through Aksai Chin, asserting de facto control.
  2. Indian assertion in Tawang: India occupied Tawang citing the 1914 Simla Convention and the McMahon Line signed with an independent Tibet.
  3. Proposals for compromise: In 1959, Beijing suggested a Line of Actual Control (LAC) with a 20 km troop pullback; in 1960, Zhou Enlai proposed a swap—Aksai Chin for Arunachal recognition.
  4. Breakdown and war: India rejected these offers; attempts to reclaim Aksai Chin triggered the 1962 war, where India lost ground in Ladakh but retained the McMahon Line in the east.

Post-war developments and early engagement

  1. Dormancy period: After 1962, both sides avoided border contact for more than a decade.
  2. China Study Group: In 1975, India formed this high-level body to map the border with satellite imagery and direct patrolling.
  3. Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s outreach: In 1979, Vajpayee visited Beijing, the first senior Indian leader to do so since 1962, initiating cautious normalisation.
  4. Revival of Chinese proposals: Deng Xiaoping in 1980 reiterated Zhou’s swap idea, but India, led by Indira Gandhi, rejected it due to mistrust.

The stalemate in negotiations during the 1980s

  1. Unproductive talks: From 1981, both sides engaged in negotiations—India sought sector-wise talks, while China insisted on a package deal.
  2. Demand for Tawang: By 1985, Beijing linked concessions in Ladakh with Indian concessions over Tawang, central to China’s Tibet policy.
  3. Operation Falcon: In 1986, India forward-deployed troops at Namka Chu, displaying improved military preparedness since 1962.
  4. De-escalation: Both sides eventually pulled back, but the demand for Tawang revealed fundamental divergence.

Rajiv Gandhi’s 1988 visit and a new framework

  1. Strategic reset: Rajiv Gandhi’s visit to Beijing marked a shift from linking normalisation to border resolution.
  2. Framework for dialogue: Both sides agreed to restore relations while deferring the border issue to a Joint Working Group (JWG).
  3. Principle of accommodation: Premier Li Peng emphasised “mutual understanding and mutual accommodation (MUMA),” while Gandhi sought a “fair and reasonable” settlement.
  4. Peace as priority: Peace and tranquillity were prioritised, enabling cooperation in other fields despite the unsettled boundary.

Conclusion

The India–China border dispute is a story of missed chances, mistrust, and strategic recalibration. From Aksai Chin to Tawang, an imperial legacy evolved into a sovereignty dilemma. While Deng Xiaoping and Rajiv Gandhi shifted the relationship towards peace, fundamental differences endure. History shows that strategic patience, military preparedness, and calibrated diplomacy remain the keys to managing this difficult relationship.

Value Addition

Institutional Mechanisms

  1. China Study Group (1975): Established by India to monitor the border with satellite mapping and patrolling points.
  2. Joint Working Group (1988): Created after Rajiv Gandhi’s visit to sustain structured dialogue on the boundary issue.
  3. Later confidence-building agreements (1993, 1996, 2005): Though not in this article, they flowed from this trajectory and institutionalised border management.

Policy Evolution

  1. Jawaharlal Nehru: Over-reliance on colonial maps and dismissal of negotiations.
  2. Atal Bihari Vajpayee: Cautious outreach to normalise ties in 1979 despite tensions.
  3. Indira Gandhi: Strong mistrust post-1962, refusal to accept “territorial swaps.”
  4. Rajiv Gandhi: Pragmatic reset in 1988, separating normalisation from boundary resolution.

Line of Actual Control (LAC)

  1. Definition: The de facto boundary separating Indian and Chinese forces, first formally acknowledged in 1959 by China.
  2. Nature: Not mutually agreed or demarcated on the ground, leading to “differing perceptions.”
  3. Relevance: Key to understanding recurring standoffs such as Galwan (2020), though beyond this article’s timeframe.

Case Study Relevance

  1. Aksai Chin: Illustrates how geography and strategic imperatives (road connectivity to Tibet) drive China’s claims.
  2. Tawang: Demonstrates cultural and religious dimensions (Tibetan Buddhism, Dalai Lama’s birthplace links).
  3. Operation Falcon (1986): A case study in how improved military readiness altered China’s calculus.
  4. Rajiv Gandhi’s 1988 visit: A model of pragmatic diplomacy—normalisation without immediate resolution.

Way Forward

  1. Institutional strengthening: Reviving and empowering mechanisms like the Joint Working Group and Special Representatives dialogue.
  2. Confidence-building: Expanding agreements on patrolling norms, hotlines, and disengagement to avoid clashes.
  3. Strategic balance: Maintaining military preparedness (as shown in Operation Falcon) while keeping diplomacy open.
  4. Engagement beyond the border: Deepening cooperation in trade, technology, and multilateral forums to build trust.
  5. Mutual accommodation: Drawing from Deng Xiaoping and Rajiv Gandhi’s vision of a “fair, reasonable, mutually acceptable” settlement to guide long-term resolution.

PYQ Relevance

[UPSC 2017] ‘China is using its economic relations and positive trade surplus as tools to develop potential military power status in Asia’, In the light of this statement, discuss its impact on India as her neighbor.

Linkage: China’s occupation of Aksai Chin and insistence on Tawang show how strategic control is tied to economic leverage, such as road connectivity and infrastructure. Its trade surplus with India fuels military modernisation along the Line of Actual Control (LAC). For India, this creates a dual challenge of managing unresolved borders while countering China’s economic–military power projection in Asia.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Tribes in News

Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTGs)

Prelims Only | Indian Society | Mains Paper 1: Population & Associated Issues

Why in the News?

The Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) has written to the Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India (RGI) to enumerate PVTGs separately in Census 2027.

Who are the PVTGs?

  • Overview: Sub-category of Scheduled Tribes (STs) marked by stagnant or declining population, geographical isolation, pre-agrarian subsistence, economic backwardness, and very low literacy.
  • Origin: Concept recommended by the Dhebar Commission (1960–61) noting inequalities among STs.
  • Historical Evolution:
    • Fourth Five-Year Plan (1969–74): creation of Primitive Tribal Groups (PTGs).
    • Fifth Five-Year Plan (1974–79): 52 groups identified.
    • 2006: PTGs renamed as PVTGs.
  • Present Status: 75 PVTGs recognized across 18 states and 1 UT (Andaman & Nicobar Islands).
  • Characteristics: Small numbers, remote habitation, pre-agricultural practices, hunting and gathering reliance, and in some cases zero or negative population growth.

Enumeration and Population Estimates:

  • 2011 Census Status: PVTGs were NOT separately enumerated, counted under the broader ST category.
  • Special Cases:
    • 2011 Census: Baigas counted separately, while Abujh Marias, Bharias, Hill Korbas, Kamars subsumed under STs.
    • 2013: Abujh Maria and Hill Korba explicitly added to Chhattisgarh’s ST list via legislation.
  • Recent Estimates: 2023 PM JANMAN survey estimated the population at 47.5 lakh.
    • Madhya Pradesh: 13.22 lakh (highest).
    • Maharashtra: about 6.7 lakh.
    • Andhra Pradesh: about 5.18 lakh.
  • Largest and Smallest:
    • Largest: Baiga of Madhya Pradesh with about 4.14 lakh.
    • Smallest: Sentinelese of Andaman & Nicobar Islands with just 15 individuals.
  • Micro Groups: In 2011, 13 PVTGs had populations below 1,000 including Jarawa, Onge, Sentinelese, Shompen (A&N Islands), Raji (Uttarakhand), Kota (Tamil Nadu), Birhor (Odisha/Bihar), Kamar (Madhya Pradesh), and others.
[UPSC 2019] Consider the following statements about Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTGs) in India:

1. PVTGs reside in 18 States and one Union Territory.

2. A stagnant or declining population is one of the criteria for determining PVTG status.

3. There are 95 PVTGs officially notified in the country so far.

4. Irular and Konda Reddi tribes are included in the list of PVTGs.

Which of the statements given above are correct?

Options: (a) 1, 2 and 3 (b) 2, 3 and 4 (c) 1, 2 and 4* (d) 1, 3 and 4

 

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Foreign Policy Watch: India-ASEAN

In news: Strait of Malacca

Prelims Only | International Relations | Mains Paper 2: India & Its Neighborhood - Relations

Why in the News?

Singapore’s PM has acknowledged India’s intent to join the Malacca Straits Patrol (currently undertaken by Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, and Singapore).

In news: Strait of Malacca

About Strait of Malacca:

  • Location: Narrow waterway in Southeast Asia, between the Malay Peninsula (northeast) and Sumatra, Indonesia (southwest).
  • Length & Width: Extends about 800–900 km; width varies from 65 km in the south to 250 km in the north.
  • Depth: The southern end is narrow and shallow, usually less than 37 m deep, posing navigational challenges.
  • Geological Setting: Part of the Sunda Shelf formation, created after post-glacial sea level rise around 2.6 million years ago.
  • Key Ports: Hosts major hubs like Singapore, Port Klang, Penang, and Melaka, making it one of the busiest shipping lanes globally.

Strategic and Economic Importance:

  • Global Chokepoint: Links the Indian Ocean (Andaman Sea) with the Pacific Ocean (South China Sea), forming a vital maritime chokepoint.
  • Trade Corridor: The shortest sea route between the Middle East/Africa and East Asia, critical for global commerce.
  • Volume of Trade: Handles about 60% of world maritime trade, including large-scale oil shipments from the Middle East to China, Japan, and Southeast Asia.
  • Economic Impact: Any disruption could severely affect supply chains and energy security worldwide.
  • Geopolitical Significance: Attracts competing interests of India, China, the US, and ASEAN states, making it a hotspot for regional and global strategic rivalry.
[UPSC 2010] Which one of the following can one come across if one travels through the Strait of Malacca ?

Options: (a) Bali (b) Brunei (c) Java (d) Singapore*

 

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Centre approves creation of ‘Environment Auditors’

Prelims Only | Enviro & Biodiversity | Mains Paper 3: Conservation, Environmental Pollution & Degradation, Eia

Why in the News?

The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) has introduced the Environment Audit Rules, 2025, creating an independent class of Environment Auditors.

Who are the Environment Auditors?

  • Overview: Independent, certified professionals comparable to Chartered Accountants, but for environmental compliance.
  • Accreditation: Certification and registration granted by the Environment Audit Designated Agency (EADA).
  • Responsibilities:
    • Ensure compliance across environmental domains.
    • Conduct project audits and assess performance.
    • Collect and analyze environmental samples.
    • Verify self-reported project data.
    • Check conformity with environmental clearances and consents.
    • Calculate environmental compensation in case of violations.
    • Support implementation of Green Credit Registry, Ecomark Certification, and Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) compliance.

About Environment Audit Rules, 2025:

  • Introduced by: MoEFCC in August 2025.
  • Purpose: Establishes independent auditors to assist Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), SPCBs, and Pollution Control Committees facing manpower/resource gaps.
  • Objectives:
    • Strengthen monitoring and compliance.
    • Enhance transparency, accountability, credibility.
    • Promote sustainable governance and stakeholder trust.
  • Scope of Audits: Covers compliance with Green Credit Rules, Ecomark Rules 2024, E-Waste Rules 2022, Plastic Waste Rules 2016, Battery Waste Rules 2022, Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam 1980, Wild Life Protection Act 1972 and related rules.
  • Institutional Features:
    • EADA certifies, registers, and monitors auditors.
    • Categories: Certified Environment Auditor (qualified) and Registered Environment Auditor (certified + authorised).
  • Certification Pathways:
    • Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) for experienced professionals.
    • National Certification Examination (NCE) for new entrants.
  • Registration: Valid for 5 years, renewable on review; requires technical proof and clean track record.
  • Oversight: A Steering Committee (chaired by MoEFCC Additional Secretary) supervises; government retains powers to issue guidelines, resolve disputes, and order audits.
[UPSC 2022] Which one of the following has been constituted under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 ?

Options: (a) Central Water Commission (b) Central Ground Water Board (c) Central Ground Water Authority* (d) National Water Development Agency

 

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Internal Security Architecture Shortcomings – Key Forces, NIA, IB, CCTNS, etc.

What is Free Movement Regime (FMR)?

Prelims Only | Security Issues | Mains Paper 3: External State & Non-State Actors: Challenges To Internal Security.

Why in the News?

Ahead of PM Modi’s Manipur visit, United Naga Council (UNC) has announced a trade embargo from against the India–Myanmar border fence and the suspension of the Free Movement Regime (FMR).

What is Free Movement Regime (FMR)?

About the Free Movement Regime (FMR):

  • Overview: Introduced in the 1970s, FMR allowed residents within 16 km of the India–Myanmar border to travel freely up to 16 km across without visa requirements.
  • Border length: India–Myanmar border stretches 1,643 km across four states: Arunachal Pradesh (520 km), Nagaland (215 km), Manipur (398 km), Mizoram (510 km).
  • Purpose: To recognize ethnic, cultural, and familial ties of communities (Kuki, Naga, Mizo, etc.) living across the unfenced border.
  • Revision: Last revised in 2016 under the Act East Policy.
  • Suspension: On February 8, 2024, MHA formally announced its scrapping, citing:
    • Internal security risks.
    • Illegal immigration and demographic changes in NE states.
    • Cross-border drug trafficking and insurgency links.

Stakeholder Perspectives:

  • Kuki groups: View FMR suspension and fencing as an attack on shared ethnic ties, even comparing it to the Berlin Wall. Recently reached an understanding with MHA negotiators.
  • Naga groups (UNC): Strongly opposed to border fencing and FMR suspension, claiming it undermines homeland, land rights, and identity. Announced a trade embargo in protest.
  • Meiteis (Valley population): Support suspension, arguing that FMR facilitated illegal migration, illicit drug trade, and aggravated ethnic tensions.
  • Government of India: Defends suspension on security and demographic grounds, while attempting to balance peace talks with tribal groups.
[UPSC 2016] Consider the following statements:

I. Assam shares a border with Bhutan and Bangladesh

II. West Bengal shares a border with Bhutan and Nepal

III. Mizoram shares a border with Bangladesh and Myanmar

Which of the statements given above are correct?

Options: (a) I, II and III * (b) I and II only (c) II and III only (d) I and III only

 

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Internal Security Architecture Shortcomings – Key Forces, NIA, IB, CCTNS, etc.

Immigration and Foreigners (Exemption) Order, 2025

Prelims Only | Security Issues | Mains Paper 3: External State & Non-State Actors: Challenges To Internal Security.

Why in the News?

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has issued the Immigration and Foreigners (Exemption) Order, 2025, notified under Section 33 of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025.

What is Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025?

  • Enactment: Passed by Parliament, effective 1 Sept 2025.
  • Objective: Unifies scattered immigration laws into a single framework, balancing national security, demographic protection, humanitarian obligations, and economic openness.
  • Repeals: Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920; Registration of Foreigners Act, 1939; Foreigners Act, 1946; Immigration (Carriers’ Liability) Act, 2000.
  • Key Provisions:
    • All foreigners must enter, stay, exit with valid passport & visa, unless exempted.
    • Digital system with biometrics, AI-based monitoring, and real-time agency coordination.
    • New visa categories: Skilled Talent, Startup, Investor, Digital Nomad, Business Plus.
    • Mandatory reporting by hotels, landlords, universities, hospitals on foreign guests/students/patients.
    • Entry to protected/restricted areas subject to special permits; mountaineering expeditions need prior approval.
  • Penalties: Up to 7 years imprisonment and ₹10 lakh fine for forged documents; detention centres allowed for illegal foreigners till deportation.
  • Institutions:
    • National Immigration Authority for policy and central database.
    • Bureau of Immigration, led by Commissioner, for operations.

About Immigration and Foreigners (Exemption) Order, 2025:

  • Overview: Issued by Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) on 1 Sept 2025 under Section 33 of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025.
  • Objective: Consolidates earlier scattered exemptions to simplify rules, enable regional mobility with Nepal & Bhutan, extend humanitarian relief to refugees/persecuted minorities, and provide legal clarity to carriers.
  • Replaces: The Registration of Foreigners (Exemption) Order, 1957 and Immigration (Carriers’ Liability) Order, 2007.
  • Exemptions:
    • Indian Armed Forces members on duty and families using govt transport.
    • Indian citizens entering via Nepal/Bhutan borders.
    • Nepal & Bhutan citizens (except if entering from China, Hong Kong, Macau, Pakistan).
    • Tibetans registered with India, religious minorities from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Pakistan (who entered before Dec 31, 2024), and Sri Lankan Tamils sheltered till Jan 9, 2015.
    • Diplomats, visa-on-arrival nationals, foreign military personnel on goodwill or exercises.
  • Carriers’ Liability: Rail, road, air, sea operators exempted where forged documents need expert verification or ships/aircraft are diverted.
[UPSC 2021] With reference to India, consider the following statements:

1.There is only one citizenship and one domicile.

2.A citizen by birth only can become the Head of State.

3.A foreigner, once granted citizenship, cannot be deprived of it under any circumstances.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

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

 

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Russian Invasion of Ukraine: Global Implications

Highlights of the Global Peace Index, 2025

IOCR | International Relations | Mains Paper 2: Effect Of Policies & Politics Of World On India'S Interests

Why in the News?

India has ranked 115th in the Global Peace Index, 2025 published by the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP).

About Global Peace Index (GPI):

  • Publisher: Released annually by the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP), Sydney.
  • Coverage: Ranks 163 countries/territories, representing 99.7% of world population.
  • Indicators: Based on 23 metrics grouped under three domains:
    • Societal Safety & Security (crime, terrorism, political stability).
    • Domestic & International Conflicts.
    • Degree of Militarisation (defence spending, arms imports, personnel).
  • Launch: First published in 2007; now a key global benchmark for peace, stability, and security.

Key Highlights of GPI 2025:

  • Top 10: Iceland (1st), Ireland, New Zealand, Finland, Austria, Switzerland, Singapore, Portugal, Denmark, Slovenia.
  • India’s Position: Ranked 115th (score 2.229), an improvement from 116th in 2024 (+0.58%).
  • Neighbour Comparison:
    • Pakistan – 144th (much lower).
    • Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh – higher than India, reflecting stronger peace metrics.
  • Least Peaceful: Russia, Ukraine, Sudan, DR Congo, Yemen, hit by wars, humanitarian crises, and instability.
  • Regional Insights:
    • Europe dominates top ranks.
    • Singapore is only Asian country in top 10.
    • South America shows gains (Argentina, Peru).
    • South Asia, Middle East, Africa remain volatile.
[UPSC 2023] Consider the following pairs:

1. North Kivu and Ituri: War between Armenia and Azerbaijan

2. Nagorno-Karabakh: Insurgency in Mozambique

3. Kherson and Zaporizhzhia: Dispute between Israel and Lebanon

How many of the above pairs are correctly matched?

Options: (a) Only one (b) Only two (c) All three (d) None*

 

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Judicial Reforms

[4th September 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Concealing a judge’s dissent, eroding judiciary’s authority

Explained | Polity | Mains Paper 2: Executive & Judiciary

PYQ Relevance

[UPSC 2023] Constitutionally guaranteed judicial independence is a prerequisite of democracy. Comment.

Linkage: The 2023 PYQ on judicial independence as a prerequisite of democracy directly relates to the Collegium debate. Concealing Justice Nagarathna’s dissent shows how opacity undermines independence by eroding legitimacy and public trust. True independence requires not just freedom from external control but also internal transparency and accountability.

Mentor’s Comment

Transparency in judicial appointments is once again under scrutiny. The recent revelation of Justice B.V. Nagarathna’s dissent on a Collegium recommendation, concealed from the public, has sparked fresh debate on the opacity of India’s judicial system. This piece examines why concealing dissent undermines the judiciary’s legitimacy, what is at stake for democracy, and how reforms could restore accountability in the higher judiciary.

Introduction

Constitutional democracies, as South African jurist Etienne Mureinik observed, thrive on a “culture of justification”, the principle that every exercise of public power must be explained and defended. Indian judges have often invoked this idea to hold governments accountable. Yet, when it comes to the judiciary’s own functioning, particularly the Collegium system of judicial appointments, this principle falters. The recent concealment of Justice B.V. Nagarathna’s dissent on the elevation of Justice Vipul M. Pancholi illustrates the problem starkly: the public is denied access to crucial reasoning behind decisions that shape the judiciary itself.

Why is this news significant?

The dissent of a sitting Supreme Court judge on a Collegium recommendation has surfaced through media leaks, not official disclosure. This is striking because the official resolution uploaded on the Court’s website suggested unanimity. The lack of transparency is troubling not just for one appointment but for the credibility of the entire judicial system. For a country where judges decide on critical questions of liberty and constitutional balance, secrecy corrodes legitimacy and deepens the democratic deficit.

Opacity as the defining feature of the Collegium system

  1. Judge-made law: The Collegium emerged from the Second Judges Case (1993) and was reinforced in the Third Judges Case (1998).
  2. Private deliberations: Decisions are made by the five senior-most judges of the Supreme Court behind closed doors.
  3. Minimal disclosure: Until 2017, no explanations were given. Later, skeletal resolutions were published, with only brief reasons disclosed in 2018 before the practice was abandoned.
  4. Resistance to transparency: Concerns of reputational harm and political interference are cited as justifications for secrecy.

The critical importance of Justice Nagarathna’s dissent

  1. Grave objections concealed: Reports suggest her reservations were serious, but neither her note nor the majority’s reasoning is accessible to the public.
  2. Unclear role of the executive: It is uncertain whether her dissent was even communicated to the Union government, which cleared the appointment within 48 hours.
  3. Democratic deficit: When even dissent within the highest court is hidden, the culture of justification collapses.

Balancing transparency with fairness in judicial appointments

International examples:

  1. Britain: Judicial Appointments Commission publishes criteria and detailed assessment reports.
  2. South Africa: Judicial Service Commission conducts public interviews of candidates.
  3. Indian reality: Transparency is avoided, and even dissent becomes visible only through leaks.
  4. Balancing act: Protecting reputations requires sensitive disclosure, not complete secrecy.

Democratic stakes of a secretive Collegium process

  1. Shaping constitutional outcomes: Judges appointed today decide on civil liberties, executive powers, and Union–State relations.
  2. Institutional legitimacy: Without openness, citizens lose trust in the judiciary.
  3. Contradiction of standards: Courts demand accountability from governments but exempt themselves.

The urgent need for reform in the Collegium system

  1. Self-accountability: A judiciary that explains its decisions strengthens, not weakens, its independence.
  2. Preserving legitimacy: Concealment erodes public trust, while openness anchors authority in people’s confidence.
  3. Past failures: Transparency initiatives have been sporadic and quickly rolled back.
  4. Future imperative: Without reform, the judiciary risks losing moral authority, the very foundation of its role in democracy.

Conclusion

The concealment of Justice Nagarathna’s dissent is not an isolated event but a symptom of the deeper opacity in judicial appointments. If the judiciary insists on accountability from other state organs, it must hold itself to the same standards. A transparent Collegium process will not diminish judicial independence; it will enhance legitimacy, anchor democracy in trust, and ensure that the culture of justification applies to all.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Port Infrastructure and Shipping Industry – Sagarmala Project, SDC, CEZ, etc.

India’s recent maritime reforms need course correction

Explained | Economics | Mains Paper 3: Infrastructure: Energy, Ports, Roads, Airports, Railways Etc.

Introduction

India’s maritime laws, some over a century old, were recently overhauled through the Ports Bill, Merchant Shipping Act, Coastal Shipping Act, and Carriage of Goods by Sea Bill (2025). The reforms aim to modernise governance, boost ease of doing business, and enhance India’s maritime role. Yet, concerns remain over centralisation, weakened ownership safeguards, excessive discretion, and burdens on smaller players, raising questions about federal balance.

Why Is This News Significant

The Ports Bill, 2025 centralises decision-making under a Maritime State Development Council, curbing State autonomy in port development. The Merchant Shipping Act allows partial foreign ownership of Indian-flagged vessels, ending the earlier full Indian ownership rule. Critics argue these changes favour big corporations and the Centre, while sidelining coastal States and small operators, with implications for India’s maritime sovereignty.

Progress and Pitfalls of Maritime Modernisation

  1. Comprehensive reform: New laws collectively update fragmented, outdated frameworks, covering shipping finance, offshore operations, safety, liability, and training.
  2. Ease of business: The Ports Act aims to create coherence in regulation, promoting sustainable development and investment.
  3. Legislative haste: Bills passed without serious debate or standing committee review, raising concerns about lack of consensus and scrutiny.

The Ports Act and the Federal Balance

  1. Centralisation of authority: Maritime State Development Council empowers the Centre to dictate State maritime policies.
  2. Erosion of fiscal autonomy: Coastal States cannot adjust frameworks independently; central plans like Sagarmala and Gati Shakti override local priorities.
  3. Federal subordination: Critics argue this undermines cooperative federalism, reducing States to implementers of central schemes.

Eroding Safeguards in Shipping Ownership

  1. Loophole in Indian-flag ownership: Merchant Shipping Act allows partial foreign/OCI ownership; exact thresholds left to government discretion.
  2. Risk of flag-of-convenience: Executive may dilute ownership norms, letting foreign operators control Indian ships indefinitely.
  3. BBCD mechanism: Bareboat Charter-Cum-Demise leasing recognised, but risks foreign lessors retaining de facto control.

Small Operators and Dispute Resolution Challenges

  1. Vague compliance norms: Discretionary powers could overwhelm smaller port operators with compliance burdens.
  2. Clause 17 controversy: Bars civil courts from port-related disputes; relies on internal committees lacking impartiality.
  3. Investment deterrence: Absence of independent judicial oversight could erode investor confidence.

Coastal Shipping: Protecting or Undermining Local Players?

  1. Cabotage protection: Only Indian-flagged vessels can engage in coastal trade — in principle, safeguarding domestic players.
  2. DG Shipping’s sweeping powers: Licences to foreign vessels on broad grounds like “national security” or “strategic alignment.”
  3. Impact on fishing industry: Smaller players face heavy reporting burdens without clarity on data use or safeguards.
  4. Central dominance: National Coastal and Inland Shipping Strategic Plan reduces State-level say in coastal regulation.

Conclusion

India’s maritime reforms are necessary but flawed. The package risks over-centralisation, weakened sovereignty, and burdens on smaller operators, even as it promises modernisation. True reform requires transparent ownership rules, impartial dispute resolution, and genuine cooperative federalism. Otherwise, the reforms may deliver short-term ease of business but compromise India’s federal balance and maritime security.

Value Addition

Key Provisions of the Indian Ports Bill, 2025 (replacing Indian Ports Act, 1908)

  1. State Maritime Boards:
    • Statutory recognition: Boards set up by coastal States now have a legal mandate.
    • Functions: Planning & developing port infrastructure, granting licenses, fixing tariffs, ensuring compliance with safety, security, and environmental norms.
  2. Maritime State Development Council (MSDC):
    • Composition: Chaired by Union Minister of Ports, Shipping and Waterways; includes State Ministers, Navy & Coast Guard representatives, and Union Ministry officials.
    • Role: Issues guidelines on port data, ensures tariff transparency, advises Centre on national maritime plans, legislative adequacy, and connectivity.
  3. Dispute Resolution Committee (DRC):
    • Jurisdiction: Resolves disputes between non-major ports, concessionaires, users, and service providers.
    • Appeals: Lie with High Courts; civil courts barred.
    • Flexibility: Agreements may allow arbitration or alternative dispute resolution.
  4. Tariffs:
    • Major Ports: Fixed by Board of Major Port Authority/Company Board.
    • Non-Major Ports: Fixed by State Maritime Boards or their concessionaires.
  5. Port Officers:
    • Conservator: Chief port officer with powers over anchoring, berthing, movement, obstruction clearance, and fee recovery.
    • New functions: Preventing disease spread, assessing damage, adjudicating penalties.
  6. Safety and Environmental Protection:
    • MARPOL & Ballast Water Management Convention compliance mandatory.
    • New obligations: Waste reception facilities, emergency preparedness, pollution containment, and regular central audits.
  7. Offences and Penalties:
    • Continuity: Retains offences under 1908 Act (non-compliance, impeding navigation, damage to port property).
    • Decriminalisation: Certain offences now carry monetary fines; first-time violations can be compounded.
  8. New offences:
    • Imprisonment up to 6 months for endangering vessel safety, disturbing seabed.
    • Monetary penalties for unnotified port operations, failure to report/manage pollution, or ignoring DRC orders.

PYQ Relevance:

[UPSC 2022] What are the maritime security challenges in India? Discuss the organisational, technical and procedural initiatives taken to improve maritime security.

Linkage: India’s maritime reforms (2025) strengthen security through MARPOL compliance, waste management, and statutory State Maritime Boards, but also create vulnerabilities. Dilution of vessel ownership, centralisation via MSDC, and weak dispute resolution raise concerns of sovereignty and resilience. Thus, reforms reflect both organisational advances and new security risks, linking directly to India’s maritime security challenges.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Minority Issues – SC, ST, Dalits, OBC, Reservations, etc.

Should reservations exceed the 50% cap?

Explained | Indian Society | Mains Paper 2: Laws, Institutions & Bodies Constituted For The Vulnerable Sections

Introduction

Reservations have always stood at the crossroads of social justice and equality of opportunity in India. While Articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India empower the state to address historical discrimination, the judicially imposed 50% cap has often clashed with demands for greater inclusivity. Recent developments, from Maharashtra’s acceptance of Maratha demands to calls for caste census and creamy layer reform, have amplified questions on whether the reservation system remains equitable, representative, and sustainable.

The Current Moment of Reckoning

The debate has reached a critical juncture because:

  1. Political promises like Bihar opposition leader Tejashwi Yadav’s proposal for 85% reservations directly challenge the 50% ceiling.
  2. Judicial scrutiny continues, with the Supreme Court questioning whether creamy layer exclusion should extend to SCs and STs.
  3. Empirical concerns such as 40–50% of reserved seats remaining unfilled, and the Rohini Commission’s revelation that 97% of OBC benefits are cornered by 25% castes, highlight structural inequities.

This combination of political assertion, judicial intervention, and social critique makes the issue highly consequential.

Articles 15 and 16: The constitutional basis of equality and reservation

  1. Equality mandate: Article 15 guarantees equality in state actions, including education; Article 16 guarantees equality in public employment.
  2. Special provisions: Both allow the state to make reservations for OBCs, SCs, and STs.
  3. Present levels: At the central level, reservations stand at 59.5% (OBC – 27%, SC – 15%, ST – 7.5%, EWS – 10%).

Judicial rulings on reservation and equality

  1. Balaji vs State of Mysore (1962): Reservations must be “within reasonable limits” and capped at 50%; seen as upholding formal equality.
  2. N.M. Thomas (1975): Saw reservations as a continuation of equality of opportunity (substantive equality), but gave no ruling on the cap.
  3. Indra Sawhney (1992): Upheld 27% OBC quota, reaffirmed 50% ceiling, and introduced creamy layer exclusion for OBCs.
  4. Janhit Abhiyan (2022): Validated 10% EWS quota; held that 50% limit applies only to backward classes.
  5. Davinder Singh (2024): Suggested considering creamy layer exclusion for SCs and STs.

Challenges to the 50% ceiling on reservations

  1. Population logic: Backward classes form a larger share than reflected in current quotas; caste census demanded to get exact numbers.
  2. Unfilled vacancies: 40–50% of reserved seats for OBC/SC/ST remain unfilled at the central level.
  3. Sub-caste concentration: Rohini Commission showed extreme skew in OBC benefits—about 1,000 communities have zero representation.

The problem of concentration of reservation benefits

  1. OBCs: 97% benefits go to ~25% sub-castes.
  2. SCs/STs: Similar skew; absence of creamy layer exclusion means relatively better-off sub-castes capture opportunities.
  3. Policy vacuum: Despite judicial nudges, the Centre reaffirmed in August 2024 that creamy layer does not apply to SC/ST.

The way forward for India’s reservation system

  1. Balancing equality: Increasing quota to 85% may violate equality of opportunity, but substantive equality demands better targeting.
  2. Caste census 2027: Could offer empirical basis for restructured reservation.
  3. Sub-categorisation: Rohini Commission’s recommendations need urgent implementation.
  4. Two-tier system: Priority for the most marginalised within SC/STs could prevent elite capture.
  5. Beyond reservation: Skill development and private sector opportunities are crucial, given shrinking public jobs.

Conclusion

India’s reservation policy is at an inflection point. Expanding quotas without reforming their structure risks perpetuating inequity within communities. A nuanced approach, backed by caste census data, sub-categorisation, and skill-building, can ensure that reservations remain a tool for empowerment rather than a political slogan. The challenge lies in balancing constitutional guarantees of equality with the imperative of social justice in a diverse democracy.

PYQ Relevance:

[UPSC 2019] Performance of welfare schemes that are implemented for vulnerable sections is not so effective due to absence of their awareness and active involvement at all stages of policy process, Discuss.

Linkage: The 2019 question highlights how welfare schemes for vulnerable sections often fail due to lack of awareness and skewed access. The same issue is reflected in India’s reservation policy: despite constitutional backing, 40–50% of reserved seats remain unfilled, and the Rohini Commission revealed that 97% of OBC benefits are cornered by just 25% sub-castes, leaving nearly 1,000 communities with no representation at all. This shows that affirmative action, much like welfare schemes, risks becoming ineffective unless equitable distribution, sub-categorisation, awareness generation, and active participation of the most marginalised are ensured.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Goods and Services Tax (GST)

GST Council approves two-rate tax slab effective September 22

Prelims Only | Economics | Mains Paper 3: Government Budgeting

Why in the News?

In its 56th meeting, the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Council approved a two-rate structure with special category rates, effective 22 September 2025.

What is GST?

  • Overview: A comprehensive, multi-stage, destination-based indirect tax on goods and services.
  • Launch: Introduced 1 July 2017 via 101st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2016.
  • Objective: “One Nation, One Tax” to reduce cascading taxes, simplify compliance, and expand base.
  • Earlier Structure: Five slabs initially (0, 5, 12, 18, 28%) plus cess on luxury/sin goods.
  • Exemptions: Essential items like food grains, medicines, education; petroleum, alcohol, electricity remain outside GST.

About GST Council:

  • Constitutional Basis: Created under Article 279A (inserted by the Constitution (One Hundred and First Amendment) Act, 2016).
  • Composition: Chaired by Union Finance Minister, with MoS Finance and all state finance/taxation ministers.
  • Voting: Centre – one-third weight, States – two-thirds; requires 75% weighted votes for decisions.
  • Meetings: Held quarterly; over 55 meetings so far.
  • Role: Decides on rates, exemptions, compliance, and dispute resolution, making it a key fiscal federal institution.

GST Council approves two-rate tax slab effective September 22

New GST Rate Structure:

  • Simplification: At the 56th GST Council meeting (Sept 2025), slabs reduced to two rates plus a special rate.
  • Main Slabs: 5% and 18% apply on most goods and services.
  • Special 40% Rate: Levied on sin goods (tobacco, pan masala, aerated drinks) and super-luxury items (large cars, yachts, private aircraft).
  • Rate Reductions:
    • Daily-use items (soap, shampoo, toothpaste, bicycles, kitchenware) now at 5%.
    • Cement down from 28% to 18%.
    • Small cars, motorcycles <350cc, ACs, TVs, dishwashers shifted to 18%.
    • Food staples (milk, paneer, rotis, chapatis, parathas) at 0%.
    • Life-saving drugs, spectacles corrected to 0–5%.
  • Inverted Duty Fix: Man-made fibre, yarn, fertilizers, acids, ammonia cut to 5%.
  • Revenue Impact: Estimated loss of ₹48,000 crore, expected to be offset by higher compliance and buoyancy.
[UPSC 2017] What is/are the most likely advantages of implementing ‘Goods and Services Tax (GST)’?

1. It will replace multiple taxes collected by multiple authorities and will thus create a single market in India.

2. It will drastically reduce the ‘Current Account Deficit’ of India and will enable it to increase its foreign exchange reserves.

3. It will enormously increase the growth and size of the economy of India and will enable it to overtake China in the near future.

Select the correct answer using the code given below:

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

 

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Parliament – Sessions, Procedures, Motions, Committees etc

[pib] Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS)

Schemes | Governance | Mains Paper 2: Government Scheme/Policies

Why in the News?

The Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI) recently organized a national workshop on the e-SAKSHI web portal and mobile app for the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS).

About MPLADS:

  • Overview: A Central Sector Scheme, launched in 1993, to empower MPs to recommend developmental works in their constituencies, focusing on durable community assets addressing local needs.
  • Administration: Initially under the Ministry of Rural Development; Since 1994, managed by MoSPI.
  • Implementation:
    • State-level nodal department supervises implementation.
    • District authorities sanction projects, release funds, and ensure execution.
  • Funding:
    • Each MP gets ₹5 crore per year (since 2011–12).
    • Disbursed by MoSPI in two instalments of ₹2.5 crore each to district authorities.
    • Funds are non-lapsable i.e. carried forward if unutilized.
  • Targeted Allocation: Minimum 15% for SCs and 7.5% for STs.
  • Special Provisions:
    • Up to ₹25 lakh annually can be spent outside constituency/state for national unity projects.
    • Up to ₹1 crore can be allocated nationwide during severe natural calamities.
  • Eligible Projects:
    • Durable community assets (e.g., libraries, community halls, ambulances, sports infrastructure, sanitation).
    • MPLADS funds can be converged with MGNREGS or integrated with Khelo India for asset creation.
    • Support allowed on lands of registered societies/trusts (3+ years old) engaged in welfare work.
    • Prohibited for societies/trusts where the MP/family are office-bearers.
  • Transparency Measures:
    • Plaque with MP’s name and project details must be installed at project sites.
    • Project details listed in district offices, MPLADS website, and accessible via RTI.
  • Monitoring & Audit:
    • District authorities inspect at least 10% of projects annually.
    • Funds audited by statutory auditors.
    • Regular review meetings at state and central levels.
  • e-SAKSHI platform: Enables MPs to digitally recommend, monitor, and track MPLADS projects, improving transparency, accountability, and efficiency in fund utilization.
[UPSC 2020] With reference to the funds under Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS), which of the following statements are correct?

1. MPLADS funds must be used to create durable assets like physical infrastructure for health, education, etc.

2. A specified portion of each MP’s ‘fund must benefit SC/ST populations.

3. MPLADS funds are sanctioned on yearly basis and the unused funds cannot be carried forward to the next year.

4. The district authority must inspect at least 10% of all works under implementation every year.

Select the correct answer using the code given below:

Options: (a) 1 and 2 only (b) 3 and 4 only (c) 1, 2 and 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 4 only*

 

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Agricultural Sector and Marketing Reforms – eNAM, Model APMC Act, Eco Survey Reco, etc.

[pib] Coconut Development Board (CDB)

Prelims Only | Agriculture | Mains Paper 3: Major Crops & Cropping Patterns

Why in the News?

The World Coconut Day (2nd September) was recently celebrated by the Coconut Development Board (CDB).

About Coconut Development Board (CDB):

  • Establishment: Created on 12 January 1981; statutory body under the Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare.
  • Headquarters & Offices: HQ at Kochi, Kerala; regional offices in Bengaluru, Chennai, Guwahati, and Patna.
  • Mandate: Integrated development of coconut production and utilization with focus on productivity, processing, and product diversification.
  • Functions: Provides technical advice and financial aid to farmers/processors; promotes modern technology adoption, value addition, pricing & marketing measures, and export promotion.
  • Welfare Schemes: Implements farmer-focused programs like Coconut Palm Insurance Mission and Kera Suraksha.

Back2Basics: Coconut Cultivation in India

  • Global Standing: India is the third-largest coconut producer, contributing about 31.45% of world output.
  • Production: In 2023–24, India produced 153.29 lakh MT from an area of 23.33 lakh ha.
  • Productivity: Average productivity at 9,871 nuts/ha, among the highest globally.
  • Leading States: Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, and Andhra Pradesh account for ~90% of production. Kerala and TN lead, Karnataka has risen sharply, AP contributes ~8%.
  • Economic Value: Sector contributed ₹27,199.5 crore GVO and ₹30,795.6 crore GDP share in 2022–23.
  • Exports: In 2022–23, India exported coconut products worth ₹3,554.23 crore (US $452 million) including copra, oil, coir, activated carbon, and value-added foods.
  • Employment Impact: Supports 12+ million livelihoods; 15,000+ coir industries employ nearly 6 lakh workers.

 

[UPSC 2022] With reference to the “Tea Board” in India, consider the following statements:

1. The Tea Board is a statutory body.

2. It is a regulatory body attached to the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare.

3. The Tea Board’s Head Office is situated in Bengaluru.

4. The Board has overseas offices at Dubai and Moscow.

Which of the statements given above are correct ?

Options: (a) 1 and 3 (b) 2 and 4 (c) 3 and 4 (d) 1 and 4*

 

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Citizenship and Related Issues

Foreigners Tribunal (FT) can issue Arrest Warrants

Prelims Only | Polity | Mains Paper 2: Federalism

Why in the News?

The Union Home Ministry empowered Foreigners Tribunals (FTs), especially in Assam, to detain suspected illegal immigrants in designated camps, a power earlier exercised only through executive orders.

About Foreigners Tribunal (FT):

  • Nature: Quasi-judicial bodies constituted under the Foreigners (Tribunal) Order, 1964, framed under the Foreigners Act, 1946.
  • Purpose: Decide whether a person is a foreigner/illegal immigrant, especially in the context of Assam’s border migration issues.
  • Cases handled:
    • References from border police against suspected foreigners.
    • Cases of “D” (doubtful) voters flagged by the Election Commission.
  • Composition: Members drawn from retired judges, advocates, and civil servants with judicial experience; capped at 3 members per tribunal.
  • Functioning:
    • FTs exercise powers of a civil court (summons, evidence, witness examination).
    • Required to dispose of cases within 60 days of reference.
    • Burden of proof lies on the individual to establish citizenship (Section 9, Foreigners Act).
  • Present Status: About 100 FTs operational in Assam (expanded after NRC-2019). No FTs in other states, where suspected foreigners are tried in local courts.

New Provisions under the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025:

  • Replacement: Replaces the Foreigners (Tribunal) Order, 1964, now part of the comprehensive Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025.
  • Detention Powers: For the first time, FTs are empowered to detain suspected illegal immigrants in designated transit camps, a power earlier exercised through executive orders.
  • Judicial Authority:
    • Powers of a civil court under CPC, 1908.
    • Powers of a judicial magistrate (first class) under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — including issuing arrest warrants, ordering detention, and directing personal appearance.
  • Ex-parte Orders: Can be set aside if the appellant files a review within 30 days.
  • Scope: Though applicable nationwide, functional relevance remains in Assam.
  • Restrictions on Employment: Bars foreigners from working in strategic sectors (defence, nuclear energy, petroleum, power, water supply, space, human rights) without Central government approval.
  • Border Security Measures: Border forces/Coast Guard to record biometrics and demographic data of illegal entrants before pushing them back.
  • Grounds for Refusal of Stay: Foreigners convicted of terrorism, espionage, narcotics trafficking, organized crime, human trafficking, cybercrime, child abuse, crimes against humanity, etc., can be refused entry or deported.
  • Exemptions: Citizens of Nepal, Bhutan, Tibetans, and Sri Lankan Tamils exempted under a special 2025 order.
[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

 

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Climate Change Negotiations – UNFCCC, COP, Other Conventions and Protocols

Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdictions (BBNJ) Agreement

Prelims Only | Enviro & Biodiversity | Mains Paper 3: Conservation, Environmental Pollution & Degradation, Eia

Why in the News?

The Ministry of Earth Sciences has formed a 12-member committee led by SC lawyer Sanjay Upadhyay to draft a new national law safeguarding India’s maritime and economic interests under the 2023 High Seas Treaty (BBNJ Agreement).

About the BBNJ (High Seas Treaty) Agreement:

  • Overview: International treaty under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), focusing on biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (high seas).
  • Objective: Conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in international waters (covering ~64% of the world’s oceans).
  • Scope of Provisions:
    • Establishment of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in high seas.
    • Regulation of seabed mining and extractive activities.
    • Fair and equitable sharing of benefits from marine genetic resources.
    • Mandatory environmental impact assessments (EIAs) before major projects.
    • Use of both scientific and traditional knowledge, guided by the precautionary principle.
  • Relation to UNCLOS: Would be the third implementing agreement, alongside:
    • 1994 Part XI Implementation Agreement (seabed mineral resources).
    • 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement (conservation of migratory fish stocks).
  • Adoption & Status:
    • Agreed in March 2023, open for signature for 2 years from September 2023.
    • Enters into force 120 days after the 60th ratification (currently ratified by 55 countries).
[UPSC 2022] With reference to the United Nations Convention on the Law of Sea, consider the following statements:

1. A coastal state has the right to establish the breadth of its territorial sea up to a limit not exceeding 12 nautical miles, measured from baseline determined in accordance with the convention.

2. Ships of all states, whether coastal or land-locked, enjoy the right of innocent passage through the territorial sea.

3. The Exclusive Economic Zone shall not extend beyond 200 nautical miles from the baseline from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured.

Which of the statements given above are correct?

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

 

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Judicial Reforms

[3rd September 2025] India needs more women judges in the Supreme Court

op-ed snap | Polity | Mains Paper 2: Executive & Judiciary

PYQ Relevance

[UPSC 2021] Disucss the desirability of greater representation to women in higher judiciary to ensure equity and inclusiveness.

Linkage: The acute gender imbalance in the Supreme Court, with only 11 women judges since 1950, directly reflects the inequity in higher judiciary appointments. Greater representation of women is not only about fairness but also about inclusiveness, diversity of perspectives, and legitimacy of justice delivery. This makes the 2021 UPSC question highly relevant as it highlights why institutionalising gender as a criterion in judicial appointments is essential.

Mentor’s Comment

The issue of women’s representation in the higher judiciary has resurfaced sharply after the recent appointments to the Supreme Court overlooked senior women judges and lawyers. Despite being the guardian of constitutional morality and equality, the apex court itself reflects a glaring gender imbalance. This article explores the extent of underrepresentation, the opacity in the appointment process, and why diversity on the Bench is not merely symbolic but essential for justice delivery.

Introduction

The retirement of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia in August 2025 created an opportunity to address the deep gender imbalance in India’s Supreme Court. However, with the appointments of Justices Vipul Pancholi and Alok Aradhe, the Court continues to have only one woman judge—Justice B.V. Nagarathna. This exposes both a structural problem in the judicial appointment system and the reluctance to institutionalise gender as a criterion for higher judiciary appointments.

The significance of gender imbalance in the Supreme Court

  1. Striking underrepresentation: Only 11 women judges out of 287 since 1950 (3.8%).
  2. Missed opportunity: Despite two vacancies in August 2025, no woman judge was appointed.
  3. Historical first ignored: The 2021 Collegium decision appointing three women judges at once raised hope of change, but the momentum has not continued.
  4. Symbolic contradiction: The Court upholds gender equality but does not reflect it internally.

The historical trajectory of women judges in the Supreme Court

  1. First woman judge: Justice Fathima Beevi (1989).
  2. Trail of appointments: Only 11 till date, with short tenures limiting their influence.
  3. Tenure disparity: Women often appointed at a late stage in career, reducing chances of reaching the Collegium or CJI position.
  4. Upcoming first woman CJI: Justice B.V. Nagarathna, but for only 36 days (Sept–Oct 2027).
  5. Lack of caste and minority representation: Only Justice Fathima Beevi represented a minority faith; no SC/ST woman judge was ever appointed.

Gender disparity in direct elevation from the Bar

  1. Male dominance: Nine men have been directly elevated from the Bar.
  2. Single woman appointee: Justice Indu Malhotra (2018) was the only woman elevated directly.
  3. Systemic discrimination: Despite women Senior Advocates being present, elevation remains blocked.
  4. Global comparison: Worldwide, the Bar is a major route to the higher judiciary, India lags in enabling women lawyers.

The opacity of the judicial appointment process

  1. Collegium secrecy: No clarity on criteria or names under consideration.
  2. Inconsistent transparency: Collegium resolutions briefly made public in 2017 under CJI Dipak Misra, but not institutionalised.
  3. Regional and caste factors considered: Yet gender is ignored as a formal category.
  4. Violation of merit claims: Recent appointments skipped senior women High Court judges despite “seniority” being cited in the past as a hurdle.

The importance of women’s representation on the Bench

  1. Unique perspectives: Women judges bring experiential diversity that shapes judicial outcomes.
  2. Public trust: Greater representation builds confidence in judicial impartiality.
  3. Truly representative court: The SC must reflect India’s social and gender diversity to strengthen legitimacy.
  4. Judicial precedents: The Court itself has mandated 30% reservation for women in Bar Association elections, but has no such rule for its own appointments.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s gender imbalance undermines its constitutional commitment to equality and inclusivity. Unless women are institutionalised as a criterion for judicial appointments, alongside caste, religion, and region, the credibility of India’s top court will remain in question. Representation is not tokenism; it is a constitutional necessity to ensure justice is dispensed through the lens of diversity, fairness, and lived realities.

Value Addition

Committees & Reports

  1. Law Commission 230th Report (2009): Recommended adequate representation of women and minorities in higher judiciary.
  2. Justice Verma Committee (2013): Strongly stressed the need for gender diversity in judiciary to handle women-related cases with sensitivity.

International Comparisons & Norms

  1. Beijing Platform for Action (1995): Calls for women in decision-making positions, including judiciary.
  2. Canada & UK: Women form 40–50% of higher judiciary in recent years.
  3. South Africa: Institutionalised diversity (race + gender) as a mandatory criterion in judicial appointments.

 

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Policy Wise: India’s Power Sector

Decoding the SC order on regulatory assets

Explained | Economics | Mains Paper 3: Infrastructure: Energy, Ports, Roads, Airports, Railways Etc.

Introduction

India’s electricity sector faces a chronic mismatch between the cost of supply and the revenue collected, leaving distribution companies (DISCOMs) financially stressed. To bridge this gap, regulatory assets, unrecovered costs deferred for future recovery, have become common. The Supreme Court has now ordered DISCOMs and regulators to clear these within strict timelines and capped their creation, marking a crucial step towards financial discipline and consumer protection in the power sector.

Significance of the Supreme Court’s Directive

The Supreme Court directed State Electricity Regulatory Commissions (SERCs) and DISCOMs to clear existing regulatory assets within four years and any new ones within three years, while capping their creation at 3% of Annual Revenue Requirement (ARR). The Court also mandated transparent recovery roadmaps and intensive audits for non-compliant DISCOMs.The judgment is significant because it marks the first time the Supreme Court has set explicit timelines and caps for the liquidation of regulatory assets. With Delhi DISCOMs alone carrying regulatory assets worth over ₹58,000 crore, and Tamil Nadu reporting ₹89,375 crore in FY 2021-22, the scale of the problem is massive. The ruling highlights how the misuse of regulatory assets has become systemic, leading to debt accumulation, delayed payments to generators, and poor grid modernisation.

Understanding Regulatory Assets

  1. Definition: Regulatory assets are deferred costs created when the Average Cost of Supply (ACS) is higher than the ARR, allowing DISCOMs to recover the gap later instead of burdening consumers immediately.
  2. Example: If ACS = ₹7.20/unit and ARR = ₹7.00/unit, the shortfall of ₹0.20 per unit across 10 billion units leads to a revenue gap of ₹2,000 crore, which becomes a regulatory asset.
  3. Consumer relief: Prevents immediate tariff shocks but leads to deferred steep tariff hikes later, often with interest.

Causes of the Average Cost of Supply (ACS)- Annual Revenue Requirement (ARR) Gap

  1. Non-cost reflective tariffs: Tariffs often kept artificially low for political reasons.
  2. Delayed subsidies: State governments fail to release subsidies for agriculture or low-income households on time, worsening DISCOM finances.
  3. Fuel price shocks: Sudden increases in coal/gas prices inflate procurement costs.
  4. Historical evidence: Punjab’s 2004–05 case of ₹487 crore revenue gap set the precedent for regulatory assets in India.

Impact of regulatory assets on consumers and DISCOMs

  1. Consumers:
    • Immediate stability in tariffs but eventual steeper hikes.
    • Example: Delhi DISCOMs must recover ₹16,580 crore annually in four years, implying an additional ₹5.5/unit on average.
  2. DISCOMs:
    • Persistent cash flow crises as revenue doesn’t cover costs.
    • Forced to borrow → higher debt burden.
    • Limited capacity to modernise grids, integrate renewables, or improve services.
    • Creates a vicious cycle of financial and operational distress.

Regulatory Assets and Grid Modernisation

  1. Yes: Large unrecovered costs reduce capital available for investment in infrastructure.
  2. Renewable integration challenge: Financially weak DISCOMs are unable to invest in flexible grids or storage solutions.
  3. Consumer service compromise: Lower quality of supply, billing inefficiencies, and lack of digital modernisation.

Way forward

  1. Cost-reflective tariffs: Rationalise tariffs while shielding vulnerable consumers with targeted subsidies.
  2. Timely subsidy release: State governments must ensure fiscal discipline.
  3. Automatic fuel cost adjustments: Tariffs should respond dynamically to input cost fluctuations.
  4. Annual true-up exercises: Prevent backlog accumulation by reconciling projections with actual costs.
  5. Regulatory discipline: Enforce caps, transparency, and timelines to ensure regulatory assets remain exceptional, not structural.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s directive signals a turning point for India’s power sector. It underlines the urgent need for financial discipline, timely subsidies, and transparent tariff setting. If implemented well, this move could break the cycle of deferred costs and inefficiencies, ensuring that electricity supply remains both affordable for consumers and financially viable for utilities. For policymakers, it serves as a reminder that delaying reforms through regulatory tools only compounds systemic risks.

Value Addition

Importance of DISCOMs in India’s Power Sector

  1. DISCOMs are the last-mile link in the electricity chain, responsible for delivering power to households, industries, and agriculture.
  2. Their financial health directly impacts energy access, affordability, and quality of supply.

Current Financial Stress

  1. AT&C Losses: Aggregate Technical & Commercial losses remain high at ~16–20% (against a target of 12–15%).
  2. Revenue Gap: ACS > ARR leads to losses per unit supplied.
  3. Debt Burden: Many DISCOMs rely on borrowing to bridge gaps, adding to systemic financial stress.

Key Causes of DISCOM Distress

  1. Non-cost reflective tariffs: Political pressure keeps tariffs lower than actual supply cost.
  2. Delayed subsidies: State governments often delay releasing agricultural/poor household subsidies.
  3. Cross-subsidisation: Industrial and commercial consumers are charged higher rates to subsidise other sectors, affecting competitiveness.
  4. Fuel price volatility: Sudden spikes in coal/gas prices worsen procurement costs.

Government Initiatives for DISCOMs

  1. UDAY (2015): Transferred debt to State governments, targeted efficiency improvements.
  2. Revamped Distribution Sector Scheme (RDSS) (2021): RDSS, focuses on smart meters, loss reduction, and IT-based monitoring.
  3. Electricity Amendment Bill (2022) (proposed): Aims to promote competition, allow multiple distributors in the same area, and reduce monopolies.

DISCOMs and Energy Transition

  1. Financially weak DISCOMs struggle to integrate renewable energy and invest in smart grids, storage, and modernisation.
  2. This hampers India’s 2030 renewable energy targets (500 GW capacity, 50% non-fossil share).

Global Comparisons

  1. Many countries (e.g., UK, Germany) have cost-reflective tariff mechanisms and automatic adjustment clauses to prevent accumulation of arrears.
  2. India’s reliance on regulatory assets is unusual, reflecting deeper political economy challenges.

PYQ Relevance

[UPSC 2021] “Access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy is the sine qua non to achieve Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).’’ Comment on the progress made in India in this regard.

Linkage: The Supreme Court’s directive on regulatory assets directly ties to SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) by addressing the financial distress of DISCOMs, which undermines both affordability for consumers and sustainability for utilities. India has expanded electricity access impressively, but the persistence of unrecovered costs, delayed subsidies, and non-cost-reflective tariffs highlight the fragility of the system. The judgment pushes for financial discipline, timely subsidy release, and transparent tariff recovery, ensuring that progress towards universal, reliable, and modern energy access is not compromised by systemic inefficiencies.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Foreign Policy Watch: India-SCO

Unmistakable shift (India signalled a change in foreign policy stance at SCO Summit)

Explained | International Relations | Mains Paper 2: Bilateral, Regional and Global Groupings and agreements involving India

Introduction

India’s foreign policy has historically oscillated between balancing great power politics and safeguarding its strategic autonomy. The 2025 SCO Summit in China witnessed a landmark moment: Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s first bilateral engagement with Chinese President Xi Jinping since the 2020 military standoff. The visit not only revived dormant dialogues but also underscored India’s shifting posture in a multipolar world marked by U.S. sanctions, instability in West Asia, and contestations within Eurasia.

Significance of Indian Prime Minister’s Visit to China

  1. Seven-year gap: PM Modi had not travelled to China since 2017, making this a major diplomatic breakthrough.
  2. First bilateral since standoff: Meeting with Xi Jinping was the first since the 2020 military confrontation along the LAC.
  3. Three-year SCO absence: Modi’s return to SCO after three years shows India’s willingness to re-engage with a grouping seen as anti-Western.
  4. Optics of bonhomie: Images with Xi and Putin evoked memories of the inactive Russia-India-China trilateral, signalling recalibration.

Revival of India-China Bilateral Engagement

  1. Troop disengagement: Both leaders endorsed the normalisation process initiated in October 2024.
  2. Boundary resolution: Agreed to fast-track talks between Special Representatives.
  3. Connectivity revival: Resumption of direct flights and visa facilitation announced.
  4. Economic ties: Leaders stressed on building trade relations to stabilise world commerce.
  5. Mutual trust rhetoric: Modi stressed ties based on “mutual trust, respect and sensitivity”, while Xi used the metaphor of “Dragon and Elephant” coming together.

External Drivers of India’s Foreign Policy Recalibration

  1. U.S. tariffs and sanctions: American restrictions and mistrust of the Trump administration nudged India to diversify partnerships.
  2. Strategic compulsion: India managed to side-step concerns like China’s support to Pakistan during Operation Sindoor, UNSC/NSG opposition, and shielding of terrorists.
  3. Multipolar optics: India’s engagement at SCO signals balancing between West and Eurasia.

Key Outcomes of the 2025 SCO Summit

  1. Tianjin declaration: Strong language against cross-border terrorism, including condemnation of the Pahalgam attack (India) and Balochistan attacks (Pakistan).
  2. West Asian crisis: SCO united on humanitarian crisis in Gaza and condemned U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran.
  3. China’s push: Xi proposed an SCO Development Bank.
  4. India’s push: Modi proposed a Civilisational Dialogue among SCO members.
  5. India’s reservation: Continued opposition to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) paragraph.

Missed Diplomatic Opportunities at the Summit

  1. Skipped SCO Plus: Indian Prime Minister did not attend the extended “SCO Plus” Summit, limiting engagement with neighbourhood and Global South leaders.
  2. Regional bonding gap: While optics were strong, substantive regional outreach was diluted.

Conclusion

The SCO Summit underscored India’s willingness to recalibrate its foreign policy in a changing world order. Modi’s visit after years of distance marked a thaw with China, greater Eurasian engagement, and assertion of India’s independent foreign policy despite U.S. pressures. However, missed opportunities in broader outreach and unresolved trust deficits with China remain cautionary notes.

Value Addition

Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO)

Historical Background

  1. Successor to: SCO is the successor to the Shanghai Five, formed in 1996 between China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and Tajikistan.
  2. Formation: Established in 2001 in Shanghai by China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan.
  3. Expansion: India and Pakistan joined as full members in 2017; Iran became a member in 2023.
  4. Observers & Dialogue Partners: Afghanistan, Belarus, Mongolia, and others engage as observers; several countries (e.g., Turkey, Sri Lanka) are dialogue partners.

Strategic Importance of SCO for India

  1. Geopolitical Balancing: Provides a platform to engage with China and Russia while maintaining ties with the West (Quad, U.S.).
  2. Regional Security: Key forum for counter-terrorism cooperation, especially in light of cross-border terrorism and instability in Afghanistan.
  3. Eurasian Connectivity: Enhances India’s presence in Central Asia, a region rich in energy resources.
  4. Multipolar World Order: Strengthens India’s narrative of strategic autonomy and non-alignment in new form.

Key SCO Mechanisms

  1. Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure (RATS): Headquartered in Tashkent, focuses on counter-terrorism intelligence sharing.
  2. Economic Cooperation: Proposals for SCO Development Bank, regional trade, and connectivity projects (though India resists BRI-linked initiatives).
  3. Cultural and Civilisational Dialogues: Shared platforms for people-to-people exchanges, education, and cultural diplomacy.

India’s Challenges within SCO

  1. China Factor: Difficult to expand cooperation given border disputes and China’s Pakistan tilt.
  2. Pakistan Factor: Its membership often leads to diplomatic blockages on issues like terrorism.
  3. BRI Opposition: India consistently refuses to endorse the Belt and Road Initiative, creating friction.
  4. Russia-China Axis: Russia’s growing dependence on China may dilute India’s influence in the bloc.

Contemporary Relevance

  1. Energy and Trade: Central Asia is crucial for energy diversification; SCO provides a gateway.
  2. Geopolitical Flux: With U.S.-China rivalry and West Asia instability, SCO’s role in Eurasian stability gains importance.
  3. Soft Power Opportunity: India uses SCO to promote civilisational dialogue, yoga, Ayurveda, and cultural diplomacy.

PYQ Relevance

[UPSC 2021] Critically examine the aims and objectives of SCO. What importance does it hold for India?

Linkage: The article directly illustrates the objectives of SCO—counter-terrorism (Tianjin declaration), multipolarity, and Eurasian stability. It highlights India’s balancing act—reviving ties with China, opposing BRI, and pushing for civilisational dialogue. Thus, the SCO Summit outcomes reflect both the scope and constraints of SCO’s importance for India in strategic, economic, and security domains.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

JOIN THE COMMUNITY

Join us across Social Media platforms.