Mera Yuva Bharat (MY Bharat) received the Guinness World Records title for the “Most Users to Take an Online Quiz in One Week”. The recognition was awarded after 390,812 participants successfully completed the quiz during the assessment period.
Key Highlights
The record was achieved through the Viksit Bharat Young Leaders’ Dialogue (VBYLD) Quiz.
Quiz objective: Promote youth participation and awareness regarding Viksit Bharat@2047.
Conducted through:
MY Bharat portal under the Department of Youth Affairs, Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports.
Participation:
Over 50.42 lakh youth participated.
Covered all 28 States and 8 Union Territories.
Guinness assessment period:
25 October to 31 October 2025.
During the assessment:
More than 8.39 lakh quiz participations recorded.
390,812 participants certified after digital forensic audits and verification.
MY Bharat registrations:
2.19 crore registrations within three years.
Union Minister:
Mansukh Mandaviya stated that nearly 65% of India’s population is below 35 years of age.
Significance:
Demonstrates digital youth engagement.
Encourages volunteering, leadership development, experiential learning, and community participation.
Supports the vision of Viksit Bharat@2047.
About Mera Yuva Bharat (MY Bharat)
Launched by the Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports.
Objective: To provide a technology-driven institutional platform for youth development and participation.
Focus Areas
Leadership development
Volunteerism
Skill enhancement
Community participation
Nation building initiatives
[2018] Consider the following statements : Human capital formation as a concept is better explained in terms of a process which enables 1. individuals of a country to accumulate more capital. 2. increasing the knowledge, skill levels and capacities of the people of the country. 3. accumulation of tangible wealth. 4. accumulation of intangible wealth. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Mains Paper 3: Conservation, Environmental Pollution & Degradation, Eia
Why in the news?
The Government of India highlighted major achievements in environmental protection, biodiversity conservation, climate action, and sustainable development over the last 12 years.
Forest and Green Cover
India’s forest and tree cover reached 8.27 lakh sq. km (25.17% of geographical area).
Forest carbon stock stands at 30.43 billion tonnes.
Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority undertook over 3.2 lakh hectares of compensatory afforestation between FY 2020-21 and 2024-25.
“Ek Ped Maa Ke Naam” campaign planted 262.4 crore saplings till December 2025.
River Rejuvenation
Namami Gange Programme launched for restoration of the River Ganga.
524 projects worth ₹43,030 crore sanctioned till February 2026.
Industrial BOD load reduced from 26 TPD (2017) to 10.75 TPD (2024).
Gangetic dolphin population estimated at 6,327.
Wetland Conservation
Wetland conservation strengthened under the National Plan for Conservation of Aquatic Ecosystems (NPCA).
India’s Ramsar sites increased from 26 in 2014 to 99 by April 2026.
Mangrove and Coastal Ecosystems
Mangrove cover increased from 4,628 sq. km (2013) to 4,992 sq. km (2023).
Blue Flag certified beaches increased to 18 in 2025-26.
Wildlife Conservation
Project Tiger: Tiger population increased from 2,226 (2014) to 3,682 (2022).
Project Cheetah: India’s cheetah population reached 53.
Asiatic lion population increased to 891 in 2025.
India hosts nearly 60% of the global wild Asian elephant population.
Waste Management and Circular Economy
Solid waste processing increased from 17% (2014) to over 77% (2024).
1,138 dumpsites remediated across 1,048 cities.
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) frameworks expanded for plastics, batteries, tyres, e-waste, and used oil.
Climate and Global Leadership
India achieved its target of reducing emissions intensity by 33-35% from 2005 levels ahead of schedule.
Non-fossil sources account for 52.57% of installed power capacity (February 2026).
Major global initiatives led by India:
International Solar Alliance
Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure
International Big Cat Alliance
Mission LiFE
[2025] Consider the following statements: Statement I: Circular economy reduces the emissions of greenhouse gases. Statement II: Circular economy reduces the use of raw materials as inputs. Statement III : Circular economy reduces wastage in the production process. Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?
[A] Both Statement II and Statement III are correct and both of them explain Statement I
[B] Both Statement II and Statement III are correct but only one of them explains Statement I
[C] Only one of the Statements II and III is correct and that explains Statement I
[D] Neither Statement II nor Statement III is correct
PYQ Relevance[UPSC 2017] Examine the scope of Fundamental Rights in the light of the latest judgement of the Supreme Court on Right to Privacy Linkage: The question examines the expansion of Article 21 and the constitutional status of informational privacy after the Puttaswamy judgment. The Right to be Forgotten is a direct extension of the right to informational privacy, raising questions about balancing privacy with open justice, transparency, and public access to judicial records.
Mentor’ Comment
A recent Delhi High Court order on the Right to be Forgotten has revived the debate over whether individuals can seek removal of their names from online court records. The case is significant because it brings into direct conflict two constitutional principles, the right to privacy recognised in the Puttaswamy judgment (2017) and the principle of open justice. This comes at a time when digitisation and search engines have made judicial records permanently accessible and searchable.
What is the Right to be Forgotten?
The Right to Be Forgotten (RTBF) is the legal concept that empowers individuals to request the removal, erasure, or de-indexing of their personal data from internet searches, databases, and public platforms when that information becomes outdated, irrelevant, or harmful to their reputation.
It is built on the principle of informational self-determination, allowing people to reclaim control over their digital narrative and move on from past events without facing lifelong social or professional stigma.
What is the Open Justice Principle?
The Open Justice Principle is a foundational legal rule stating that judicial proceedings and records must be open to the public and the media to guarantee transparency, fairness, and public trust in the legal system.
It is summarized by the classic legal maxim: “Justice must not only be done, but must manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.”
How Has Digitisation Transformed the Debate on Open Justice and Privacy?
Digital Permanence: Court records remain searchable indefinitely through search engines and online legal databases.
Expanded Accessibility: Judicial records are accessible globally to anyone with internet access.
Automated Archiving: Search engines and digital repositories replicate records across multiple platforms.
Enhanced Public Scrutiny: Facilitates public understanding of judicial processes and legal developments.
Persistent Reputational Impact: Allegations may remain associated with individuals even after acquittal or discharge.
Implication
The digital environment has transformed court publicity from a temporary consequence into a potentially permanent one
Why Does the Right to be Forgotten Conflict with the Principle of Open Justice?
Privacy Protection: Enables individuals to exercise control over personal information.
Transparency Requirement: Ensures judicial functioning remains open to public scrutiny.
Historical Record: Judicial decisions form part of the state’s official record.
Democratic Accountability: Open records strengthen public confidence in courts.
Freedom of Expression: Access to information supports informed public discourse.
Core Constitutional Tension
Right to Privacy
Open Justice
Protects personal dignity
Ensures transparency
Limits unnecessary exposure
Facilitates public scrutiny
Supports informational autonomy
Preserves public records
Prevents perpetual stigma
Maintains historical accuracy
Why Did the Delhi High Court Favour Greater Privacy Protection?
Search Engine Excerpts: Search engines may display isolated portions of judgments without context.
Name-Based Discovery: Public access does not necessarily require searching cases through an accused person’s name.
Replication Problem: Updating official records may not update copies stored on other websites.
Context Loss: Fragmented information can misrepresent judicial outcomes.
Digital Harm: Continuous association with allegations may affect reputation despite legal exoneration.
Judicial Concern
The Court recognized that merely updating records may not adequately protect privacy because digital content often persists across multiple platforms.
Is Discoverability the Real Problem, or Is It Incomplete Information?
The core issue is not public access itself but incomplete records.
Acquittal Visibility: Searches should reveal both allegations and subsequent acquittals.
Contextual Accuracy: Complete judicial history should accompany search results.
Information Integrity: Users should receive accurate and updated records.
Balanced Disclosure: Transparency should include final outcomes, not merely initial accusations.
Digital Correction: Records should evolve with judicial developments.
Example
If an individual is acquitted, anyone accessing the proceedings should also immediately find the acquittal order instead of only the original accusation.
Why Are Judicial Records Treated as Public Records of the State?
Official Character: Court records constitute official acts of the State.
Institutional Memory: They preserve the history of judicial administration.
Public Accountability: Citizens can assess judicial functioning.
Rule of Law: Transparent records strengthen trust in legal institutions.
Can Digital Accuracy Offer a Better Solution than Digital Erasure?
Key Measures
Record Updating: Reflect acquittals, discharges, settlements, and final outcomes prominently.
Database Synchronisation: Ensure legal repositories regularly update records.
Contextual Search Results: Display complete procedural history.
Judicial Oversight: Impose obligations on registries and legal information platforms.
Responsible Indexing: Ensure search engines provide context alongside judicial records.
Expected Outcome: Protects privacy without undermining transparency or historical recordkeeping.
How Does the European Experience Inform the Debate?
The concept gained massive global prominence following the landmark 2014 Google Spain v. AEPD ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). It is now strictly codified under Article 17 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) as the “Right to Erasure”
European Origin: RTBF emerged in response to persistent digital records.
Balancing Test: Privacy claims are assessed against freedom of expression and public interest.
Context-Based Approach: No absolute right to deletion exists.
Public Interest Exception: Information relevant to public accountability may remain accessible.
Proportionality Principle: Competing rights are balanced case-by-case.
Conclusion
The challenge is not whether judicial records should be accessible, but whether they should remain accurate and complete in the digital age. A balanced approach that preserves open justice while ensuring updated and contextualised records can protect both privacy and transparency, thereby strengthening public trust in the judiciary and the rule of law.
The year 2026 marks the 79th anniversary of the June 3 Declaration. The Mountbatten plan formally accepted the Partition of British India after decades of constitutional negotiations aimed at preserving unity. It is significant as it represented a dramatic departure from earlier British efforts such as the Cabinet Mission Plan, which sought a united federal India.
How Did British India Reach the Stage of Partition by 1947?
Communal Polarisation: Intensified after the Muslim League’s demand for Pakistan and growing Hindu-Muslim political divergence.
Direct Action Day (1946): Triggered widespread communal violence, particularly in Calcutta.
Escalating Riots: Violence spread to Noakhali, Bihar, Bombay, Punjab, and other regions.
Failure of Constitutional Negotiations: The Cabinet Mission Plan failed to secure agreement between Congress and the Muslim League.
British Urgency: Post-World War II Britain lacked the resources and political will to govern India indefinitely.
Why Did Lord Mountbatten Conclude That Partition Had Become Inevitable?
Administrative Breakdown: Increasing communal violence threatened governance and public order.
Political Deadlock: Congress and the Muslim League remained divided on power-sharing arrangements.
Pakistan Demand: Muslim League leadership under Muhammad Ali Jinnah remained committed to a separate state.
Time Constraints: Britain sought a rapid and orderly withdrawal from India.
Security Concerns: Continued instability threatened a larger civil conflict across the subcontinent.
The “Plan Balkan” Rejection: Before the June 3rd Plan, Mountbatten drafted the “Dickie Bird Plan” (Plan Balkan), which suggested letting individual provinces declare themselves independent successor states. Jawaharlal Nehru fiercely opposed it, arguing it would lead to total balkanization and chaos, prompting Mountbatten to scrap.
Key Provisions of the June 3rd Plan
Creation of Two Dominions: British India was divided into the sovereign dominions of India and Pakistan, both holding the temporary right to retain British Commonwealth status.
Partition of Bengal and Punjab: The Legislative Assemblies of Punjab and Bengal met in separate sections (Muslim-majority vs. non-Muslim majority areas) to vote on partition. Simple majorities in favor meant both provinces were split.
Border Demarcation: A Boundary Commission, chaired by Sir Cyril Radcliffe, was established to draw the exact international borders for Punjab and Bengal.
Regional Referendums: The North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and the Sylhet district of Assam held popular referendums to determine whether they would join India or Pakistan. Both ultimately voted to join Pakistan.
Status of Princely States: The 565 autonomous princely states were stripped of British paramountcy. They were given the choice to join either India or Pakistan based on geographical contiguity, while independent status was explicitly denied by the British administration.
Sovereign Constituent Assemblies: Each dominion established its own sovereign assembly to design its independent constitution.
Accelerated Timeline: Advanced from June 1948 to August 15, 1947.
Why did Congress Accept the Partition Plan?
Violence Containment: Sought to prevent further communal bloodshed.
Governability: Preferred a smaller but politically cohesive India.
Strong Central Authority: Feared prolonged instability in a weak federal arrangement.
Administrative Practicality: Viewed Partition as the quickest route to independence.
Key Leaders Involved
Jawaharlal Nehru: Accepted Partition as a political necessity.
Sardar Patel: Favoured a pragmatic settlement to avoid prolonged conflict.
Why Did the Muslim League Support the June 3 Plan?
Pakistan Objective: Fulfilled the League’s principal political demand.
Political Representation: Addressed fears of marginalisation in a Hindu-majority state.
Self-Determination Argument: Presented Pakistan as a means of safeguarding Muslim political interests.
Recognition of Separate Nationhood: Reinforced the League’s Two-Nation Theory.
What Objections Were Raised Against the Plan?
Muslim League Concerns
Punjab Partition: Opposed division of Punjab.
Bengal Partition: Opposed division of Bengal.
Sikh Concerns
Boundary Security: Demanded stronger safeguards in Punjab.
Population Distribution: Feared division of Sikh religious and economic centres.
Congress Concerns
National Unity: Regarded Partition as a tragic compromise.
Inadequate Preparation: Insufficient planning for migration and security.
Boundary Ambiguities: Created confusion and unrest.
Humanitarian Disaster: Failed to anticipate the scale of violence and displacement.
Long-Term Conflict: Left unresolved territorial and identity disputes.
Conclusion
The Mountbatten Plan remains one of the most consequential political decisions in modern South Asian history. While it facilitated the end of colonial rule and enabled the emergence of independent states, it also exposed the limitations of hurried decolonisation. The legacy of Partition continues to influence India-Pakistan relations, debates on identity and federalism, and discussions on managing diversity within democratic nation-states.
PYQ Relevance
[UPSC 2019] Assess the impact of British imperial power in complicating the process of transfer of power during the 1940s.
Linkage: The question examines the British role in shaping the final phase of India’s independence and Partition. The Mountbatten Plan was the decisive framework through which Britain managed the transfer of power, accelerated Partition, and redrew the political map of the Indian subcontinent.
The Delhi High Court recently ruled that Google’s practice of allowing advertisers to purchase competitors’ registered trademarks as keywords for online advertisements can amount to trademark infringement.
How Did the Hindware-Google Trademark Dispute Originate?
Background of the dispute
Hindware Trademark: Hindware possessed a registered trademark with substantial market goodwill built over decades in the sanitaryware sector.
Discovery in 2013: Hindware found that competitors Grohe India Pvt. Ltd. and Cera Sanitaryware Ltd. had purchased the keyword “Hindware” through Google AdWords.
Search Result Diversion: Searches for “Hindware”, “Hindware Sanitary”, or related terms displayed competitors’ websites and advertisements prominently.
Consumer Impact: Users intending to purchase Hindware products were redirected toward rival brands.
Legal Objection: Hindware argued that its trademark was being commercially exploited without authorization.
How Does Google’s Keyword Advertising System Function?
Mechanism of Google AdWords
Keyword Advertising:Advertisers bid for specific words or phrases that trigger sponsored advertisements.
Auction-Based Model: Google conducts auctions among advertisers bidding for keywords.
Revenue Generation: Google earns revenue through a Cost-Per-Click (CPC) model.
Illustrative Example
Trademark Search: A user searching for “Nokia” or “Sony” may be shown advertisements from competitors if those companies purchased the trademark as a keyword.
Commercial Outcome: User attention may shift from the trademark owner to competing brands.
Why Did Hindware Consider Keyword Advertising a Trademark Infringement?
Hindware’s Legal Arguments
Registered Trademark Protection: Hindware argued that its trademark enjoys legal protection under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
Unauthorized Commercial Use: Competitors used the trademark for generating advertising impressions without consent.
Diversion of Customers: Searches intended for Hindware products were redirected toward rival companies.
Misappropriation of Goodwill: Competitors benefited from brand value created through Hindware’s investments over decades.
Consumer Confusion: Users searching specifically for Hindware could be influenced toward alternative brands.
Trademark Law Basis
Advertising Use: Hindware argued that keyword bidding constitutes use of a trademark in advertising.
Section 29(6) Relevance: The practice falls within the statutory meaning of trademark use in advertising.
[About Section 29(6) of Trade Marks Act, 1999: Trademark is deemed to be used if a person
Affixes it to goods or packaging.
Offers goods or services under that trademark.
Imports or exports goods under that trademark.
Uses the trademark in advertising.]
What Defence Did Google Present Before the Court?
Backend Function Argument
Invisible Keywords: Google argued that keywords operate only as backend triggers.
No Visible Display: Users cannot see purchased keywords during searches.
Technical Facilitation: The platform merely facilitates ad placement based on advertiser-selected terms.
Consumer Awareness Argument
Sponsored Labels: Advertisements are marked separately from organic search results.
Distinct Identification: Users can distinguish advertisements from natural search results.
Reduced Confusion Claim: Clear labeling minimizes the possibility of consumer deception.
Global Policy Argument
International Practice: Google highlighted that keyword advertising involving trademarks is permitted in several jurisdictions.
Policy Consistency: The company argued that its India policy aligns with broader global advertising practices.
Competition Argument
Market Access: Google contended that keyword bidding enables smaller firms to compete with established brands.
Restriction Concern: Prohibiting keyword purchases could reduce competitive advertising opportunities.
Why Did the Court Reject Google’s Position?
Recognition of Trademark Use
Commercial Exploitation: The Court held that keyword bidding amounts to trademark use in advertising.
Revenue Generation: Google earns direct revenue through auctions involving trademarked terms.
Advertising Function: Trademarked keywords serve as commercial tools for attracting consumers.
Free-Riding on Goodwill
Brand Investment: Trademark owners spend significant resources building consumer trust.
Unfair Advantage: Competitors benefit from that goodwill without making equivalent investments.
Monetization of Reputation: Google profits from the commercial value attached to others’ trademarks.
Consumer Diversion
Search Intent: Users searching for “Hindware” generally seek Hindware products.
Traffic Redirection: Sponsored advertisements can divert consumers toward competing brands.
Marketplace Distortion: Consumer attention shifts from the trademark owner to advertisers.
Judicial Observation
Free-Riding Finding: The Court observed that Google’s conduct effectively monetizes investments made by trademark owners.
Commercial Benefit: Google derives revenue from trademark popularity despite not owning the trademark itself.
What Did the Delhi High Court Ultimately Rule?
Trademark Protection: Restrained Google from using “Hindware” or combinations of related words as advertising keywords.
Infringement Recognition: Treated such use as capable of constituting trademark infringement under the Trade Marks Act.
Goodwill Protection: Reinforced legal protection for brand reputation and consumer association.
Significance of the Judgment
Digital Trademark Jurisprudence: Establishes an important precedent for online trademark disputes.
Platform Accountability: Expands scrutiny of intermediary business models.
The Delhi High Court’s ruling marks an important step in adapting trademark law to the digital economy. By recognizing keyword advertising as potential trademark use, the judgment strengthens brand protection while raising important questions about competition, platform accountability, and consumer choice in online markets.
Value Addition
Trademark
Definition: A sign, symbol, word, phrase, logo, design, or combination distinguishing goods or services of one entity from another.
Legal Basis: Trade Marks Act, 1999.
Validity: Registration valid for 10 years and renewable indefinitely.
Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Ecosystem in India
Constitutional Basis:
Article 300A: Protects property rights.
Legal Shield: Guarantees no property deprivation without legal authority.
IP Inclusion: Covers both tangible and intellectual property
Institutional Framework
Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT):
Ministry: Ministry of Commerce and Industry.
Status: Non-statutory body (Central Government Department).
Policy Maker: Formulates and amends all national IPR policies.
Parent Body: Oversees the functioning of the CGPDTM and CIPAM.
Global Liaison: Represents India at international forums like WIPO.
Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (CGPDTM)
Ministry: Ministry of Commerce and Industry (attached office of DPIIT).
Status: Statutory body.
IP Registry: Manages statutory offices for Patents, Designs, Trade Marks, and Geographical Indications.
E-Filing Hub: Operates the centralized online registration portals.
Quasi-Judicial Power: Hears and decides intellectual property disputes and oppositions.
Cell for IPR Promotion and Management (CIPAM)
Ministry: Ministry of Commerce and Industry (professional body under DPIIT).
Status: Non-statutory body (Executive Agency).
Policy Executor: Implements targets set by the National IPR Policy.
Public Outreach: Conducts IP awareness campaigns across schools and universities.
Enforcement Training: Trains police, customs, and judiciary staff to curb piracy.
PYQ Relevance
[UPSC 2024] What is the present world scenario of Intellectual Property Rights with respect to life materials? Although India is second in the world to file patents, still only a few have been commercialized. Explain the reasons behind this less commercialization.
Linkage: The PYQ examines the protection, commercialization, and enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in a rapidly evolving technological environment. The Delhi High Court’s ruling extends trademark protection to digital advertising practices, addressing new-age IPR challenges in the platform economy.
Mains Paper 2: Bilateral, Regional and Global Groupings and agreements involving India
Why in the news?
The Office of the United States Trade Representative proposed a 12.5% tariff on imports from India and several other countries for allegedly failing to effectively enforce prohibitions on goods produced using forced labour.
Key Highlights
Proposed tariff: 12.5% on imports from 54 countries including India.
Investigation launched under: Section 301 of the U.S. Trade Act, 1974.
The proposal is: Not final yet.
Public hearings scheduled for: July 7, 2026.
What is Section 301 of the U.S. Trade Act?
Section 301 empowers the U.S. government to:
Investigate unfair trade practices by foreign countries.
Impose:
Tariffs
Trade restrictions if practices are seen as harmful to U.S. commerce.
Reason for the Investigation
The U.S. alleged that some countries:
Failed to effectively prevent imports of goods produced using: Forced labour.
India’s Response
The Ministry of Commerce and Industry stated that:
India remains engaged with the U.S. regarding:
Section 301 proceedings
Interim trade agreement negotiations.
Timeline of Key Events
March 2026: USTR launched investigations.
June 2026: U.S. trade delegation visited India.
June 22: Deadline for hearing participation requests.
July 6: Deadline for written submissions.
July 7: Public hearings.
Sectors Likely to be Impacted
Labour intensive sectors may face major impact:
Textiles
Garments
Leather products
Carpets
Brassware
What is Forced Labour?
According to international labour standards:
Forced labour refers to work extracted under threat, coercion or without voluntary consent.
[2018] International Labour Organization’s Conventions 138 and 182 are related to –
A Child labour
B Adaptation of agricultural practices to global climate change
Mains Paper 2: Bilateral, Regional and Global Groupings and agreements involving India
Why in the news?
NPCI International Payments Limited and ACLEDA Bank Plc. launched cross border UPI payments in Cambodia through KHQR, Cambodia’s national QR code system.
Key Highlights
Indian travellers can now use:
Unified Payments Interface (UPI) for QR based payments in Cambodia.
Is a real time digital payment system developed in India.
Operated by: National Payments Corporation of India.
Enables: Instant bank to bank transfers using mobile applications.
What is NIPL?
NPCI International Payments Limited (NIPL):
International arm of NPCI.
Responsible for:
Expanding UPI and RuPay globally.
About KHQR
Cambodia’s national QR code standard.
Operates through:
Bakong payment system.
Managed by:
National Bank of Cambodia.
Features of the Partnership
Phase 1
Indian travellers in Cambodia can:
Scan KHQR codes and make payments.
Covers:
More than 4.5 million Cambodian merchants.
Future Phase
Cambodian citizens visiting India will also be able to:
Use Cambodian banking apps to scan UPI QR codes in India.
Benefits of the Initiative
For Travellers
Reduces need for:
Currency exchange
Carrying cash.
Enables:
Seamless digital transactions.
For Merchants
Access to Indian tourists.
Faster and secure payments.
Lower cash handling costs.
Importance of UPI Internationalisation
Promotes: India’s digital public infrastructure globally.
Strengthens: FinTech diplomacy.
Supports: Cross-border digital payments and trade.
Countries Accepting UPI
UPI is currently accepted in Singapore, United Arab Emirates, France, Mauritius, Nepal, Bhutan, Qatar, Sri Lanka, and Cambodia.
Legal Status of NPCI
Company Status: Registered as a Non-Profit Company under Section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013.
Ownership: Owned and operated by a consortium of major banks in India.
Regulatory Oversight: It is regulated and supervised by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) under the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007.
[2025] Consider the following countries: I. United Arab Emirates II. France III. Germany IV. Singapore V. Bangladesh How many countries amongst the above are there other than India where international merchant payments are accepted under UPI?
Investor Education and Protection Fund Authority and Securities and Exchange Board of India will organise a Niveshak Shivir in Bhopal on 5 June 2026 to help investors resolve issues related to unclaimed dividends and shares.
Key Highlights
Organised by:
IEPFA under the Ministry of Corporate Affairs
SEBI.
Objective:
Investor awareness
Grievance redressal
Recovery of unclaimed investments.
Services Provided at Niveshak Shivir
Recovery assistance for:
Unclaimed dividends
Unclaimed shares.
On the spot:
KYC updation
Nomination services.
Resolution of:
Pending IEPFA claim issues.
What is IEPFA?
The Investor Education and Protection Fund Authority (IEPFA):
Functions under: Ministry of Corporate Affairs.
Established to:
Protect investor interests.
Promote financial literacy and investor awareness.
Investor Education and Protection Fund (IEPF)
Created under: Companies Act, 2013.
Unclaimed: Dividends, Shares, and Deposits are transferred to the IEPF after a specified period.
When are Shares/Dividends Transferred to IEPF?
If dividends remain unclaimed for Seven consecutive years, the related shares are transferred to the IEPF Authority.
What is SEBI?
The Securities and Exchange Board of India:
Is the regulator of Securities and capital markets in India.
Established in 1988.
Statutory status granted in 1992.
Objectives of the Initiative
Simplify Investor claim process.
Promote:
Financial inclusion
Investor protection.
Strengthen: Transparency in financial markets.
About RTAs
Registrars and Transfer Agents (RTAs):
Maintain records of:
Shareholders
Share transfers
Dividend payments.
Assist companies in investor-related services.
[2025] 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 of time. III. There is no regulatory body either to warn the 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?
Scientists from Agharkar Research Institute developed a biodegradable nanomedicine platform capable of silencing cancer driving genes in breast cancer cells, offering a promising precision oncology therapy.
Key Highlights
Research published in: Advanced Healthcare Materials.
Developed under: Department of Science and Technology.
Uses: Targeted gene silencing strategy.
Aim: Effective tumour inhibition with minimal toxicity.
What is Nanomedicine?
Nanomedicine refers to the use of nanoscale materials and technology for:
Side effects associated with conventional therapies.
Key Technology Used
Mesoporous Silica Nanoparticles
Biodegradable nanoparticles with:
High drug loading capacity.
Tunable surface chemistry.
Used to deliver: Small interfering RNA (siRNA).
What is siRNA?
Small interfering RNA (siRNA): Molecules that silence specific genes by preventing protein production.
Used in:
Gene therapy
Cancer treatment research.
[2015] With reference to the use of nanotechnology in health sector, which of the following statements is/are correct? 1.Targeted drug delivery is made possible by nanotechnology 2.Nanotechnology can largely contribute to gene therapy Select the correct answer using the code given below.
Mains Paper 2: Bilateral, Regional and Global Groupings and agreements involving India
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 neighbour.Linkage: The PYQ focuses on China’s broader strategy of converting economic, diplomatic, and strategic influence into regional power projection. The article reflects China’s broader strategy of using its growing power to strengthen territorial claims and strategic leverage along the India-China border, particularly through the “Early Harvest” proposal.
Mentor’s Comment
India and China have resumed discussions on boundary settlement through the Special Representatives (SR) mechanism after years of tensions following the 2020 Galwan crisis. The significance lies in the reported revival of the idea of an “early harvest” settlement in the Sikkim sector, a proposal first discussed in 2005.
What is the Indo-China border?
The India-China border is defined by a 3,488-kilometre-long frontier known as the Line of Actual Control (LAC).
Three Sectors of the LAC
The un-demarcated border is geopolitically divided into three operational sectors:
Western Sector: Covers Ladakh. It features key flashpoints like the Galwan Valley, Pangong Tso, and the Depsang Plains, directly adjacent to the Chinese-controlled Aksai Chin wasteland.
Central Sector: Runs across the peaceful, less contested states of Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand.
Eastern Sector: Spans Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh. It historically follows the McMahon Line, which India recognizes but China disputes by claiming Arunachal Pradesh as “South Tibet“.
How Have India-China Boundary Negotiations Evolved?
Phase 1: Historical Boundary Legacy
1890 Anglo-Chinese Convention
Defined the Sikkim-Tibet boundary.
Mentioned Mount Gipmochi as the starting point.
Introduced the watershed principle.
Phase 2: Military Confrontation
1967 Nathu La and Cho La Clashes
Major armed confrontations after the 1962 war.
Demonstrated unresolved border disputes.
Phase 3: Confidence-Building Era
1993 Agreement on Peace and Tranquillity
First major agreement to maintain stability along the LAC.
1996 CBM Agreement: Military confidence-building measures.
2005 Political Parameters and Guiding Principles: Created framework for final boundary settlement. Envisaged:
Political settlement first.
Delimitation later.
Demarcation afterwards.
Phase 4: Emergence of the Early Harvest Idea
2005-2010s
Discussions emerged on resolving easier sectors first.
Sikkim identified as a possible candidate.
India remained cautious about abandoning the package-settlement approach.
Phase 5: Doklam and Strategic Distrust
2017 Doklam Standoff
China attempted road construction near the tri-junction.
India intervened.
Highlighted strategic importance of Sikkim-Doklam region.
Phase 6: Breakdown of Trust
2020 Galwan Clash
First combat fatalities in decades.
India linked broader bilateral relations to peace on the LAC.
Phase 7: Renewed Negotiations
May 2025: Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination (WMCC) discussed steps toward boundary delimitation.
August 2025
24th Special Representatives Meeting.
Agreement to establish an Expert Group.
China referred to “demarcation” and negotiations in favourable sectors.
Phase 8: Current Debate
China’s Preference: Sector-wise or “Early Harvest” settlement.
India’s Preference
Comprehensive package settlement.
Peace and tranquillity on the LAC as a precondition.
Protection of interests in Eastern Ladakh, Arunachal Pradesh, and the Doklam tri-junction.
How Do Recent India-China Boundary Talks Indicate a Revival of the “Early Harvest” Approach?
The Early Harvest Proposal refers to the idea of resolving those sectors of the India-China boundary where agreement is relatively easier, while leaving the more contentious sectors for later negotiations. Under this approach:
India and China would first settle the Sikkim sector, where differences are comparatively limited.
More difficult disputes such as Eastern Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh would be postponed.
China would obtain a formal settlement in one sector while negotiations continue indefinitely elsewhere.
Why Does the Revival of the “Early Harvest” Proposal Matter?
Special Representatives Dialogue: India and China held the 24th round of SR talks in August 2025, reviving discussions on boundary settlement.
Expert Group Formation: Both sides agreed to establish an Expert Group to examine boundary delimitation in India-China border areas.
Chinese Terminology Shift: China used the term “demarcation” and referred to launching negotiations in sectors where conditions are favourable.
Strategic Concern: Sector-wise settlements could enable China to secure gains in less disputed regions while retaining leverage in contentious sectors.
Diplomatic Significance: Marks the return of political-level boundary negotiations after prolonged military tensions.
What Is the Historical Basis of the Sikkim Boundary Dispute?
Nathu La Clashes (1967): Heavy casualties occurred on both sides despite Sikkim’s eventual accession to India.
Convention of 1890: The Anglo-Chinese Convention identified Mount Gipmochi as the starting point of the Sikkim-Tibet boundary.
Watershed Principle: The convention specified that the boundary follows the mountain ridge separating watersheds.
Tri-Junction Dispute: India and Bhutan maintain that the tri-junction lies near Batang La, about 6.5 km north of Gipmochi.
Strategic Geography: The dispute directly affects the location of the India-China-Bhutan tri-junction.
Why Is the Tri-Junction Location Strategically Important?
Jampheri/Zompelri Ridge: Controls approaches overlooking the Siliguri Corridor.
Siliguri Corridor Security: The narrow corridor connects mainland India with the Northeast.
Chinese Objective: A favourable tri-junction location would provide China greater strategic depth in the Chumbi Valley.
Military Leverage: Enhanced access could improve Chinese observation and operational capabilities.
Territorial Implications: A revised boundary could indirectly legitimise Chinese claims over nearby areas.
How Does the Doklam Experience Influence India’s Position?
Chinese Consolidation: Since the 2017 Doklam standoff, China has strengthened military infrastructure in western Bhutan.
Road Construction: Expansion of roads and permanent facilities has altered ground realities.
Pressure on Bhutan: Increased Chinese presence creates incentives for Bhutan to negotiate on China’s terms.
Indian Concerns: Any settlement affecting the tri-junction could have direct consequences for India’s security.
Strategic Lesson: Temporary stand-offs do not necessarily prevent long-term territorial consolidation.
Why Does India Link Boundary Settlement With Peace Along the LAC?
Galwan Legacy: The 2020 clashes fundamentally altered trust levels in bilateral relations.
LAC Stability Principle: India maintains that broader normalization depends on peace and tranquillity along the border.
Military Buildup: Large-scale troop deployments remain in several sectors.
Confidence Deficit: Repeated violations of prior understandings have weakened confidence in incremental agreements.
Negotiation Framework: India seeks restoration of stability before pursuing major political settlements.
How Has China Altered Ground Realities Along the Border?
Infrastructure Expansion: Construction of roads, airfields, logistics hubs, and border villages.
Military Consolidation: Increased troop presence and deployment capabilities along sensitive sectors.
Administrative Assertion: Renaming locations in Arunachal Pradesh seeks to reinforce territorial claims.
Border Villages Programme: Expansion of settlements near the LAC strengthens administrative presence.
Strategic Messaging: Combines military, political, and infrastructural measures to reinforce claims.
What Was the Significance of the 2005 Agreement?
Political Parameters Agreement (2005): Established principles for resolving the boundary issue.
Two-Step Process: Envisaged political settlement first, followed by delimitation and demarcation.
Package Settlement Concept: Favoured an overall settlement rather than sector-wise resolution.
Mutual Safeguards: Recognized the need to protect strategic interests of both sides.
Framework Relevance: Continues to provide the most comprehensive basis for negotiations.
Should India Accept a Sector-Wise Settlement?
Arguments in Favour
Incremental Progress: Resolves less contentious sectors.
Confidence Building: May improve bilateral atmosphere.
Diplomatic Momentum: Prevents complete stagnation of negotiations.
Administrative Clarity: Reduces ambiguity in settled regions.
Arguments Against
Loss of Leverage: Settled sectors can no longer be bargaining instruments.
Strategic Risk: May strengthen Chinese positions elsewhere.
Historical Precedent: Past agreements have not always prevented new tensions.
Asymmetrical Benefits: China could secure gains while retaining flexibility in contentious sectors.
What Principles Should Guide India’s Negotiating Strategy?
Comprehensive Settlement: Prioritises holistic resolution over isolated agreements.
LAC Stability: Makes peace and tranquillity a precondition for progress.
Strategic Reciprocity: Ensures mutual concessions rather than unilateral compromises.
Protection of Core Interests: Safeguards Arunachal Pradesh, Eastern Ladakh, and Siliguri Corridor security.
Ground Verification: Links agreements with verifiable implementation.
Conclusion
India’s challenge is not merely to settle a boundary segment but to secure a durable and equitable border framework. Any settlement must preserve strategic interests, maintain stability along the LAC, and avoid creating incentives for future coercion. A comprehensive settlement rooted in the 2005 framework, supported by verifiable peace on the ground, remains more consistent with India’s long-term security and diplomatic objectives than a narrowly defined “early harvest” approach.
