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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Fundamental Rights,DPSP

1. History + Evolution
2. Features
3. Amendments
4. Basic Structure

  • States have the unlimited right to tax mineral-rich lands    

    Why in the News?

    The Supreme Court delivered a significant 8:1 judgment affirming that State Legislatures have the power to tax mining lands and quarries, independent of the Parliament’s Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act of 1957 (MMDR Act).

    About the verdict given by SC      

    • Judgment Overview: The majority opinion, authored by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, stated that states derive their taxing authority from Article 246 and Entry 49 of the State List, which pertains to taxation on lands and buildings.
    • Distinction Between Tax and Royalty: The Court clarified that royalty paid for mining leases is not considered a tax. 
      • Royalty is viewed as a contractual obligation between the mining lessee and the lessor, thus not subject to the same regulatory framework as taxes.
    • Parliamentary Limitations: The judgment emphasised that the MMDR Act cannot impose limitations on state taxation powers regarding mines and quarries. The Court rejected the argument that Entry 50 of the State List allowed Parliament to impose restrictions on state taxes related to mineral rights.
    • Dissenting Opinion: Justice B.V. Nagarathna provided a dissenting opinion, cautioning that allowing states to tax under Entry 49 could lead to double taxation and undermine the specific provisions of Entry 50.

    About the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act of 1957

    • The MMDR Act was enacted to regulate the mining sector in India, ensuring the development and conservation of minerals while balancing the interests of the state and the public.
    • The Act provides a comprehensive framework for the licensing and regulation of mines, including provisions for the fixation of royalties on mineral extraction.
    • The Act has been a point of contention regarding the extent of state powers to impose taxes on mineral rights, with arguments that it limits state legislative competence in this area.
    • The Supreme Court’s recent ruling clarifies that the MMDR Act does not restrict state powers to tax mineral rights, thus resolving conflicts arising from previous interpretations of the Act.

    On the division of the power

    • Constitutional Framework: The Constitution of India delineates the distribution of powers between the Centre and the States through the Seventh Schedule, which includes the State List and the Union List.
    • Entry 49 and Entry 50: Entry 49 allows states to levy taxes on lands and buildings, while Entry 50 pertains specifically to taxes on mineral rights, subject to limitations imposed by Parliament.
    • Judicial Clarity: The Supreme Court’s judgment clarifies that states can exercise their taxing powers under both Entries 49 and 50 without interference from the MMDR Act, reinforcing the states’ authority over local resources.

    Conclusion: The Supreme Court’s ruling affirms that states can tax mining lands independently of the MMDR Act, highlighting their authority under Article 246 and Entry 49, despite dissenting concerns about double taxation.

    Mains PYQ:

    Q Though the federal principle is dominant in our Constitution and that priniciple is one of its basic features, but it is equally true that federalism under the Indian Constitution leans in favour of a strong Centre, a feature that militates against the concept of strong federalism. 15M

  • Parliamentary Democracy: A Comparison between Nepal and India

    Why in the News?

    • On July 14, K. P. Sharma Oli was sworn in as Nepal’s Prime Minister for the fourth time, leading a new coalition government.
      • Since the abolition of the monarchy in 2008, Nepal has had 14 governments despite a new constitution in 2015 promising progress.

    Evolution of Nepal’s Constitution

    • 1948: The Government of Nepal Act was the first attempt at creating a constitution.
    • 1951: The Interim Government of Nepal Act aimed to establish democracy but was replaced in 1959.
    • 1959: Introduced a multi-party system, but the Panchayat Constitution of 1962 established a party-less system under King Mahendra.
    • 1990: A constitutional monarchy restored the multi-party system.
    • 2007: An Interim Constitution was adopted after continued political upheavals.
    • 2015: The current constitution established Nepal as a federal democratic republic.

    Comparing the Indian Constitution and Nepal’s Constitution:

    India Nepal
    Historical Background Adopted on November 26, 1949, and came into effect on January 26, 1950.

    Framed by the Constituent Assembly elected in 1946.

    		 Current constitution promulgated on September 20, 2015.

    Many attempts since 1948, 1951, 1959, 1962, 1990, and 2007.
    Form of Government Quasi-federal nature of the Indian constitution is described as a “Union of States” in Article 1. Other factors also talk about the quasi-federal like Emergency power and independent judiciary. etc

    Parliamentary system with the President as the ceremonial head and the Prime Minister as the head of government.

    		 Federal democratic republic.

    Parliamentary system with the President as the ceremonial head and the Prime Minister as the executive head.
    Structure of Government Bicameral legislature: Lok Sabha (House of the People) and Rajya Sabha (Council of States).

    Three levels of government: central, state, and local.

    		 Bicameral legislature: House of Representatives and National Assembly.

    Three levels of government: federal, provincial, and local.
    Federal Structure More centralized federal structure. The central government has significant authority over states.

    Flexible to allow greater central control when necessary.

    		 More decentralized federal structure. Greater autonomy to provinces.

    Includes seven provinces, each with its own government and legislature.
    Elections and Representation First-past-the-post (FPTP) system for Lok Sabha elections. Representation through single-member constituencies and multi-party systems. Mixed electoral system with both FPTP and proportional representation (PR). Ensures broader representation but leads to the proliferation of smaller parties.
    Judiciary The Supreme Court of India is the highest judicial authority.

    Ensures protection of fundamental rights and upholds the rule of law.

    		 The Supreme Court of Nepal is the highest judicial body.

    Interprets the Constitution and protects citizens’ rights. Aims to uphold the rule of law and safeguard fundamental rights.
    Fundamental Rights and Duties Comprehensive list of Fundamental Rights in Part III, including equality, freedom, religion, and constitutional remedies. Fundamental Duties in Part IV-A. Extensive fundamental rights, covering civil, political, and socio-economic rights. Emphasizes affirmative action for marginalized groups.
    Secularism and Religion A secular state with no official religion which mentioned in the Preamble of the Constitution. The secular state was declared in the 2015 Constitution.

    Protects religious freedom and promotes harmony among religious communities.

     

    PYQ:

    [2023] Compare and contrast the British and Indian approaches to Parliamentary sovereignty.

    [2022] Critically examine the procedures through which the Presidents of India and France are elected.

    [2021] Analyze the distinguishing features of the notion of Right to Equality in the Constitutions of the USA and India.

    [2021] Analyse the distinguishing features of the notion of Right to Equality in the Constitutions of the USA and India.

    [2020] The judicial systems in India and the UK seem to be converging as well as diverging in recent times. Highlight the key points of convergence and divergence between the two nations in terms of their judicial practices.

    [2019] What can France learn from the Indian Constitution’s approach to secularism?

    [2018] India and the USA are two large democracies. Examine the basic tenets on which the two political systems are based.

  • Is immunity for the President and Governors absolute?  

    Why in the news?

    The Supreme Court has agreed to examine if the immunity granted to the President and Governors under Article 361 violates fundamental rights and constitutional principles.

     What is the case?  

    • The Supreme Court is examining a petition filed by a contractual woman employee of the West Bengal Raj Bhavan, who has accused Governor C.V. Ananda Bose of sexual harassment and molestation.
      • The petitioner argues that the “absolute immunity” granted to the Governor under Article 361 of the Constitution undermines her fundamental rights and the fairness of the legal process.

    Immunity Under Article 361: 

    • Article 361 provides immunity to the President and Governors from being answerable to any court for acts performed in their official capacity.
    • Specifically, clause (2) of Article 361 states that no criminal proceedings can be initiated or continued against the President or a Governor during their term of office. The petitioner contends that this immunity should not apply to illegal acts that violate fundamental rights.
    • The petitioner argues that the Governor’s immunity caused negligent handling of her complaint by police, delaying justice and hindering investigations.
    • The Supreme Court will determine if Article 361(2) immunity is absolute or can be challenged in serious cases like sexual harassment.

    Does Article 361 Grant Absolution to the Governor against Criminal Charges?

    • Scope of Article 361: Article 361 does grant significant immunity to Governors, shielding them from criminal proceedings during their term. However, the immunity is not absolute.
      • The first provision allows for the conduct of the President to be reviewed by designated bodies for impeachment, while the second provision allows for civil suits against the government.
    • Judicial Precedents: Previous court rulings have indicated that while Governors enjoy immunity under Article 361, this does not prevent judicial scrutiny of their actions, especially if those actions infringe upon fundamental rights.
      • For example, in the case of Rameshwar Prasad vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court stated that civil immunity does not preclude challenges based on malafide actions.
    • Potential for Legal Challenge: The current case may set a precedent for how Article 361 is interpreted regarding criminal acts committed by Governors.
      • If the court finds that immunity does not apply to acts that violate fundamental rights, it could pave the way for accountability and legal recourse for victims of misconduct by constitutional authorities.

    Conclusion: The Supreme Court’s interpretation of Article 361 could redefine the immunity of Governors, potentially allowing criminal proceedings for actions violating fundamental rights, thereby ensuring accountability and justice for victims.

    Mains PYQ:

    Q Discuss the essential conditions for the exercise of the legislative powers by the Governor. Discuss the legality of the re-promulgation of ordinances by the Governor without placing them before the Legislature. (UPSC IAS/2022)

  • Right to Shelter is a Fundamental Right: Supreme Court     

    Why in the News?

    The Supreme Court emphasised the need to balance railway infrastructure development in Haldwani, Uttarakhand, with the fundamental right to shelter nearly 50,000 people accused of illegally encroaching on railway land.

    What was the Case?

    • The hearing was based on an application filed by the Railways seeking to modify a January 2023 Supreme Court order.
    • The order had stayed a Uttarakhand HC direction to evict the families within a week, even using paramilitary forces.
    • The application pointed out that the Ghaula River flood has disrupted railway operations in the region and that more land was urgently needed to lay new tracks.

    What is the Right to Shelter?

    • The right to shelter is derived from the Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which guarantees the protection of life and personal liberty.
    • Article 19(1)(e) provides the Right to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India.

    Judicial pronouncements related to it:

    • Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985): The Supreme Court recognized the right to livelihood as a part of the right to life under Article 21.
    • Chameli Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1996): The Supreme Court declared that the right to shelter is a fundamental right under Article 21. It includes adequate living space, safe and decent structures, clean surroundings, light, air, water, electricity, and sanitation.
    • Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation v. Nawab Khan Gulab Khan (1997): The Supreme Court directed the state to construct affordable houses for the poor, reiterating the state’s duty to provide shelter and make the right to life meaningful.

    Various Legislations supporting the Right to Shelter:

    • The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006
    • The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
    • The Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956

     

    PYQ:

    [2021] Consider the following statements :​

    1. ‘Right to the City’ is an agreed human right and the UN-Habitat monitors the commitments made by each country in this regard.​
    2. ‘Right to the City’ gives every occupant of the city the right to reclaim public spaces and public participation in the city.​
    3. ‘Right to the City’ means that the State cannot deny any public service or facility to the unauthorized colonies in the city.​

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    (a) 1 only

    (b) 3 only

    (c) 1 and 2

    (d) 2 and 3

  • What is Governor’s immunity under Article 361, set to be reviewed by Supreme Court?

    Why in the News?

    • The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a plea seeking to redefine the constitutional immunity of state Governors.
      • Article 361 of the Constitution shields the President and Governors from criminal prosecution and judicial scrutiny.
      • The Supreme Court will interpret whether the immunity includes the registration of an FIR, initiation of a preliminary inquiry, or a magistrate taking cognisance of an offence.

    Origins of Governor’s Immunity

    • The concept of immunity is based on the Latin maxim “rex non potest peccare” (the king can do no wrong), rooted in English legal traditions.
    • During the Constituent Assembly debates in 1949, member H. V. Kamath questioned whether immunity meant no proceedings could be instituted against the President or Governor during their term or only while they were in office.
      • The article was adopted without further debate on criminal immunity.

    What are immunities under Article 361?

    • According to Article 361(1), the President or a Governor is not answerable to any court for the exercise of their powers and duties.
    • Article 361(2) ensures that NO criminal proceedings can be initiated or continued against the President or Governor during their term.
    • Article 361(3) prohibits the arrest or imprisonment of the President or Governor while they are in office.
    • Article 361(4) states that civil lawsuits for personal acts against the President or Governor cannot be initiated during their term and can only proceed two months after a written notice is given post-term.

    Judicial Interpretations of Article 361:

    • Dr SC Barat and Anr vs. Hari Vinayak Pataskar Case (1961): Distinguished between the Governor’s official and personal actions. While official actions have complete immunity, civil proceedings for personal acts can proceed with prior notice.
    • Rameshwar Prasad vs. Union of India Case (2006): The Supreme Court recognized “complete immunity” for constitutional actions under Article 361(1), but allowed judicial review for actions taken with malicious intent.
    • Vyapam Scam Case (2015): The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that Governor Ram Naresh Yadav had absolute protection under Article 361(2), preventing his name from being included in the investigation to avoid undue legal harassment.
    • State of UP vs. Kalyan Singh Case (2017): The Supreme Court upheld that Kalyan Singh, while serving as Governor of Rajasthan, was immune under Article 361. Legal proceedings related to the Babri Masjid demolition were to resume after his term.
    • Telangana High Court Judgment (2024): Observed that the Constitution does not explicitly or implicitly bar judicial review of actions taken by a Governor, and stated that Article 361 immunity is personal and does not exclude judicial review.

    Case for Revisiting Immunity

    The debate on executive immunity is ongoing in other countries as well.

    • The US Supreme Court recently decided that former President Donald Trump is entitled to “absolute immunity” from criminal prosecution for official acts but not for unofficial or personal acts.
    • In India, the discussion is viewed within the larger context of the tension between Governors and opposition-ruled state governments.
    • The Supreme Court has noted instances where Governors acted with political motives.

    PYQ:

    [2018] Consider the following statements:

    1. No criminal proceedings shall be instituted against the Governor of a State in any court during his term of office.
    2. The emoluments and allowances of the Governor of a State shall not be diminished during his term of office.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    (a) 1 only

    (b) 2 only

    (c) Both 1 and 2

    (d) Neither 1 nor 2

    [2019] Which one of the following suggested that the Governor should be an eminent person from outside the State and should be a detached figure without intense political links or should not have taken part in politics in the recent past?

    (a) First Administrative Reforms Commission (1966)

    (b) Rajamannar Committee (1969)

    (c) Sarkaria Commission (1983)

    (d) National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (2000)

  • Bombay HC quashes Exemption from RTE Quota for Private Schools  

    Why in the News?

    The Bombay High Court has cancelled the Maharashtra government’s new rule that allowed private schools within 1 kilometer of government or government-aided schools to avoid reserving 25% of their seats for students from weaker sections and disadvantaged groups.

    Right to Education (RTE) Act: Overview

    • The Right to Education (RTE) Act, 2009 ensures free and compulsory education as fundamental right under Article 21A of the Indian Constitution.
    • It mandates that every child has the right to full-time elementary education of satisfactory and equitable quality in a formal school that meets certain essential norms and standards.
    • Key Provisions:
      • The RTE Act provides for free and compulsory education for all children between 6 and 14 years.
      • Schools must be available within a prescribed distance from the child’s residence to ensure accessibility.
      • The Act ensures the provision of adequate teachers and the establishment of standards for their training and quality.
    • Teacher Qualification: The teacher must pass the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), which is administered by the respective government authority. The National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) has established the minimum qualifications required for a person to be eligible for appointment as a teacher for classes I to VIII.
    • The RTE Act does NOT apply to Minority institutions.

    Section 12(1) (C) of the RTE Act:

    • Section 12(1) (C) requires private unaided and specified category schools to reserve at least 25% seats for children from economically weaker sections and disadvantaged groups.
    • This provision aims to promote social inclusion and ensure that children from all backgrounds have access to quality education.
    • The government reimburses schools for the expenses incurred for admitting these children, based on per-child expenditure incurred by the state.
    • Children from economically weaker sections and disadvantaged groups benefit from this Section as it provides them access to private schooling.
    • This section aims to contest education apartheid and bring parity and equality of opportunity for all children.

    Details of the Exemption Rule in Maharashtra

    • The notification stated that private unaided schools within one kilometer of a government or government-aided school would not need to reserve 25% of seats for socio-economically backward students.
    • Students in these areas would first be considered for admission to nearby government or government-aided schools.
    • The exemption also applied to future private schools established within a one-kilometer radius of government or government-aided schools.
    • If no such schools existed in the vicinity, private schools would be identified for RTE admissions.

    Similar Exemptions in Other States

    • Maharashtra joined Karnataka and Kerala in implementing this regime to exempt private schools from RTE admissions.
    • Karnataka introduced the rule in December 2018, referencing Kerala’s rules introduced in 2011.
    • In Kerala, the fee concession is available to RTE quota students only if there are no government or aided schools within one kilometer for Class 1 students.

    Reasons for Introducing Exemptions

    • Karnataka’s Law Minister stated in 2018 that the primary intention of RTE is to provide education to all classes of students.
    • Allowing parents to admit children to private schools despite nearby government schools resulted in a drop in enrollment ratios in government schools.
    • Private schools and teachers’ organizations highlighted that state governments often failed to reimburse fees for students admitted through the RTE quota.
      • Section 12(2) of the RTE Act binds state governments to reimburse expenses incurred by schools per child or the fee amount, whichever is less.
      • In Maharashtra, the Maharashtra English School Trustees Association (MESTA) threatened to boycott RTE admissions last December due to pending reimbursements of Rs 1,800 crore.

    PYQ:

    [2022] The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 remains inadequate in promoting incentive-based systems for children’s education without generating awareness about the importance of schooling. Analyse.

    [2018] Consider the following statements:

    1. As per the right to education (RTE) Act, to be eligible for appointment as a teacher in a state, a person would be required to possess the minimum qualification laid down by the concerned State council of Teacher education.
    2. As per the RTE Act, for teaching primary classes, a candidate is required to pass a Teacher Eligibility Test conducted in accordance with the National Council of Teacher Education guidelines.
    3. In India, more than 90 % of teacher education institutions are directly under the State Governments.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

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

  • The problems with sub-caste reservations

    Why in the News?

    The Supreme Court has reserved its decision on sub-caste reservations for SC/STs. Any ruling on this matter must be substantiated not only legally but also academically.

    What is the Sub-categorization of castes?

    It refers to the practice of further dividing larger caste categories into smaller groups or sub-groups based on specific criteria such as socio-economic status, geographical location, historical background, or specific needs for policy implementation.

    Background of the Case:

    • The case involves the validity of sub-classification within the SC and ST categories for providing reservations in government jobs and education.
    • In 2004 Supreme Court strikes down Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes (Rationalisation of Reservations) Act, 2000, citing violation of the right to equality in the E.V. Chinnaiah v State of Andhra Pradesh case and emphasised that the SC list should be treated as a single, homogeneous group
      • Only Parliament has the power to sub-classify SCs and STs for reservations
      • The Supreme Court is now considering whether states have the power to create sub-classifications within these reserved categories.
    • The case stems from a 1975 Punjab government notification that divided its 25% reservation for SCs into two categories: half for Balmikis (Valmikis) and Mazhabi Sikhs, and the other half for the remaining groups within the SC category.

    Objectives behind the implementation of reservations and present SC scenario:

    • Objective of Reservations: The primary objective of reservations, as advocated by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, is to ensure equitable representation and opportunities for historically marginalized communities, particularly Scheduled Castes (SCs).
    • Present SC scenario: Despite reservations, certain sub-castes within SCs continue to face challenges in securing adequate representation in jobs and education. This under-representation is often attributed to factors such as inadequate educational opportunities, economic disparities, and historical discrimination.

    The policy of economic empowerment in India and its associated challenges:

    • Policies for Economic Empowerment: These policies complement reservations by focusing on enhancing the ownership of capital assets (like land and businesses) and improving educational attainment among SC individuals
      • For example, Self-Employment Scheme for Rehabilitation of Manual Scavengers (SRMS), National Scheduled Castes Finance & Development Corporation (NSFDC) and National Safai Karamcharis Finance & Development Corporation (NSKFDC).
      • These policies are aimed at building capabilities and enabling greater participation in economic activities.
    • Challenges: There are challenges in implementing economic empowerment policies including inadequate access to credit and financial resources, lack of skill development initiatives, and persistent socio-economic barriers that hinder the upward mobility of SC communities.
      • Intersection with Reservations: Integrating economic empowerment with reservations is crucial to ensure that individuals from SC backgrounds not only secure reserved positions but also have the necessary skills and resources to thrive in competitive environments.

    What must be our focus? (Way Forward)

    • Holistic Approach: There is a need for a holistic approach that combines reservations with targeted economic and educational interventions. This approach should address both systemic discrimination and socio-economic barriers faced by SC communities.
    • Capacity Building: There should be emphasis on enhancing the educational infrastructure and skill development programs tailored to the needs of SC individuals.
    • Data-Driven Policy: The policy decisions related to sub-caste reservations should be informed by empirical data that assesses the actual impact of discrimination versus socio-economic factors on under-representation.

    Mains PYQ: 

    Q Whether National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) can enforce the implementation of constitutional reservation for the Scheduled Castes in the religious minority institutions? Examine (UPSC IAS/2018)

  • Karnataka State Employment of Local Candidates in the Industries, Factories and Other Establishments Bill, 2024

    Why in the News?

    The Karnataka Cabinet has approved a bill mandating that industries, factories, and other establishments appoint local candidates in 50% of management positions and 75% in non-management positions.

    • The bill was cleared in a Cabinet meeting chaired by the Chief Minister.

    Key features of the Bill:

    • Definition of a Local Candidate:
      • Born in Karnataka
      • Domiciled in Karnataka for 15 years
      • Proficient in speaking, reading, and writing Kannada
      • Passed a required test by the nodal agency
    • Educational Requirements:
      • Must have a secondary school certificate with Kannada as a language, or
      • Pass a Kannada proficiency test specified by the nodal agency
    • Training and Relaxation Provisions:
      • Industries and establishments must train local candidates within three years if qualified locals are unavailable
      • Establishments can apply for relaxation if local candidates are insufficient
      • The government’s decision on relaxation applications is final
      • Local candidates must constitute at least 25% in management and 50% in non-management positions
      • Non-compliance penalties range from ₹10,000 to ₹25,000

    Do you know?

    • The Punjab and Haryana High Court earlier quashed the Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Act, 2020, which mandated 75% reservation for state domiciles in the private sector jobs.
    • This decision was made because the State had overstepped its legislative authority and imposed undue restrictions on private employers.

    Background and Rationale:

    • Long-pending Demand:
      • The bill has been passed in response to longstanding demands for 100% job reservation for Kannadigas.
      • Earlier in July, Kannada organizations organized rallies in parts of the State, demanding immediate implementation of the Sarojini Mahishi Report.
    • Sarojini Mahishi Report:
      • The Sarojini Mahishi report, submitted in 1984 by Mahishi, former Union Minister and the first woman MP from Karnataka, included 58 recommendations.
      • The report recommended 100% reservation for locals in group C and D jobs in Central government departments and public sector undertakings (PSUs) in Karnataka.

    Reservation for Locals in Jobs: Constitutionality Check 

    Provision Potential Violation
    Article 14 Guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws. Reservation for locals could create unequal opportunities for non-locals, violating the principle of equality.
    Article 15 Prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. Reserving jobs for locals based on place of birth or domicile status may constitute discrimination against non-locals.
    Article 16 Ensures equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State. Though it allows reservation for backward classes, it does not explicitly extend this provision to private employment, making mandatory quotas for locals potentially unconstitutional.
    Article 19 Guarantees the freedom to move freely throughout the territory of India. Imposing local reservations could restrict the free movement of people seeking employment opportunities across states, infringing upon their freedom of movement and residence.

     

    PYQ:

    [2017] One of the implications of equality in society is the absence of:

    (a) Privileges

    (b) Restraints

    (c) Competition

    (d) Ideology

  • SC to look into the use of ‘Money Bills’ to pass laws   

    Why in the News? 

    CJI D.Y. Chandrachud has accepted the plea to list petitions challenging the passage of contentious legislation in Parliament as Money Bills.

    • This has given rise to the expectation that the matter could be heard and decided before Chandrachud demits office in November this year.

    Presently, the three key issues are referred to the 7-judge bench in the Supreme Court:

    • Amendments made post-2015, like the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) through Money Bills, giving the Enforcement Directorate wide powers, were valid or not.
    • Whether the passage of the Finance Act of 2017 as a Money Bill to alter appointments to 19 key judicial tribunals was valid or not
    • In the Aadhaar case, the Supreme Court had in 2018 upheld the Aadhaar Act as a valid Money Bill.
      • However, in 2021, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud (who was then a part of the bench) had dissented, saying the larger questions on Money Bills should be decided first before reviewing the Aadhaar judgment.
    • Now, the current Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud has agreed to list the petitions challenging the use of the Money Bill route by the Centre to pass contentious amendments, indicating he will constitute a 7-judge Constitution Bench to hear this matter.

    What is a Money Bill?

    • A Money Bill is a specific type of financial legislation that exclusively deals with matters related to taxes, government revenues, or expenditures.
      • It is defined under Article 110 of the Indian Constitution.
    • Every Money Bill is a Finance Bill but every Financial Bill is not a Money Bill: A Financial Bill can cover a broader range of financial issues, whereas a Money Bill is specifically limited to the matters mentioned in Article 110 of the Constitution. Therefore, while every Money Bill is a Financial Bill, not every Financial Bill is a Money Bill.

    Key provisions of the Money Bill: 

    • Article 110(1)(a): Imposition, abolition, remission, alteration, or regulation of any tax
    • Article 110(1)(b): The regulation of borrowing by the government or giving of any guarantee by the government or the amendment of the law for any financial obligations undertaken by the government
    • Article 110(1)(c): Custody of the Consolidated Fund or the Contingency Fund of India, the payment of money into or the withdrawal of money from any such Fund. 
    • Article 110(1)(d): Appropriation of money out of the Consolidated Fund of India
    • Article 110(1)(e): Declaration of any expenditure to be expenditure charged on the Consolidated Fund of India or the increase of the amount of any such expenditure
    • Article 110(1)(f): Receipt of money on account of the Consolidated Fund of India or the public account of India or the custody or issue of such money or the audit of the accounts of the Union or of a State
    • Article 110(1)(g): Any matter incidental to any of the matters specified in sub-clauses (a) to (f).

    What are the present challenges associated with the Parliament?

    • Circumvention of the Rajya Sabha:  The government is accused of misusing the Money Bill provision to evade scrutiny of the Bill by the Rajya Sabha where it was numerically weaker as compared to the Lok Sabha where it enjoyed pre-eminence.
    • Contentious Amendments passed as the Money Bill: Aadhaar Act, 2016; amendments to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002; amendments to the Foreign Contributions Regulations Act, 2010; Finance Act, 2017 which brought about changes in the mode of appointment of judicial tribunals; electoral bonds scheme brought through Finance Act, 2017.
      • For example, the Finance Act of 2017, passed as a Money Bill, altered the appointment processes for judicial tribunals, which was seen as an attempt to extend executive control over these institutions.
      • The Supreme Court has been involved in multiple such cases questioning the classification of certain bills as Money Bills. For instance, the Rojer Mathew case and the Aadhaar case (K. Puttaswamy case)
    • Finality of the Speaker’s Decision: The Lok Sabha Speaker’s decision to certify a bill as a Money Bill has been contested. The judiciary has debated whether this decision is final or subject to judicial review.

    Way forward: 

    • Need for strengthening Judicial Oversight: Establish clear guidelines and criteria for the classification of bills as Money Bills, ensuring they strictly adhere to the provisions outlined in Article 110 of the Constitution.
    • Requires the Reinforcement of Legislative Procedures: Enhance the role of the Rajya Sabha in the legislative process by ensuring that all significant amendments, especially those affecting governance structures or individual rights, undergo thorough scrutiny in both houses of Parliament.

    Mains PYQ: 

    Q The Indian Constitution has provisions for holding joint session of the two houses of the Parliament. Enumerate the occasions when this would normally happen and also the occasions when it cannot, with reasons thereof. (UPSC IAS/2017)

  • The SC ruling on the portrayal of disability in films 

    Why in the News?

    On July 8, the Supreme Court issued guidelines against stereotyping and discriminating persons with disabilities in visual media, prompted by a plea to ban Aaankh Micholi.

    Background:

    • The Supreme Court’s guidelines came in response to a plea filed by activist Nipun Malhotra challenging the alleged insensitive portrayal of differently-abled individuals in the Film ‘Aaankh Micholi’.
    • The petitioner argued that the film contained derogatory references and stereotyping of persons with disabilities.

    Key Highlights of the Supreme Court Ruling:

    • Avoiding Derogatory Language: The court asked creators to avoid words like “cripple”, “spastic”, “afflicted”, “suffering”, and “victim” as they contribute to negative self-image and perpetuate discriminatory attitudes.
    • Accurate Representation: The court said stereotyping differently-abled persons in visual media and films must end, and creators should provide an accurate representation of disabilities rather than mocking or mythifying them.
    • Involvement of Persons with Disabilities: The court asked creators to practice the principle of “nothing about us, without us” and involve persons with disabilities in the creation and assessment of visual media content.
    • Training and Collaboration: The court emphasized the need for training programs for writers, directors, producers, and actors to sensitize them on the impact of portrayals on public perceptions.

    What are the laws which grant disability rights?   

    • Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act (RPwD Act), 2016: This is the primary legislation that comprehensively addresses the rights and entitlements of persons with disabilities in India. It replaced the earlier Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, of 1995.
    • The National Trust Act, 1999: It provides legal support to persons with autism, cerebral palsy, mental retardation, and multiple disabilities. It focuses on enabling guardianship and providing support to those who may not have guardians.
    • Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992: Regulates the training of rehabilitation professionals and promotes research in rehabilitation and special education.
    • Mental Healthcare Act, 2017: While primarily focusing on mental health issues, this Act also includes provisions related to the rights and treatment of persons with mental disabilities.

    Are the laws governing the ‘Rights of Differently-abled’ persons being implemented properly?  

    • Implementation Gaps: There are significant gaps between the provisions laid out in laws like the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016, and their actual implementation on the ground. Many disabled persons continue to face barriers to accessing their entitlements and rights.
    • Awareness and Sensitization: There is a lack of awareness among the general public, as well as within government bodies and institutions, about the rights and needs of persons with disabilities.
    • Infrastructure and Accessibility: Despite legal mandates for accessibility in public places, transportation, and buildings, implementation remains uneven.
    • Employment Opportunities: While laws mandate employment quotas for persons with disabilities in government and private sectors, these quotas are often not met.

    What is the way forward?

    • Enhanced Monitoring and Accountability: Implement regular audits and monitoring mechanisms to ensure compliance with disability rights laws at all levels of governance and across sectors.
    • Need to Increase Awareness and Sensitization: Launch nationwide awareness campaigns targeting both the general public and stakeholders within government and private sectors to promote understanding of disability rights.

    Mains PYQ: 

    Q The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 remains only a legal document without intense sensitisation of government functionaries and citizens regarding disability. Comment. (UPSC IAS/2022)