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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Governance

Important aspects of Society

  • Ed-tech in India

    The article suggests a policy formulation for future of the learning with the adoption of technology.

    Learning crisis facing and finding solutions through technology

    • India was facing a learning crisis, even before the Covid-19 pandemic, with one in two children lacking basic reading proficiency at the age of 10.
    • The pandemic worsened it with the physical closure of 15.5 lakh schools that has affected more than 248 million students for over a year.
    • With the Fourth Industrial Revolution — the imperative now is to reimagine education and align it with the unprecedented technological transformation.
    • The pandemic offers a critical, yet stark reminder of the impending need to weave technology into education.

    Is India prepared for integrating technology in learning?

    • India’s new National Education Policy (NEP) 2020envisions the establishment of an autonomous body, the National Education Technology Forum (NETF).
    • The NETF will spearhead efforts towards providing a strategic thrust to the deployment and use of technology.
    • India is well-poised to take this leap forward with increasing access to tech-based infrastructure, electricity, and affordable internet connectivity.
    • Flagship programmes such as Digital India and the Ministry of Education’s initiatives, including the Digital Infrastructure for School Education (DIKSHA), open-source learning platform and UDISE+  will help in this direction.
    • However, we must remember that technology cannot substitute schools or replace teachers.
    • It’s not “teachers versus technology”; the solution is in “teachers and technology”.
    • In fact, tech solutions are impactful only when embraced and effectively leveraged by teachers.

    Four key elements for ed-tech policy architecture

    • A comprehensive ed-tech policy architecture must focus on four key elements:
    • Access: Providing access to learning, especially to disadvantaged groups.
    • Enable: Enabling processes of teaching, learning, and evaluation.
    • Teacher training: Facilitating teacher training and continuous professional development.
    • Governance: Improving governance systems including planning, management, and monitoring processes.

    Ed-tech ecosystem in India

    • With over 4,500 start-ups and a current valuation of around $700 million, the ed-tech market is geared for exponential growth.
    • There are, in fact, several examples of grassroots innovation.
    • The Hamara Vidhyalaya in Namsai district, Arunachal Pradesh, is fostering tech-based performance assessments.
    • Assam’s online career guidance portal is strengthening school-to-work and higher-education transition for students in grades 9 to 12.
    • Samarth in Gujarat is facilitating the online professional development of lakhs of teachers in collaboration with IIM-Ahmedabad.
    • Jharkhand’s DigiSATH is spearheading behaviour change by establishing stronger parent-teacher-student linkages.
    • Himachal Pradesh’s HarGhar Pathshala is providing digital education for children with special needs.

    Way forward

    1) Short term policy formulation

    • In the immediate term, there must be a mechanism to thoroughly map the ed-tech landscape, especially their scale, reach, and impact.
    • The policy formulation and planning process must strive to:
    • 1) Enable convergence across schemes– education, skills, digital governance, and finance.
    • 2) Foster integration of solutions through public-private partnerships, factor in voices of all stakeholders.
    • 3) Bolster cooperative federalism across all levels of government.
    • Special attention must be paid to address the digital divide at two levels: access and skills.
    • Thematic areas of the policy should feature infrastructure and connectivity; high-quality software and content; and global standards for outcome-based evaluation, real-time assessments, and systems monitoring.

    2) Long-term policy measures

    • In the longer term, as policy translates to practice at local levels a repository of the best-in-class technology solutions, good practices and lessons from successful implementation must be curated.
    • The NITI Aayog’s India Knowledge Hub and the Ministry of Education’s DIKSHA and ShaGun platforms can facilitate and amplify such learning.

    Conclusion

    With NEP 2020 having set the ball rolling, a transformative ed-tech policy architecture is the need of the hour to effectively maximise student learning.

  • Taking note of the Delhi High Court’s judgment on ‘defining terrorism’

    The recent Delhi High Court order granting bail to the student activists charged with the UAPA has brought into focus the issue of misuse of anti-terror laws by the policy. The article deals with this issue.

    Misuse of anti-terror laws

    • In the period 2015-2019, as many as 7,840 persons were arrested under the UAPA (Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act) 1967 but only 155 were convicted by the trial courts.
    • Under TADA, till 1994, though 67,000 people were detained, just 725 were convicted in spite of confessions made to police officers being made admissible.
    • In Kartar Singh (1994), the Supreme Court of India had observed that in many cases, the prosecution had unjustifiably invoked provisions of TADA.
    • It added that such an invocation of TADA was ‘nothing but the sheer misuse and abuse of the Act by the police’.

     The definition of terrorism

    • There is no universal definition of the term ‘terrorism’ either in India or at the international level.
    •  Accordingly, neither TADA nor UAPA has a definition of the crucial terms ‘terror’ and ‘terrorism’.
    • Section 15 of UAPA merely defines a terrorist act in extremely wide and vague words: ‘as any act with intent to threaten or likely to threaten the unity, integrity, security, or sovereignty of India or with intent to strike terror or likely to strike terror in the people….’.
    • In Yaqoob Abdul Razzak Memon (2013), the Supreme Court said that terrorist acts can range from threats to actual assassinations, kidnappings, airline hijacking, car bombs, explosions, mailing of dangerous materials, use of chemical, biological, nuclear weapons etc.
    • In Hitendra Vishnu Thakur (1994), the Supreme Court had defined terrorism as the ‘use of violence when its most important result is not merely the physical and mental damage of the victim but the prolonged psychological effect it produces … on the society as a whole’.
    • In Kartar Singh (1994), the Supreme Court held that a mere disturbance of public order that disturbs even the tempo of the life of community of any particular locality is not a terrorist act.
    • By this interpretation, the CAA protests in a few localities of Delhi cannot be termed as terrorist activity.
    • In the PUCL judgment (2003), the Supreme Court included within its meaning amongst other things the ‘razing of constitutional principles that we hold dear’, ‘tearing apart of the secular fabric’ and ‘promotion of prejudice and bigotry.
    • Accordingly, in the CAA protest case the Delhi High Court concluded that since the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in UAPA is wide and somewhat vague, it cannot be casually applied to ordinary conventional crimes.
    • The Delhi High Court said that the act of the accused must reflect the essential character of terrorism.

    Distinction between ‘law and order’, ‘public order’ and ‘security of state’

    • In Ram Manohar Lohia (1966), the Supreme Court explained the distinction between the above three terms.
    • Law and order represents the largest circle within which is the next circle representing ‘public order’, and the smallest circle represents the ‘security of state’.
    • Accordingly, an act may affect ‘law and order’ but not ‘public order’.
    • Similarly, an act may adversely affect ‘public order’ but not the ‘security of state.’
    • In most UAPA cases, the police have failed to understand these distinctions and unnecessarily clamped UAPA charges for simple violations of law and order.

    Conclusion

    Radicalisation generally succeeds only with those who have been subjected to real or perceived injustices. Let us remove injustice to combat terrorism. The creation of a truly just, egalitarian and non-oppressive society would be far more effective in combating terrorism.

  • Testing the constitutionality of section 124A of IPC

    The article highlights the issues with section 124A of the Indian Penal Code and suggests a review of its constitutionality in Kedar Nath judgement by a larger bench.

    About section 124A of IPC

    • Section 124A of the IPC contains the law of sedition.
    • This law was enacted by the British colonial government in 1870 with the sole object of suppressing all voices of Indians critical of the government.
    • The gist of the offence is: bringing or attempting to bring the government into contempt or hatred, or exciting or attempting to excite disaffection towards the government.
    • It categorises four ways sources of seditious acts: spoken words, written words, signs or visible representations.
    • There are three explanations attached to this section.
    • The first explanation says that ‘disaffection’ includes disloyalty and all feelings of enmity.
    • The second and third explanations say that one can comment on the measures of the government without bringing or attempting to bring it into contempt or hatred or exciting or attempting to excite disaffection towards the government.

    What did Supreme Court say in Kedar Nath case (1962)

    • In the ultimate analysis, the judgment in Kedar Nath which read down Section 124A and held that without incitement to violence or rebellion there is no sedition.
    •  It says that ‘only when the words written or spoken etc. which have the pernicious tendency or intention of creating public disorder’ the law steps in.
    • So if a policeman thinks that a cartoon has the pernicious tendency to create public disorder, he will arrest that cartoonist.
    • The Kedar Nath judgment makes it possible for the law enforcement machinery to easily take away the fundamental right of citizens.

    Violation of Article 19

    • Sedition, as defined in Section 124A of the IPC, clearly violates Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution which confers the Fundamental Right of freedom of speech and expression.
    • Further, this section does not get protection under Article 19(2) on the ground of reasonable restriction.
    • However, the Supreme Court invoked the words ‘in the interest … of public order’ used in Article 19(2) and held that the offence of sedition arises when seditious utterances can lead to disorder or violence.
    • This act of reading down Section 124A brought it clearly under Article 19(2) and saved the law of sedition from being declared unconstitutional.

    Consider the question “What are the issues with section 124A of Indian Penal Code? Examine the interplay between Article 19 and section 124 of IPC.”

    Conclusion

    People will display disaffection towards a government which has failed them. The law of sedition which penalises them for hating a government which does not serve them cannot exist because it violates Article 19(1)(a) and is not protected by Article 19(2). Therefore, an urgent review of the Kedar Nath judgement by a larger Bench has become necessary.

  • One Nation One Ration Card (ONORC)

    The Supreme Court directed all states and UTs to implement the One Nation, One Ration Card (ONORC) system, which allows for inter-and intra-state portability, by July 31.

    ONORC Scheme

    • The ONORC scheme is aimed at enabling migrant workers and their family members to buy subsidized ration from any fair price shop anywhere in the country under the National Food Security Act, 2013.
    • For instance, a migrant worker from will be able to access PDS benefits elsewhere in India, where he or she may have gone in search of work.
    • While the person can buy food grains as per his or her entitlement under the NFSA at the place where he or she is based, members of his or her family can still go to their ration dealer back home.
    • To promote this reform in the archaic Public Distribution System (PDS), the government has provided incentives to states.

    How does ONORC work?

    • ONORC is based on technology that involves details of beneficiaries’ ration card, Aadhaar number, and electronic Points of Sale (ePoS).
    • The system identifies a beneficiary through biometric authentication on ePoS devices at fair price shops.
    • The system runs with the support of two portals —Integrated Management of Public Distribution System (IM-PDS) (impds.nic.in) and Annavitran (annavitran.nic.in), which host all the relevant data.
    • When a ration card holder goes to a fair price shop, he or she identifies himself or herself through biometric authentication on ePoS, which is matched real time with details on the Annavitaran portal.
    • Once the ration card details are verified, the dealer hands out the beneficiary’s entitlements.
    • While the Annavitaran portal maintains a record of intra-state transactions — inter-district and intra-district — the IM-PDS portal records the inter-state transactions.

    How many people will it benefit?

    • Under the National Food Security Act, 2013, about 81 crore people are entitled to buy subsidised foodgrains — rice at Rs 3/kg, wheat at Rs 2/kg, and coarse grains at Re 1/kg – from designated fair price shops.
    • As on 28 June 2021, there are about 5.46 lakh fair price shops and 23.63 crore ration cardholders across the country.
    • Each NFSA ration cardholder is assigned to a fair price shop near the place where his ration card is registered.

    What factors led to the launch of ONORC?

    • Earlier, NFSA beneficiaries were not able to access their PDS benefits outside the jurisdiction of the specific fair price shop to which they have been assigned.
    • The government envisioned the ONORC to give them access to benefits from any fair price shop.
    • The idea was to reform the PDS, which has been historically marred by inefficiency and leakages.
    • ONORC was initially launched as an inter-state pilot.
    • When the Covid-19 pandemic forced thousands of migrant workers to return to their villages last year, a need was felt to expedite the rollout.

    What has been the coverage so far?

    • Till date, 32 states and Union Territories have joined the ONORC, covering about 69 crore NFSA beneficiaries.
    • About 1.35 crore portability transactions every month are being recorded under ONORC on an average.
    • While inter-state ration card portability is available in 32 states, the number of such transactions is much lower than that of intra-district and inter-district transactions.

    States not joining

    • Four states are yet to join the scheme — Assam, Chhattisgarh, Delhi and West Bengal. There are various reasons.
    • For instance, Delhi is yet to start the use of ePoS in fair price shops, which is a prerequisite for the implementation of ONORC.
    • In the case of West Bengal, the state government has demanded that the non-NFSA ration cardholders — ration cards issued by the state government — should also be covered under the ONORC.

  • NITI Aayog releases study on ‘Not-for-Profit’ hospital model

    NITI Aayog has released a comprehensive study on the not-for-profit hospital model in the country, in a step towards closing the information gap on such institutions and facilitating robust policymaking in this area.

    ‘Not-for-Profit’ hospitals

    • The “Not-for-Profit” Hospital Sector has the reputation of providing affordable and accessible healthcare for many years.
    • This sector provides not only curative healthcare, but also preventive healthcare, and links healthcare with social reform, community engagement, and education.
    • They utilize the resources and grants provided to them by the Government to provide cost-effective healthcare to the population without being overly concerned about profits.
    • However, this sector remains largely understudied, with a lack of awareness about its services in the public domain.

    Significance for India

    • As per the NITI Aayog’s report, the not-for-profit hospitals account for only 1.1% of treated ailments as of June 2018.
    • The report further revealed that for-profit hospitals account for 55.3% of in-patients, while not-for-profit hospitals account for only 2.7% of in-patients in the country.
    • The cumulative cost of care at not-for-profit hospitals is lesser than for-profit hospitals by about one-fourth in the in-patient department.
    • This is reckoned by the package component of cost, which is approximately 20% lower, the doctor’s or surgeon’s charges, which are approximately 36% lower and the major aspect being the bed charges, which are approximately 44% lower than the for-profit hospitals.

    NITI Aayog’s approach

    • Categorization of the prominent not-for-profit hospitals based on the premise of services and their ownership
    • Understanding the business model of the hospitals i.e. the financial viability, and their dependence on donations and grants
    • Understanding the challenges faced by these hospitals
    • Formulation of recommendations for policy interventions to promote the sector

    Categories of such hospitals

    Using the above-mentioned approach and secondary research, the following four categories were defined for the not-for-profit hospitals:

    1. Faith-based Hospitals
    2. Community-based Hospitals
    3. Cooperative Hospitals
    4. Private Trust Hospitals

    Why need such hospitals?

    • There has been relatively low investment in the expansion of the health sector in the private domain.
    • The not-for-profit hospital sector provides not only curative but also preventive healthcare.
    • It links healthcare with social reform, community engagement, and education.
    • It uses government resources and grants to provide cost-effective healthcare to people without being concerned about profits.

  • Blended mode of teaching

    Blended mode of teaching and its advantages

    • A recent circular by the University Grants Commission (UGC) proposes that all higher educational institutions (HEI) teach 40% of any course online and the rest 60% offline termed as blended learning (BL).
    • The UGC argues that this “blended mode of teaching” and learning paves the way for:
    • 1) Increased student engagement in learning.
    • 2) Enhanced student-teacher interactions.
    • 3) Improved student learning outcomes.
    • 4) More flexible teaching and learning environments, among other things.
    • 5) Other key benefits such as the increased opportunity for institutional collaborations at a distance and enhanced self-learning accruing from blended learning (BL).
    • 6) BL benefits the teachers as well. It shifts the role of the teacher from being a “knowledge provider to a coach and mentor”.
    • 7)  The note adds that BL introduces flexibility in assessment and evaluation patterns as well.

    Challenges

    • All India Survey on Higher Education (2019-20) report shows that 60.56% of the 42,343 colleges in India are located in rural areas and 78.6% are privately managed.
    • Only big corporates are better placed to invest in technology and provide such learning.
    • Second, according to datareportal statistics, Internet penetration in India is only 45% as of January 2021.
    • This policy will only exacerbate the existing geographical and digital divide.
    • Third, BL leaves little room for all-round formation of the student that includes the development of their intelligent quotient, emotional quotient, social quotient, physical quotient and spiritual quotient.
    • The listening part and subsequent interactions with the teacher may get minimised.
    • Also, the concept note assumes that all students have similar learning styles and have a certain amount of digital literacy to cope with the suggested learning strategies of BL.
    • This is far from true. Education in India is driven by a teacher-centred approach.

    Suggestions

    • The government should ensure equity in access to technology and bandwidth for all HEIs across the country free of cost.
    • Massive digital training programmes must be arranged for teachers.
    • Even the teacher-student ratio needs to be readjusted to implement BL effectively.
    • This may require the appointment of a greater number of teachers.
    • The design of the curriculum should be decentralised and based on a bottom-up approach.
    • More power in such education-related policymaking should be vested with the State governments.
    • Switching over from a teacher-centric mode of learning at schools to the BL mode at the tertiary level will be difficult for learners.
    • Hence, the government must think of overhauling the curriculum at the school level as well.
    • Finally, periodical discussions, feedback mechanisms and support services at all levels would revitalise the implementation of the learning programme of the National Education Policy 2020, BL.
    • It will also lead to the actualisation of the three cardinal principles of education policy: access, equity and quality.

    Conclusion

    Government must take steps to address the concerns with blended learning before implementing it.

  • What govt proposes to change in film certification

    The Centre has recently released the draft Cinematograph (Amendment) Bill 2021 to the general public for comments.

    Cinematograph (Amendment) Bill 2021

    • The new draft proposes to amend the Cinematograph Act of 1952 with some provisions.
    • It seeks to give the Centre “revisionary powers” and enable it to “re-examine” films already cleared by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC).

    A look at what the draft proposes to change:

    (a) Revision of certification

    • This will equip the Centre with revisionary powers on account of violation of Section 5B(1) (principles for guidance in certifying films).
    • The current Act, in Section 6, already equips the Centre to call for records of proceedings in relation to a film’s certification.
    • The Ministry of I&B explained that the proposed revision “means that the Central Government, if the situation so warranted, has the power to reverse the decision of the Board”.
    • Currently, because of a judgment by the Karnataka High Court, which was upheld by the Supreme Court in November 2020, the Centre cannot use its revisionary powers on films that have already been granted a certificate by the CBFC.

    Issues

    • The draft comes shortly after the abolition of the Film Certificate Appellate Tribunal, which was the last point of appeal for filmmakers against the certificate granted to their film.
    • The draft has been criticized by filmmakers and term it a “super censor”.

    (b) Age-based certification

    • The draft proposes to introduce age-based categorisation and classification. Currently, films are certified into three categories — ‘U’ for unrestricted public exhibition; ‘U/A’ that requires parental guidance for children under 12; and ‘A’ for adult films.
    • The new draft proposes to divide the categories into further age-based groups: U/A 7+, U/A 13+ and U/A 16+.
    • This proposed age classification for films echoes the new IT rules for streaming platforms.

    (c) Provision against piracy

    • The Ministry noted that at present, there are no enabling provisions to check film piracy in the Cinematograph Act, 1952.
    • The draft proposes to add Section 6AA that will prohibit unauthorized recording.
    • The proposed section states, no person shall, without the written authorization of the author, be permitted to make an audio-visual recording device.
    • Violation shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term of not less than three months and may extend to three years and with a fine which shall not be less than Rs 3 lakh which may extend to 5 per cent of the audited gross production cost or with both.

    (d) Eternal certificate

    • The draft proposes to certify films for perpetuity.
    • Currently, a certificate issued by the CBFC is valid only for 10 years.

  • Centre must make way for states in Covid fight

    The States are better equipped to deal with the health emergencies and the Centre needs to augment them in their efforts. The article deals with this issue.

    Role of the States in health crisis

    • Covid-19 pandemic is a national crisis calling for concerted efforts by both, the Government of India (GoI) and state governments.
    • Health is a state subject, and the states have been pioneering many health programmes on their own, some with support and funding from the GoI, for a very long time.
    • The number of employees in the health wing of the GoI is negligible as compared to that in any state government.
    • The GoI must help them, motivate them to do better and assist them in their task.
    • Also, the GoI must and can play a major role is in vaccination.

    Role of the Central government

    • It must try to augment supplies by encouraging companies to produce more and through imports/gifts.
    •  However, whatever it procures must be allotted to states in proportion to their eligible population.
    • State governments must be involved in this policy.
    • The vaccination policy may be left to the state governments based on the allocation. 
    • The GoI must also augment supplies of critical medical goods through imports and donations from friendly nations in view of their acute shortage.
    • It must distribute them to the needy states transparently and equitably.

    Steps that need to be taken

    • Lockdowns need to be lifted in a calibrated manner depending on local conditions.
    • Lockdowns are not the solution, they just buy breathing time which can be used by governments to ramp up capacity.
    • State governments must set up efficient and well-functioning control rooms and telemedicine centres to guide people on home treatment and timely admission to hospitals.
    • The private sector can also be fully involved in these efforts.
    • Bed capacity must be increased in both private and public sectors, with all necessary requirements such as oxygen, medicines, and health workers.
    • It is also important to put in place a standard guidance protocol for health workers and control rooms to guide patients through the disease.
    •  Enforcement of masks and distancing in public places must go on till the country is fully vaccinated.
    • The measures suggested above require hard work and efficient management by state governments, by a team of reputed professionals and civil servants.
    • Daily briefing by a professional, not a politician, is the need of the hour at both the Centre and state level, giving some confidence and assurance to the public.

    Consider the question “In dealing with the health crisis the Union Government and the State governments are better placed for certain roles.  In light of this, examine the important role of the States in dealing with the Covid pandemic and how the Union government can complement it.”

    Conclusion

    The central government must realise that states are on the forefront in this war, and therefore, play a supporting and proactive role. It has only a minor, behind-the-scenes role in the health sector.

  • Time to rethink the Big Tech’s immunity

    The article discusses the need for regulation of social media and counters against placing social media on a higher pedestal for the application of reasonable restrictions. 

    Social media and its regulation

    • Social media is a commercial product that connects people all over the globe.
    • It allows people to converse with each other through profiles both known and anonymous.
    • The object is purely commercial, that is to make money.
    • The fact that a commercial product could be used for a social purpose does not make the product a social good.
    • The new Information Technology Rules, 2021 formulated by the Government of India attempts to bring in a minimum regulatory standard to social media.
    • The present amendment to the rules is to formulate a broad and soft-touch regulation mechanism for use of the product, just like one would for a good like a car or a service like chartered accountancy.

    Issues with regulation of social media

    1) Immunity from content posted on platforms

    •  Social media companies enjoy an immunity — they are not considered responsible for the contents posted on them.
    • The immunity is granted on the ground that social media is merely a platform or a sort of a glorified postbox.
    • It is incorporated under the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines) Rules, 2011 framed under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act.
    • This protection is itself unique as it is not extended to newspapers, magazines or even websites.
    • This protection is given by the government as an exceptional measure.
    • The present amendment to rules only tries to update and make these rules workable considering the latest global developments.

    2) Constitution allows for restriction of freedom of speech

    • The Constitution itself gives us a restricted right to freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) and 19(2).
    • The argument that social media is entitled to some form of higher protection because it exists on the internet is an untenable argument.
    • The Constitution doesn’t recognise a hierarchy of rights depending on the medium through which the freedom of speech is exercised.

    3) Important for political and commercial speech

    • Social media has become so crucial to commercial and political speech in this country, there is an urgent need to regulate it.
    • It has effectively become a public square in which the most important conversations on politics and society are discussed.
    • The function of social media is clearly a public function at the lowest and as a public utility at the high end, and, therefore, automatically subject to regulation and the writ jurisdiction of the courts.

    Conclusion

    For all its significance and importance, social media needs to be regulated. However, the regulations should not hamper the freedom of expression and free speech.

  • What is Open Market Sale Scheme (OMSS)?

    The Centre has informed the Supreme Court regarding the purchase of grains by the States and the UTs under the Open Market Sales Scheme (OMSS) in 2021-2022 while debunking apprehensions that those without ration cards may be left to die.

    Open Market Sale Scheme (OMSS)

    • OMSS refers to the selling of food grains by the government/government agencies at predetermined prices in the open market from time to time.
    • This scheme aims to enhance the supply of grains especially during the lean season and thereby to moderate the general open market prices, especially in the deficit regions.
    • The Food Corporation of India (FCI) on the instructions from the Government, sells wheat and rice in the open market from time to time.
    • This enhances the supply of wheat and rice especially during the lean season and moderates the open market prices, especially in the deficit regions.

    Components of the scheme

    The present form of OMSS comprises 3 schemes as under:

    1. Sale of wheat to bulk consumers/private traders through e-auction.
    2. Sale of wheat to bulk consumers/private traders through e-auction by dedicated movement.
    3. Sale of Raw Rice Grade ‘A’ to bulk consumers/private traders through e-auction.

    Selling through a transparent process

    • For transparency in operations, the Corporation has switched over to e-auction for sale under Open Market Sale Scheme (Domestic).
    • The FCI conducts a weekly auction to conduct this scheme in the open market using the platform of commodity exchange NCDEX (National Commodity and Derivatives Exchange Limited).
    • The State Governments/ Union Territory Administrations are also allowed to participate in the e-auction if they require wheat and rice outside TPDS & OWS.

    Answer this PYQ in the comment box:

    Q.The economic cost of food grains to the Food Corporation of India is Minimum Support Price and bonus (if any) paid to the farmers plus:

    (a) Transportation cost only

    (b) Interest cost only

    (c) Procurement incidentals and distribution cost

    (d) Procurement incidentals and charges for godowns