💥Mains Ready By December. Smash Mains & Smash PYQ Admissions Open
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Governance

Important aspects of Society

  • In the Indian governance system, the role of non-state actors has been only marginal. Critically examine this statement.

  • Effectiveness of the government system at various levels and people’s participation in the governance system are inter-dependent. Discuss their relationship with each other in context of India.

  • Initially Civil Services in India were designed to achieve the goals of neutrality and effectiveness, which seems to be lacking in the present context. Do you agree with the view that drastic reforms are required in Civil Services. Comment

  • Is the National Commission for Women able to strategize and tackle the problems that women face at both public and private spheres? Give reasons in support of your answer.

  • ‘The emergence of Self Help Groups(SHGs) in contemporary times points to the slow but steady withdrawal of the state from developmental activities’. Examine the role of the SHGs in developmental activities and the measures taken by the Government of India to promote the SHGs.

  • Citizens’ Charter is an ideal instrument of organizational transparency and accountability, but it has its own limitations. Identify the limitations and suggest measures for greater effectiveness or the Citizens Charter.

    The Citizen’s Charter, introduced in India in 1997 (DARPG) following the UK model, aims to make public services transparent, accountable, and citizen-centric by clearly defining service standards, timelines, and grievance redressal mechanisms.

    Role in Ensuring Transparency and Accountability

    Defines Service Standards – Eg- Passport Seva Kendra specifies delivery within 3 working days for Tatkal applications.

    Enhances Administrative Transparency – Makes procedures, responsibilities, and timelines public, reducing scope for arbitrariness and discretion.

    Promotes Accountability of Officials – Identifies responsible officers for each service and grievance redressal, ensuring answerability for delays or failures.

    Empowers Citizens to demand better service delivery, question inefficiencies, and seek grievance redressal through defined channels.

    Builds mutual expectations between government and citizens, enhancing trust in public institutions.

    Provides a benchmark for assessing departmental efficiency and monitoring service outcomes through periodic audits.

    Promotes feedback-based improvement by institutionalizing citizen input in service reforms.

    Limitations of Citizen’s Charter

    Charters are non-statutory and lack penal provisions for non-compliance, reducing accountability.

    Top Down Approach – Charters are formulated by bureaucrats without citizen consultation, making them non-representative and unrealistic.

    Low Public Awareness – Eg- only 36% of users knew of service standards (NITI Aayog, 2023).

    Weak Grievance Redressal – Absence of clear escalation mechanisms leads to ineffective resolution and loss of citizen confidence.

    Bureaucratic Resistance – Many departments treat the Charter as a procedural formality rather than a reform instrument.

    Poor Review and Monitoring – Charters are rarely updated or evaluated; lack of performance metrics weakens impact.

    Fragmented Implementation – No uniform structure or standards across ministries and states, causing inconsistency in service quality.

    Accessibility issues due to absence of regional language versions

    Measures for Greater Effectiveness

    Enact a Citizen’s Charter Act with penalties for non-compliance, similar to Right to Public Services Acts in MP and Bihar.

    Integration with Grievance Systems – Link Charters with CPGRAMS and State Service Guarantee Acts for real-time grievance tracking.

    Regular Review and Evaluation – Institutionalize annual audits and third-party evaluations to assess compliance and update service commitments.

    Conduct public awareness campaigns and train officials under the Sevottam Framework for citizen-oriented delivery.

    Technological Integration – Promote digital dashboards, online service tracking, and data-based performance monitoring.

    Performance Incentives and Accountability – Introduce reward mechanisms for compliant departments and penalties for persistent failures.

    By aligning it with the 2nd ARC recommendations, it can evolve from a symbolic commitment to a practical framework for responsive, transparent, and citizen-centric governance.

  • Multiplicity of various commissions for the vulnerable sections or the society leads to problems or overlapping jurisdiction and duplication of functions. Is it better to merge all commissions into an umbrella Human Rights Commission? Argue your case.

    “The true measure of a democracy is how it treats its weakest members.” – Mahatma Gandhi

    The Indian state has established a network of statutory and constitutional commissions to uphold equality, dignity, and justice as envisioned in Articles 14-17, 21, and 46 of the Constitution.

    Problems of Overlapping Jurisdiction

    Ambiguity in Mandate – Example- Hathras case – NCSC & NCW both intervened.

    Parallel Investigations – Example- Bilkis Bano case – NHRC, NCW, and NCM all investigated.

    Lack of Coordination leads to contradictory recommendations.

    Confusion in Accountability – Citizens unclear which body to approach for redressal.

    Problems of Duplication of Functions

    Repetitive Reporting

    Fragmented Data Systems – Separate data collection on similar issues creates inconsistency.

    Resource Wastage – Each commission maintains its own secretariat, inquiry cells, and legal divisions, leading to inefficiency.

    Overlapping Policy Recommendations, causing delay and duplication.

    Merging of all commissions into an umbrella HR Commission

    Arguments in Favour

    Uniformity- Brings consistency in standards, inquiry, and reporting across all vulnerable groups.

    Resource Efficiency- Prevents duplication of staff, budgets, and administrative infrastructure.

    Accountability- Establishes a single point of responsibility for human rights protection.

    Removes confusion and brings Clarity of Jurisdiction

    Intersectional Approach- Enables holistic handling of overlapping vulnerabilities like caste, gender, and religion.

    Global Best Practice- Mirrors models in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand with unified human rights bodies.

    Data Integration- Allows centralized data collection and analysis for evidence-based policymaking.

    Policy Coherence- Facilitates unified engagement with ministries and state bodies for coordinated action.

    Arguments Against

    Specialization Loss- Dilutes expertise of domain-specific bodies like NCW, NCSC, and NCPCR.

    Constitutional Violation- Conflicts with Articles 338, 338A, and 338B granting separate constitutional status.

    Administrative Overload- A single mega body may become slow, inefficient, and unresponsive.

    Representation Loss- Marginalized groups lose dedicated institutional voices for advocacy.

    Risk of Bureaucratization of commission

    Symbolic Dilution- Weakens the government’s visible commitment to vulnerable sections.

    Better Coordination Alternative- Inter-commission coordination can address overlaps without structural merger.

    Way Forward

    Create an Inter-Commission Coordination Council chaired by NHRC to avoid overlaps.

    Establish a common digital platform for complaints, investigations, and monitoring.

    Joint Investigations and Reports in intersectional cases (e.g., caste + gender).

    Amend relevant Acts to clearly demarcate jurisdiction.

    Simplify public interface through a single online grievance portal linked to all commissions.

    The 3R approach of Reform, Reorientation and Restructuring can enhance functioning of commissions as an effective Bulwark Of Democracy in India.

  • How far do you agree with the view that tribunals curtail the jurisdiction of ordinary courts? In view of the above, discuss the constitutional validity and competency of the tribunals in India.

    Tribunals are quasi-judicial bodies established to deliver specialized, speedy, and cost-effective justice in specific matters like taxation, service disputes, environment etc.

    Objectives of Tribunals

    Specialized Adjudication

    Speedy Justice Delivery

    Reduce Burden on Courts

    Cost-Effective Dispute Resolution

    Simplified Procedures – Principles of Natural Justice

    Decentralized Justice Access

    Efficient Enforcement of Rights – Eg- NGT

    Tribunals Curtailing the Jurisdiction of Ordinary Courts

    Exclusion of High Court Jurisdiction – Articles 323A & 323B permit exclusion of High Courts’ writ powers in tribunal matters.

    Executive Control over Appointments of tribunal members

    Creates Parallel Judicial System

    However, in L. Chandra Kumar (1997) Case, SC struck down exclusion of High Court jurisdiction as unconstitutional, reaffirming judicial review as part of basic structure.

    Constitutional Validity of Tribunals

    Constitutional Basis – Established under Articles 323A & 323B (42nd Amendment, 1976) for specialized adjudication.

    Legislative Competence – Parliament empowered to create tribunals for administrative and quasi-judicial functions under Entry 11A, Concurrent List.

    Judicial Endorsement – L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997)- Upheld constitutional validity of tribunals.

    Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 – Reorganized and rationalized tribunals.

    Functional Validity – Tribunals are supplementary judicial mechanisms, constitutionally valid as long as they do not replace or restrict High Court or Supreme Court powers.

    Competency of Tribunals in India

    Limited Jurisdiction – Competency confined to specific subject matters. Eg- NGT on environment.

    Quasi-Judicial Powers – Empowered to summon witnesses, take evidence, and deliver binding decisions similar to civil courts.

    No Inherent Jurisdiction – Unlike High Courts, tribunals cannot exercise writ or contempt powers unless conferred by statute.

    Subject to Judicial Review – Decisions are reviewable by High Courts. (L. Chandra Kumar, 1997).

    Appellate and Supervisory Role – Certain tribunals (e.g., NCLAT, DRAT) exercise appellate functions over subordinate tribunals or authorities.

    Administrative Control – Function under ministries (NCLT under Corporate Affairs).

    Guided by Principles of Natural Justice – Must ensure fair hearing, reasoned orders, and impartial adjudication in all proceedings.

    Tribunals, in line with Article 39A, must enhance access to justice while upholding judicial independence and judicial review as constitutional safeguards.

  • The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has a very vital role to play. Explain how this is reflected in the method and terms of his appointment as well as the range of powers he can exercise.

    CAG is established under Article 148 of the Constitution as the supreme audit authority of India. Ambedkar called it as most important officer under the Constitution of India

    Importance of the office of CAG

    Guardian of Public Purse – CAG ensures all government expenditure is sanctioned by law and used appropriately.

    Bulwark of Democracy along with ECI and SC

    Promotes Accountability – Eg: 2G Spectrum scam (2010)

    Strengthens Parliamentary Oversight – CAG reports form the basis for examination by Public Accounts Committee (PAC) and COPU.

    Ensures Financial Propriety – Audits whether expenditure follows financial rules, principles, and economy norms.

    Auditor of Federal Finances – Audits accounts of both Union and State Governments under Articles 149-151.

    Promotes Good Governance – Performance audits drive improvements in scheme design, implementation, and outcomes.

    Reflection of importance in method and terms of appointment

    Appointed by the President of India under Article 148(1) by warrant under his hand and seal.

    Oath of Office under Third Schedule to uphold the Constitution. The oath symbolises the solemn responsibility and independence of the office.

    Fixed Tenure – CAG holds office for 6 years or until age 65, whichever is earlier (Section 3, CAG Act 1971). Fixed tenure shields from executive pressure and ensures continuity.

    Removal Same as Supreme Court Judge- This stringent removal procedure protects CAG from arbitrary action by executive.

    Salary Charged on Consolidated Fund, not voted by Parliament (Article 148(3)).

    Service conditions cannot be varied to CAG’s disadvantage during tenure (Article 148(4)).

    No Eligibility for Further Government Office

    Reflection of importance in powers vested

    Comprehensive audit authority across federal levels. – CAG audits all expenditure from Consolidated Fund of India, Consolidated Funds of States, and UTs with legislatures.

    Audit of Contingency Fund and Public Account – Ensures complete coverage of government finances.

    Audit of Public Sector Undertakings- Eg: Audits LIC, ONGC, FCI, BHEL, Indian Railways under Companies Act provisions.

    Audit of Autonomous Bodies substantially financed by governmentEg: ICAR, CSIR

    Performance Audit evaluating economy, efficiency, effectiveness of schemes. Eg: Performance audits on MGNREGA, NHM, PMAY, Swachh Bharat Mission.

    CAG Standardises government accounting practices by prescribing form in which accounts of Union and States shall be maintained (Article 150).

    Independent Investigation Powers – CAG can call for any document, information, books, accounts from any government office without restriction.

    Discretionary Powers – Section 23, CAG (DPC) Act 1971 allows CAG to issue directions on accounting and audit principles.

    “The CAG is the conscience-keeper of public finance, ensuring not only lawful but also wise spending.” – 2nd ARC

  • Policy contradictions among various competing sectors and stakeholders have resulted in inadequate ‘protection and prevention of degradation’ to environment. ” Comment with relevant illustration.

    While environmental protection is constitutionally mandated (Article 48A, 51A(g)), it is marked by overlapping sectoral priorities and fragmented institutional mandates.

    Policy Contradictions Among Various Competing Sectors

    Energy vs. Environment – Expansion of coal-based thermal power leads to deforestation, displacement, and carbon emissions. Eg- Coal block allocations in Hasdeo Arand (Chhattisgarh)

    Agriculture – MSP policy promotes water-intensive crops like paddy and sugarcane, leading to water scarcity, salinity, and soil degradation. Eg- Over-extraction of groundwater in Punjab and Haryana.

    Industry vs. Environmental Regulation – Ease of Doing Business reforms relax environmental clearances (EIA 2020 draft allows post-facto approvals).

    Infrastructure vs. Ecosystem Stability – Eg- Projects like Bharatmala, Char Dham Highway, and river-linking projects lead to habitat fragmentation and increased disaster vulnerability.

    Tourism – Unregulated eco-tourism and pilgrimage infrastructure stress fragile ecosystems. Eg- Joshimath Crisis.

    Urban Development – Unplanned urbanisation encroaches upon natural drainage systems. Eg- Chennai floods (2015) due to wetland encroachment; Bengaluru lake pollution.

    Policy Contradictions Among Various Competing Stakeholders

    Central vs. State Governments – Conflict between industrial promotion by states and environmental clearance norms by Centre.

    Government vs. Local Communities – Top-down project approvals often ignore Gram Sabha consent under Forest Rights Act (2006). Eg- Niyamgiri Case

    Corporate Interests vs. Civil Society – Private sector prioritizes profit, while NGOs and activists demand sustainability. Eg- Industrial pollution in Sterlite Copper Plant (Thoothukudi).

    Judiciary vs. Executive – Eg- NGT banned illegal constructions in Aravalli Hills (Gurugram, 2018) and Delhi Ridge

    Inter-Ministerial Contradictions – Eg- MoEFCC seeks conservation, while the Ministry of Coal or Power pushes extraction projects.

    Way Forward

    Integrated Policy – Establish a National Council for Sustainable Development (NCSD) under NITI Aayog. Model it on the UK’s Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs.

    Whole-of-Government Approach – Institutionalize inter-ministerial task forces for projects with ecological sensitivity.

    Implement committee recommendations like Madhav gadgil Committee on Western Ghats

    Green Budgeting – Integrate ecosystem valuation and environmental costs into budgets.

    Create National Environmental Information Grid (NEIG) for real-time monitoring of forests, emissions, and water resources.

    Community Participation – Ensure FRA and PESA provisions are respected in all forest and mining projects through joint monitoring committees including tribal representatives.

    These measures can help align the developmental process with SDG-13 (Climate Action) and India’s Panchamrit targets.