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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Polity

  • TN moves Supreme Court against Governor over Bill withholds

    tn governor

    Central Idea

    • The Tamil Nadu state government has taken its concerns to the Supreme Court regarding the prolonged delay in the approval of Bills and Government orders by the Governor.

    TN Petition to the Supreme Court

    • Constitutional Challenge: The TN government has filed a Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
    • Objective: The petition seeks a declaration that the Governor’s inaction, omission, and delay in assenting to Bills and considering Government orders forwarded by the Tamil Nadu State Legislature is unconstitutional, illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, and a misuse of power.
    • Impact on Administration: The Governor’s delay in signing remission orders, day-to-day files, appointment orders, and granting approvals for prosecution is causing severe disruptions in the state administration.

    Article 32 of Indian Constitution

    • Article 32 grants individuals the right to move to the Supreme Court of India for the enforcement of their fundamental rights.
    • It is considered a fundamental right in itself and is often referred to as the “Right to Constitutional Remedies.”

    What are the Discretionary Powers of the Governor?

    The Constitution makes it clear that if any question arises whether a matter falls within the governor’s discretion or not, the decision of the governor is final and the validity of anything done by him cannot be called in question on the ground that he ought or ought not to have acted in his discretion.

    Constitutional Discretion:

    • Reservation of a bill for the consideration of the President (Article 200).
    • Recommendation for the imposition of the President’s Rule (Article 356) in the state.
    • While exercising his functions as the administrator of an adjoining union territory (in case of additional charge).
    • Determining the amount payable by the Government of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram to an autonomous Tribal District Council as royalty accruing from licenses for mineral exploration.
    • Seeking information from the chief minister with regard to the administrative and legislative matters of the state.

    Situational Discretion:

    • Appointment of chief minister when no party has a clear-cut majority in the state legislative assembly or when the chief minister in office dies suddenly and there is no obvious successor.
    • Dismissal of the council of ministers when it cannot prove the confidence of the state legislative assembly.
    • Dissolution of the state legislative assembly if the council of ministers has lost its majority.

    Can the Governor withhold His Assent to a Bill in Exercise of His Discretionary Powers?

    • While a plain reading of Article 200 suggests that the Governor can withhold his assent, experts question whether he can do so only on the advice of the Council of Ministers.
    • The Constitution provides that the Governor can exercise his executive powers only on the advice of the Council of Ministers under Article 154.
    • The larger question is why a Governor should be allowed to withhold assent when the Bill is passed by the Assembly.

    Rationale behind Governor’s Power

    • Checks and Balances: Delay in approval allows the Governor to scrutinize bills and orders more thoroughly, ensuring that they are in line with the constitution and the interests of the state.
    • Prevention of Hasty Decisions: It prevents hasty or ill-considered legislation from being passed, which might have unintended negative consequences.
    • Protection of Minority Rights: The Governor can act as a safeguard against the majority’s potentially oppressive decisions, protecting the rights and interests of minority groups.
    • Aid to Parliamentary Democracy: The delay provides time for public debate, expert opinions, and stakeholder consultations, which are essential aspects of parliamentary democracy.
    • Conflict Resolution: In situations where there are disputes between the state government and the center or between various state institutions, the Governor’s involvement can facilitate resolution.

    Issues with the delays

    • Delay in Decision-Making: The Governor’s failure to take a decision on the Bills passed by the legislature leads to a delay in decision-making, which affects the effective functioning of the state government.
    • Delay in Implementation of Policies and Laws: When the Governor fails to make a decision on a Bill passed by the assembly, it delays the implementation of policies and laws.
    • Undermines the Democratic Process: The Governor, who is appointed by the Centre, can use his powers to delay or reject Bills passed by state assemblies for political reasons, which undermines the democratic process.
    • Public Perception: The public often views pending Bills with the Governor as a sign of inefficiency or even corruption in the state government, which can damage the government’s reputation.
    • Constitutional Ambiguity: There is ambiguity in the Constitution regarding the Governor’s power to withhold assent.
    • Lack of Accountability: When the Governor withholds assent, he does not provide any reason for his decision.

    Recent Instances of Withholding Assent

    • Chhattisgarh (2020): The Chhattisgarh Governor withheld assent to a bill amending the Chhattisgarh Lokayukta Act, 2001.
    • Tamil Nadu (2021): The Tamil Nadu Governor reserved a bill exempting state students from NEET medical entrance exams for the President’s consideration after a significant delay.
    • Kerala (2023): Kerala’s Governor signed five bills into law but withheld assent to six others, citing concerns about their constitutionality and legality.

    Mains Marks Enhancer: Supreme Court’s Stance and Commission Recommendations

    • Nabam Rebia and Bamang Felix vs Dy.Speaker (2016): The SC clarified that a Governor’s discretion under Article 200 is limited to deciding whether a bill should be reserved for the President’s consideration. The Court emphasized that actions or inactions by the Governor regarding bill assent can be subject to judicial review.
    • Punchhi Commission (2010): This commission recommended the establishment of a time limit within which the Governor should decide on granting assent or reserving a bill for the President’s consideration.
    • National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC): NCRWC proposed a four-month time limit for the Governor to decide on a bill’s fate. It also suggested the removal of the Governor’s power to withhold assent except in cases explicitly stipulated in the Constitution.

    Conclusion

    • The dispute between the government and the Governor underscores the importance of timely decision-making to ensure the effective functioning of the state administration.

  • Ethics, parliamentary conduct and the Indian MP

    parliamentary conduct

    Central idea

    The Lok Sabha Ethics Committee is checking if Mahua Moitra took money for asking questions, mixing parliamentary rules with possible law-breaking. Without a clear definition of ‘unethical conduct,’ it shows the challenge of balancing parliamentary norms and legal issues. The case highlights the complex process of handling allegations of misconduct among MPs.

    Key Highlights:

    • Mahua Moitra, a Trinamool Congress MP, faces proceedings from the Lok Sabha Ethics Committee over allegations of receiving money for posing questions in Parliament.
    • Accepting money for parliamentary work is considered a breach of privilege and contempt of the House.
    • Past instances include expulsion of MPs found guilty of accepting money for putting up questions, emphasizing the seriousness of such charges.

    Challenges:

    • Lack of clear definitions for ‘unethical conduct’ places the evaluation of MPs’ actions on the Ethics Committee’s discretion.
    • The term ‘unethical conduct’ remains undefined, and decisions rely on the committee’s judgment.
    • Cases of misconduct, misuse of privileges, and personal indiscretions fall under the purview of the Ethics Committee.

    Concerns:

    • The Ethics Committee examines cases of moral lapses by MPs, ranging from personal misconduct to misuse of official privileges.
    • Legal implications of accepting illegal gratification for parliamentary work might involve criminal investigations, separate from parliamentary proceedings.
    • The scope of investigation by parliamentary committees differs from judicial probes, and evidence evaluation is based on the preponderance of probabilities.

     

    Prelims focus

     

    Establishment: Formed in 2000.

    Mandate: Examines complaints related to unethical conduct of MPs.

    Responsibilities: Investigates complaints, recommends action, and formulates a code of conduct.

    Scope: Focuses on behavior that may not have a clear definition, leaving it to the committee’s discretion.

    Decision Authority: Decides whether specific acts are unethical or not.

     

    Analysis:

    • Past cases include MPs found guilty of unethical conduct, such as bringing companions under false pretenses on official tours.
    • Serious cases of misconduct, violating laws like the Passports Act, are often dealt with by the Committee of Privileges or special committees, not the Ethics Committee.
    • Investigative methods include examining written documents, oral testimonies, expert depositions, and findings are based on a common-sense approach.

    Key Data:

    • The Ethics Committee was established in 2000 to examine complaints related to the unethical conduct of MPs and recommend actions.
    • MPs facing expulsion due to misconduct, such as accepting money for parliamentary work, may still face criminal charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

    Key Terms for mains value addition:

    • Breach of privilege and contempt of the House.
    • Unethical conduct, moral lapses, and misuse of privileges.
    • Committee of Privileges, special committees, and the Ethics Committee.
    • Article 105 of the Constitution grants MPs the freedom to speak without disclosing their information sources.

    Way Forward:

    • The Ethics Committee’s role in probing MPs’ conduct necessitates a balance between parliamentary discipline and legal considerations.
    • Clarity in defining ‘unethical conduct’ and guidelines for online submission of questions could enhance transparency.
    • Recognizing the distinction between parliamentary discipline and criminal investigations in handling serious allegations against MPs.

  • Give up impropriety, demonstrate impartiality

    Central idea

    The Chief Justice of India expresses concern over the Maharashtra Assembly Speaker’s inaction on pending disqualification petitions since July 2022, emphasizing the importance of upholding the court’s orders. The article highlights the historical evolution of the Speaker’s role, citing instances of misuse, partisanship, and delays in addressing disqualification petitions, posing a threat to the stability of elected governments.

    Key Themes:

    • The Supreme Court consistently emphasizes the need for an unbiased mechanism, possibly an independent tribunal, to handle disqualification cases.
    • Concerns about the Speaker’s delay in addressing disqualification petitions and potential challenges in the certification of Bills as Money Bills.

    Data Highlights from the Article:

    • Parliamentary Standing Committees Referral: During 2004-14, over 60% of Bills in the Lok Sabha were referred to committees for detailed scrutiny. However, from 2014-2023, this referral rate dropped to less than 25%.
    • Suspension Instances: Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury (Congress) swiftly suspended for remarks against the PM, later revoked. Ramesh Bidhuri (BJP) faced no swift action for passing communal slurs against an MP.
    • Challenges in Maharashtra Assembly: Unconstitutional suspension of 12 BJP MLAs for a year in July 2021, set aside by the Supreme Court.
    • Defection Decision Delays: Inaction by the Maharashtra Assembly Speaker on disqualification petitions pending since July 2022. Supreme Court recommends an independent tribunal for timely decisions on defection cases.
    • Certification of Bills Challenges: Ongoing challenges in the Court regarding the certification of certain Bills as Money Bills by the Lok Sabha Speaker.
    • International Speaker Practices: In Britain, the Speaker resigns from their political party upon election and seeks re-election as an impartial Speaker. This practice is not followed in India.

    Speaker’s Functions and Gaps:

    • Dual functions of certifying Bills as Money Bills and deciding on disqualification under the Tenth Schedule.
    • Misuse of suspension provisions against Opposition members, highlighting instances of bias.
    • Failure to refer significant Bills to Parliamentary Standing Committees affecting parliamentary functioning.
    • Custodianship of the rights and privileges of the House, its committees, and members.

    Challenges in Deciding Disqualification:

    • Misuse of powers against Opposition members, unequal treatment for remarks against leaders.
    • Delayed or inadequate actions on disqualification petitions, undermining stability in governance
    • Past instances show Speakers favoring ruling dispensation, raising concerns over neutrality.
    • Proposal for an independent tribunal, recommended by the Supreme Court, to handle disqualification cases.
    • Maharashtra Assembly Speaker’s inaction on pending disqualification petitions despite court directions.

    Key Supreme Court Judgments Simplified

    Kihoto Hollohan (1992):

    • Minority judges believed that giving the Speaker power to decide defections violated democratic principles.
    • The case suggests the need for an independent tribunal, headed by judges, to handle defection cases.

    Keisham Meghachandra Singh vs The Hon’ble Speaker Manipur (2020):

    • The Supreme Court recommended a constitutional amendment for an independent tribunal to decide defections.
    • The ongoing inaction of the Maharashtra Assembly Speaker on disqualification petitions was highlighted.

    Once a Speaker, Always a Speaker:

    • Comparison with Britain’s practice where the Speaker resigns from the political party for impartiality.
    • Indian Speakers rarely exercise the option to resign from their political party, impacting perceived impartiality.

    Way Forward and Reforms:

    • Adoption of British practices to instill confidence, emphasizing Speaker’s impartiality.
    • Urgent need for Speakers to demonstrate impartiality, even if formal reforms are pending.
    • Consideration of reforms such as an independent tribunal for handling disqualification cases.
    • Urgent measures needed to address challenges and restore faith in the institution of the Speaker.
    • Speakers must commit to displaying impartiality, aligning their functions with democratic principles.

  • LS Ethics Committee: Its’ Constitution, Members

    Central Idea

    • The Lok Sabha Ethics Committee, set up over two decades ago, plays a pivotal role in overseeing the conduct of members and addressing cases of misconduct.
    • While it predominantly handles relatively minor offenses, its significance in maintaining ethical standards in Parliament cannot be understated.

    History of Ethics Committees

    • Origin in 1996: The concept of ethics panels for the two Houses of Parliament was first proposed during a Presiding Officers’ Conference in Delhi in 1996.
    • Rajya Sabha’s Pioneering Committee: Vice President K R Narayanan, who served as Rajya Sabha Chairman, established the Ethics Committee for the Upper House on March 4, 1997. It officially commenced its duties in May of the same year.
    • Lok Sabha’s Journey: Lok Sabha’s Ethics Committee journey was delayed initially. A study group within the House Committee of Privileges recommended its formation in 1997 after studying legislative ethics practices worldwide. However, it only became a permanent fixture in the Lok Sabha in 2015, following its ad hoc establishment in 2000.

    Procedure for Complaints

    • Complaint Origins: Any person can file a complaint against a Member of Parliament (MP) through another Lok Sabha MP. The complaint must be accompanied by evidence of alleged misconduct and an affidavit confirming its authenticity. MPs can also lodge complaints without the need for an affidavit.
    • Speaker’s Role: The Speaker can refer any complaint against an MP to the Ethics Committee.
    • Prima Facie Inquiry: The Committee conducts a preliminary inquiry to determine if a complaint warrants further examination. It proceeds to evaluate and make recommendations after this stage.
    • Report Presentation: The Committee presents its findings to the Speaker, who seeks the House’s input on whether to consider the report. A half-hour discussion on the report can also be scheduled.

    Privileges Committee Comparison

    • Overlapping Responsibilities: The Ethics Committee and the Privileges Committee occasionally deal with similar cases. More serious allegations typically go to the Privileges Committee.
    • Privileges Committee’s Mandate: The Privileges Committee safeguards the “freedom, authority, and dignity of Parliament.” It can address breaches of privilege by MPs or non-MPs that undermine the House’s authority and dignity.
    • Ethics Committee’s Scope: The Ethics Committee primarily focuses on cases of misconduct involving MPs.

    2005 Cash-for-Query Case

    • Expulsion of MPs: In 2005, a significant episode unfolded when both Houses expelled 10 Lok Sabha MPs and one Rajya Sabha MP implicated in the cash-for-query scandal. They were accused of accepting money to raise questions in Parliament.
    • Bansal Committee’s Report: The Lok Sabha took action based on the report of a special committee led by Chandigarh MP P K Bansal. In contrast, Rajya Sabha entrusted the House Ethics Committee with investigating the matter.
    • Evidence in the 2005 Case: Former Lok Sabha Secretary General P D T Achary noted that the 2005 case was backed by substantial evidence from a sting operation. Establishing a money trail could be the challenge in the recent Bengal MP case.

    Conclusion

    • The Lok Sabha Ethics Committee, although historically ad hoc and relatively recent in its permanent establishment, plays a critical role in upholding the ethical standards of India’s parliamentary members.
    • It serves as a guardian of parliamentary ethics, ensuring that members adhere to the highest moral standards while fulfilling their legislative responsibilities.
    • The Committee’s work, while often overshadowed, is integral to maintaining the integrity of the Lok Sabha.

  • Back in news: Article 142 of the Constitution

    Central Idea

    • The Supreme Court has used its extraordinary constitutional power under Article 142 to do complete justice for a 50-year-old man who fought for nearly three decades against the postal department’s refusal to give him a job despite his name figuring high on the merit list.

    What is Article 142?

    Article 142 titled ‘Enforcement of decrees and orders of the Supreme Court and orders as to discovery, etc.’ has two clauses:

    [1] Article 142(1)

    • The Supreme Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction may pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it.
    • Any decree so passed or order so made shall be enforceable throughout the territory of India.
    • It may be in such manner as may be prescribed by or under any law made by Parliament and, until provision in that behalf is so made, in such manner as the President may by order prescribe.

    [2] Article 142(2)

    • The Supreme Court shall have all and every power to make any order for the purpose of securing the attendance of any person, the discovery or production of any documents, or the investigation or punishment of any contempt of itself.

    Important instances when Article 142 was invoked

    • Bhopal Gas tragedy case: The SC awarded a compensation of $470 million to the victims and held that “prohibitions or limitations or provisions contained in ordinary laws cannot, ipso facto, act as prohibitions or limitations on the constitutional powers under Article 142.”
    • Babri Masjid demolition case: The Supreme Court ordered framing of a scheme by the Centre for formation of trust to construct Ram Mandir at the Masjid demolition site in Ayodhya.
    • Liquor sale ban case: The Supreme Court banned liquor shops within a distance of 500 metres from National as well as State highways in order to prevent drunken driving.
    • Ex-PM Assassin case: In the case of Perarivalan, the Supreme Court invoked Article 142(1) under which it was empowered to pass any order necessary to do complete justice in any matter pending before it.

    Try this PYQ from CSP 2019:

    Q.With reference to the Constitution of India, prohibitions or limitations or provisions contained in ordinary laws cannot act as prohibitions or limitations on the constitutional powers under Article 142. It could mean which one of the following?

    (a) The decisions taken by the Election Commission of India while discharging its duties cannot be challenged in any court of law.

    (b) The Supreme Court of India is not constrained in the exercise of its powers by laws made by the Parliament.

    (c) In the event of grave financial crisis in the country, the President of India can declare Financial Emergency without the counsel from the Cabinet.

    (d) State Legislatures cannot make laws on certain matters without the concurrence of Union Legislature.

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”qhatf1pn71″ question=”Please leave a feedback on this” opened=”1″]Post your answers here.[/wpdiscuz-feedback]

  • Article 142 of Indian Constitution

    Central idea:  Supreme Court has ruled that it can dissolve a marriage on the ground of irretrievable breakdown, using its power under Article 142(1), without referring the parties to family court for waiting period of 6-18 months for mutual consent divorce.

    What is Article 142?

    Article 142 titled ‘Enforcement of decrees and orders of the Supreme Court and orders as to discovery, etc.’ has two clauses:

    [1] Article 142(1)

    • The Supreme Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction may pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it.
    • Any decree so passed or order so made shall be enforceable throughout the territory of India.
    • It may be in such manner as may be prescribed by or under any law made by Parliament and, until provision in that behalf is so made, in such manner as the President may by order prescribe.

    [2] Article 142(2)

    • The Supreme Court shall have all and every power to make any order for the purpose of securing the attendance of any person, the discovery or production of any documents, or the investigation or punishment of any contempt of itself.

    History of Article 142

    • When a draft Constitution was prepared by the drafting committee and placed before the Constituent Assembly, Article 142 was actually numbered as Article 118.
    • It was placed before the Constituent Assembly on May 27, 1949 for debate but got adopted on the same day without any debate.
    • This was possibly because everyone agreed that in order to ensure judicial independence, the highest court of the country must be empowered with plenary power to do complete justice.

    Article 142 in Divorce Cases

    (1) Current Divorce Process

    • The Hindu Marriage Act allows for “divorce by mutual consent.”
    • Both parties must file a petition to the district court, citing that they have been living separately for at least one year and mutually agree to dissolve the marriage.
    • The parties must then move a second motion before the court, no earlier than six months after filing the first petition and no later than 18 months after the same date.

    (2) Factors considered for irretrievable breakdown

    The Court must be convinced that the marriage is “totally unworkable, emotionally dead, and beyond salvation.” The following factors can be considered:

    1. The period of time that the parties had cohabited after marriage
    2. When the parties had last cohabited
    3. Nature of allegations made by the parties against each other and their family members
    4. Orders passed in the legal proceedings from time to time
    5. Cumulative impact on the personal relationship
    6. Whether and how many attempts were made to settle the disputes by a court or through mediation, and when the last attempt was made.
    7. The period of separation should be sufficiently long, and anything above six years or more will be a relevant factor.
    8. It is necessary to evaluate the factors according to the economic and social status of the parties, including their educational qualifications, whether they have any children, their age, and whether the spouse and children are dependents.

    Try this PYQ from CSP 2019:

    Q.With reference to the Constitution of India, prohibitions or limitations or provisions contained in ordinary laws cannot act as prohibitions or limitations on the constitutional powers under Article 142. It could mean which one of the following?

    1. The decisions taken by the Election Commission of India while discharging its duties cannot be challenged in any court of law.
    2. The Supreme Court of India is not constrained in the exercise of its powers by laws made by the Parliament.
    3. In the event of grave financial crisis in the country, the President of India can declare Financial Emergency without the counsel from the Cabinet.
    4. State Legislatures cannot make laws on certain matters without the concurrence of Union Legislature.

     

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”kj1si5az7m” question=”Please leave a feedback on this” opened=”1″]Post your answers here.[/wpdiscuz-feedback]

     

    Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your personal mentor for UPSC 2024 | Schedule your FREE session and get the Prelims prep Toolkit!

  • How are Symbols allotted to Political Parties in India?

    symbols

    Central Idea

    • A recent Supreme Court decision declining a plea by a political party in Telangana, questioning the allocation of election symbols, has thrown the spotlight on the intriguing world of political symbols in India.
    • This article delves into the process of symbol allocation and its role in shaping the country’s political landscape.

    Symbols Allocation Authority: ECI

    • The ECI is responsible for allocating symbols to political parties, following guidelines laid out in The Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968.
    • This order aims to regulate symbol specification, reservation, choice, and allotment during elections.

    Types of Election Symbols

    • Reserved and Free Symbols: Symbols can be either reserved, exclusively assigned to recognized political parties, or ‘free’ symbols that can be chosen by unrecognised registered parties’ candidates. Unrecognized parties are those that haven’t met the criteria for state party recognition.
    • Exclusive Symbols: Recognized national and state parties are granted exclusive symbols, signifying their established status.

    Symbol Selection by Parties

    • Preference Lists: Unrecognized parties provide a list of ten preferred symbols from the free symbol pool.
    • Proposal of New Symbols: Parties can propose up to three new symbols for consideration, provided they do not resemble reserved or free symbols, carry religious or communal connotations, or depict birds or animals.
    • Common Symbol Assignment: The ECI may allot a proposed symbol as a common symbol for the party if it deems it suitable.

    Historical Origins of Symbols

    • Sketching Process: Symbols were initially sketched by MS Sethi, who retired from the ECI in 1992. These symbols were conceived through brainstorming sessions where the goal was to identify objects that the common man could relate to.
    • Birth of Familiar Symbols: Many iconic symbols such as the bicycle, elephant, and broom originated from these sessions.
    • Unconventional Entries: Some lesser-known symbols like a pair of glasses, a nail cutter, and a neck-tie were also suggested, reflecting the diversity of ideas.
    • Modern Additions: Over time, new symbols like a bowl of noodles and a mobile charger have been included in the symbol list, reflecting contemporary times.

    Political Parties’ Say

    • Preference Submission: Unregistered parties submit their symbol preferences from the list of free symbols.
    • Proposal of New Symbols: Parties can suggest up to three new symbols with clear designs and drawings.
    • Criteria for Approval: Proposed symbols must not resemble existing reserved or free symbols, possess religious or communal connotations, or depict birds or animals.

    Symbol Allocation in Split Parties

    • Decision by ECI: When recognized political parties split, the ECI determines the symbol assignment. For example, the Congress party’s symbol evolved from a pair of bulls to the current hand symbol due to splits.
    • Recent Example: The ECI assigned different symbols to factions of the Shiv Sena, allowing one faction to retain the bow and arrow symbol while allotting a flaming torch to the other.

    Conclusion

    • The allocation of election symbols in India is a meticulous process governed by the ECI’s guidelines.
    • These symbols hold profound significance in political campaigns, representing parties’ identities and ideologies.
    • Understanding the history and intricacies of symbol allocation provides valuable insights into India’s dynamic political landscape.

  • How MPs ask Questions in Lok Sabha?

    Central Idea

    • A Parliamentarian is being questioned by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Lok Sabha Ethics Committee, in her alleged involvement in ‘cash for query’ allegations.
    • This has thrust the spotlight on the importance and procedure of asking questions in the Lok Sabha.

    Procedure for Raising Questions

    • Rules and Directions: The process of raising questions is governed by Rules 32 to 54 of the “Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha” and Directions 10 to 18 issued by the Speaker, Lok Sabha.
    • Notice Submission: MPs initiate the process by submitting a notice addressed to the Secretary-General of the Lok Sabha, specifying the question’s text, the relevant Minister, desired answer date, and order of preference if multiple questions are tabled.
    • Limitations: MPs are allowed to submit a maximum of five notices for oral and written answers combined, per day, with any excess notices considered for the subsequent session days.
    • Notice Period: The notice period for a question is usually not less than 15 days.
    • Submission Modes: MPs can submit notices through the online ‘Member’s Portal’ using their login credentials or physical forms available in the Parliamentary Notice Office.

    Conditions for Admissibility of Questions

    • Admissibility Rules: Various rules govern the admissibility of questions, such as a limit of 150 words, prohibition of arguments or defamatory statements, avoidance of character or conduct references except in official capacity, and disallowance of policy-related queries.
    • Legal Matters: Questions concerning subjects under court consideration or those that may compromise national unity and integrity are inadmissible.

    Types of Questions

    • Starred Questions: MPs pose starred questions for oral responses from the Minister-in-charge. These questions require submission at least 15 days in advance, with a maximum of 20 listed for oral answers each day.
    • Unstarred Questions: Unstarred questions receive written replies from the Ministry and must also be submitted 15 days ahead. A daily limit of 230 unanswered questions for written answers exists.
    • Short Notice Questions: Pertaining to urgent public concerns, these questions can be asked with less than 10 days’ notice, accompanied by a valid reason.
    • Questions to Private Members: Addressed to the MP themselves, these are posed when the subject relates to bills, resolutions, or House-related matters under that MP’s responsibility.

    Importance of Raising Questions

    • Parliamentary Right: MPs have an inherent and unrestricted parliamentary right to raise questions, serving as a legislative control mechanism over executive actions.
    • Information and Critique: Questions help obtain administration and government activity details, critique government policies, expose lapses, and prompt ministers to take corrective actions.
    • Government Feedback: For the government, questions gauge public sentiment towards policies, and administration, and can lead to parliamentary commissions, inquiries, or legislative actions in response.

  • Caste Enumeration and OBC Sub-Categorization in India

    obc caste

    Central Idea

    • The recent publication of Bihar’s caste survey results has sparked discussions about the possibility of similar exercises in other states as India enters a new electoral cycle.
    • Enumerating castes and sub-categorizing Other Backward Classes (OBCs) for equitable reservation distribution have long been contentious issues.

    Who are Other Backward Classes (OBCs)?

    • Origins of OBCs: OBCs represent communities and castes considered socially and educationally backward, distinct from Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs).
    • Constitutional Mandate: The Indian Constitution mandates affirmative action for OBCs through Articles 15(4) and 16(4), enabling special provisions and reservations.

    Diverse Categories within OBCs

    • Occupational Classification: OBCs have historically been identified based on their occupations, including land ownership, farming, labor, and artisanal work.
    • Two Broad Categories: OBCs can be broadly categorized into landowners (e.g., Yadavs and Kurmis in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh) and non-landowners.
    • Inequality Concerns: A demand for reservation within OBCs has emerged, as a few “upper” OBCs have reportedly benefitted disproportionately from the existing 27% reservation, a result of the Mandal Commission’s recommendations over 30 years ago.

    EBCs in Bihar

    • EBC Identification: Bihar’s caste survey identified 27% of the population as “pichhda” (backward) and 36% as “atyant pichhda” (Extremely Backward Classes, or EBCs).
    • Historical Context: The state had previously categorized castes as “more backward,” and the Karpoori Thakur Formula, implemented in the 1970s, offered reservation benefits to various groups, including OBCs, economically backward OBCs, women, and the economically disadvantaged from “upper castes.”

    Historical OBC Commissions

    • Kaka Kalekar Commission (1953): Established in 1953, it recommended identifying socially and educationally backward classes and 25-40% reservation in government jobs.
    • Mandal Commission (1979): Appointed in 1979 but implemented in 1990, it identified 3,743 OBC castes, suggested 27% reservation in government jobs and educational institutions, and proposed no sub-categorization.

    State-specific Subcategorization

    • Diverse State Approaches: Various states have implemented subcategorization within their OBC quotas based on unique criteria.
    • Examples: Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Jharkhand, West Bengal, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, and Kerala have subgroups within their OBC reservations.

    Subcategorization at the National Level

    • Subcategorization Initiative: In 2015, the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment tasked the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) with examining the subcategorization of OBCs.
    • NCBC’s Recommendation: The NCBC proposed subcategorization into Extremely Backward Classes, More Backward Classes, and Backward Classes.

    Recent Developments: Rohini Commission

    • In October 2017, the Rohini Commission was formed to explore OBC subcategorization.
    • It submitted its report in July 2023, although its contents remain undisclosed.

    Conclusion

    • The issue of caste enumeration and subcategorization of OBCs in India reflects complex social and political dynamics.
    • While it aims to ensure equitable distribution of reservation benefits, it also highlights the need for nuanced, state-specific approaches to address the diverse composition of OBC communities.
    • The recent report by the Rohini Commission holds potential significance, but its implications and recommendations await public scrutiny and debate.

  • Judicial Perspectives on LGBTQI Marriage and Adoption Issues

    Central Idea

    • In a recent landmark decision, the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, deliberated on granting legal status to same-sex marriages.
    • This case has sparked significant interest as it explores the intersection of individual rights and societal norms.

    Judicial Perspectives on Various Issues:

    [A] Fundamental Right to Marry

    Issue Minority View (CJI) Majority View
    Petitioner Argument
    • Marriage is not fundamentally important;
    • It gained significance through state regulation as Civil Union.
    • Marriage’s importance is personal preference and social status.
    • It is necessarily NOT a fundamental right.

     

    [B] Interpretation of Special Marriage Act

    Issue Minority View (CJI) Majority View
    Framing the Issue
    • Cautioned against expansive interpretations;
    • Suggested encroachment on the legislature’s domain.
    • Concurred with the minority view.
    • Emphasized the SMA’s purpose for facilitating civil marriages between heterosexual couples.

     

    [C] Queer Couples’ Right to Adopt a Child

    Issue Minority View (CJI) Majority View
    Discriminatory Regulations
    • Struck down certain CARA regulations, asserting that they do not serve the child’s best interests.
    • Highlighted the discriminatory impact on the queer community based on their sexuality.
    • Acknowledged the discriminatory aspect.
    • But believed legislative action, rather than judicial imposition, should bring about this change.

     

    [D] Civil Unions for Queer Couples

    Argument Minority View (CJI Chandrachud) Majority View
    Recognition of Civil Unions
    • Connected the right to form intimate associations with freedom of speech and expression.
    • Proposed that the state should acknowledge various entitlements for such relationships.
    • Disagreed with prescribing a “choice” of civil unions.
    • Suggested that the state should facilitate this choice for those who opt for it.

     Conclusion

    • The Supreme Court’s decision on same-sex marriage reflects a complex interplay of legal, social, and legislative factors.
    • While the minority view leans towards immediate recognition of civil unions and highlights the importance of individual rights, the majority opinion emphasizes the legislative role in bringing about changes in societal norms.
    • The verdict underscores the evolving landscape of LGBTQ+ rights in India and the ongoing dialogue surrounding equal rights and inclusivity.