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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Polity

  • “The reservation of seats for women in the institutions of local self- government has had a limited impact on the patriarchal character of the Indian Political Process.” Comment.

    73rd and 74th CAA are the embodiment of grass-root democracy and democratic decentralization in India.

    Positive Impact on Women’s Political Participation

    Increased Representation- Over 14 lakh women representatives currently serve in local bodies (MoPR, 2024).

    Leadership Development- Eg- Sulata Deo started her career as Sarpanch and became MP from Odisha

    Enhanced Service Delivery- Women-led Panchayats prioritize water, sanitation, education, and health issues. Eg- Chhavi Rajawat (Rajasthan)

    Social Change Catalysts by challenging gender stereotypes in public decision-making.

    Women leaders have strengthened Self-Help Groups (SHGs) and livelihood initiatives, promoting inclusive development. Eg- Bina Devi (“Mushroom Mahila”)

    Persistent Patriarchal Barriers in Women’s Political Participation at the Local Level

    Political Barriers

    Proxy Representation- The “Sarpanch Pati” phenomenon – husbands or male relatives exercise real power.

    Political parties rarely nominate women beyond the mandated quota, restricting vertical mobility in politics.

    Tokenism- Representation often confined to fulfilling quotas rather than genuine empowerment or participation in governance.

    Institutional Barriers

    Institutional and Bureaucratic Dominance undermine elected women’s authority, especially in resource allocation and project execution.

    Limited Decision-Making Power- exclusion from key committees or budgetary discussions.

    Economic Barriers

    Economic Dependence on male family members limits independence in political and developmental decisions.

    Social barriers

    Women representatives face verbal abuse, threats, and social ostracism, especially when asserting authority.

    Cultural and Social Norms- restrict women’s mobility and participation in public life. Eg- purdah system.

    Lack of education and political training weakens women’s administrative confidence and negotiation skills.

    Intersectional Barriers- Women from SC/ST and minority communities face additional layer of discrimination.

    Way Forward

    Mandate political parties to allot a fixed percentage of tickets to women beyond local bodies to ensure vertical mobility in politics.

    Mentorship and role model initiatives led by successful women sarpanchs to inspire grassroots participation.

    Capacity Building– Establish State Institutes of Rural Development (SIRDs) as nodal agencies for PRI training.

    Manishankar Aiyar Committee recommendations.

    Create Panchayat Ombudsman for grievance redressal.

    Adopt activity mapping for clear delineation of 3Fs – Funds, Functions, Functionaries.

    “I measure the progress of a community by the degree of progress which women have achieved.” – Ambedkar

    True empowerment lies in transforming participation into power, ensuring women are policy-shapers, not placeholders.

    Elections

  • “Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution is a limited power and it cannot be enlarged into absolute power.” In the light of this statement explain whether Parliament under Article 368 of the Constitution can destroy the Basic Structure of the Constitution by expanding its amending power?

    Article 368 empowers Parliament to amend the Constitution, but this power is not absolute. The SC, through the Basic Structure Doctrine, has clarified that while Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, it cannot alter or destroy its essential features.

    Limitations on the Amending Power of Parliament

    Procedure under Article 368 – Constitutional amendments must strictly follow special majority and, where applicable, state ratification (for federal provisions).

    Basic Structure Doctrine (Kesavananda Bharati, 1973) – Parliament cannot alter, abrogate, or destroy the Basic Structure of the Constitution.

    Minerva Mills, 1980 – The limited amending power itself is part of the Basic Structure.

    Balance Between Fundamental Rights and DPSPs – Parliament cannot give unlimited precedence to one over the other, preserving constitutional harmony.

    Separation of Powers – Parliament cannot encroach upon the independence of the judiciary or the executive-legislative balance. Eg- NJAC

    Federal Structure – Amendment cannot centralize power to the extent of destroying federalism or state autonomy. (S.R. Bommai Judgment)

    I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007) – Even laws under the Ninth Schedule are open to judicial review if they violate Basic Structure.

    Thus, parliament cannot destroy or expand its amending power beyond constitutional limits. It is subject to Basic Structure

    Supremacy of the Constitution

    Republican and democratic form of government

    Secularism

    Federalism

    Judicial Review and Rule of Law

    Separation of Powers

    Limited amending power (Minerva Mills)

    Analysis

    The power of amendment under Article 368 is an instrument to ensure the Constitution’s continuity, and dynamic adaptation, not institutional annihilation. In a democracy governed by the Rule of Law, no organ can arrogate to itself absolute power, for that would negate the very idea of constitutionalism.

  • On what grounds a people’s representative can be disqualified under the Representation of People Act, 1951? Also mention the remedies available to such person against his disqualification.

    The RPA, 1951 provides the statutory framework for conducting elections and maintaining the integrity of India’s democratic process.

    Grounds for Disqualification under RPA, 1951

    Disqualification on Conviction for Certain Offences – Section 8

    bribery, undue influence, promoting enmity (IPC 153A, 295A), or corruption.

    If the sentence is two years or more, the disqualification is immediate and lasts six years after release.

    Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2013) – Section 8(4) was struck down, making disqualification automatic on conviction.

    Disqualification for Dismissal from Government Service – Section 9 – Disqualification for five years if dismissed for corruption or disloyalty to the State.

    Disqualification for Office of Profit – Section 10 – Holding an office of profit under the government (not exempted by law)

    Disqualification for Government Contracts – Section 9A

    Disqualification for Failure to Lodge Election Expenses – Section 10A

    Remedies Available Against Disqualification

    Judicial Appeal – If conviction is stayed, disqualification ceases to operate (Lok Prahari v. Union of India, 2018).

    Under Articles 103 & 192, President or Governor’s Decision acts on the advice of the Election Commission.

    Election Petition (Section 80, RPA, 1951) in the High Court within 45 days of result declaration.

    Analysis

    Thus, the disqualification provisions ensure the trinity of Ethics, Accountability and Fairness of electoral process.

  • From the resolution of contentious issues regarding distribution of legislative powers by the courts, ‘Principle of Federal Supremacy’ and ‘Harmonious Construction’ have emerged. Explain.

    As per Ivor Jennings, India is “a federation with a strong centralising tendency.” The 7th Schedule is a reflection of this tendency.

    Contentious Issues regarding Distribution of Legislative Powers

    Concurrent List repugnancy – Eg- Education (Concurrent List, Entry 25) – Centre’s NEET law vs Tamil Nadu’s opposition to it.

    Residuary powers with the Union

    Under Article 249, Rajya Sabha can empower Parliament to legislate on State List subjects. Eg- Essential Commodities Act (food items, agricultural produce).

    During National Emergency (Art. 250) or President’s Rule (Art. 356), Parliament can legislate on State subjects.

    Principle of Federal Supremacy

    In cases of irreconcilable conflict, Union law prevails over State law.

    Judicial Validation–

    Union of India v. H.S. Dhillon (1972) – Parliament has residuary powers.

    State of Karnataka v. Union of India (1977) – Union’s primacy in matters of national importance.

    State of West Bengal v. Union of India (1963) – SC upheld Parliament’s power to acquire State property.

    Zameer Ahmed Latifur Rehman Sheikh v. State of Maharashtra (2010) – SC ruled that a central money laundering law overrides conflicting State law under Article 254(1).

    Protects national unity and uniformity in crucial subjects.

    Principle of Harmonious Construction

    Courts attempt to reconcile conflicts so that both Union and State laws can function simultaneously.

    Judicial Validation–

    In C.B. Boarding and Lodging v. State of Mysore (1970), the SC upheld the State’s power to levy tax on lodging houses, even though taxation on income was a Union subject.

    State of Rajasthan v. G. Chawla (1959) – Both Centre and State laws upheld through harmonious interpretation.

    Hoechst Pharmaceuticals v. State of Bihar (1983) – Repugnancy avoided through reconciliation.

    Preserves federal balance and safeguards state autonomy.

    “Federalism is not a monolith; it is a dialogue between self-rule and shared rule.” Both Union & States are creatures of the Constitution

  • What can France learn from the Indian Constitution’s approach to secularism?

    Secularism ensures the neutrality of the State toward religion while protecting freedom of belief and conscience.

    While France follows Laïcité, emphasizing strict separation of religion and State, India practices positive secularism, ensuring equal respect for all religions within a plural society.

    France’s Model of Secularism (Laïcité)

    Based on non-recognition and non-involvement of the State in religious affairs.

    Guarantees freedom of conscience but restricts public religious expression (e.g., veil ban in schools, 2004).

    Aims to preserve republican unity and neutrality in the public sphere.

    India’s Model of Secularism

    Enshrined in the Preamble and Articles 25-28 of the Constitution.

    Guarantees freedom of religion, equal treatment of all faiths, and State neutrality.

    Allows State intervention for social reform (e.g., abolition of untouchability, Sabarimala judgment).

    Described as positive secularism – promoting harmony through engagement, not exclusion.

    Upheld as a basic feature of the Constitution in S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994).

    Lessons France Can Learn from Indian Secularism

    Inclusive Neutrality: The State can respect all religions equally rather than excluding them from the public sphere.

    Reform-Oriented State Role: The State can intervene in religious practices to uphold human rights and gender equality (e.g., abolition of untouchability, temple entry)

    Multiculturalism – respecting cultural and religious rights and customs. Promoting plurality instead of uniformity

    Freedom of Religious Expression: Allowing individuals to express faith in public spaces strengthens personal liberty (e.g., Sikh turban, Muslim veil).

    Pluralism as Democratic Strength: Religious diversity, when accommodated constitutionally, enhances national unity and democratic legitimacy.

    Balancing Liberty with Equality: Secularism should protect individual conscience while also advancing social justice and non-discrimination.

    Dialogue over Restriction: Promoting inter-faith dialogue and accommodation builds social cohesion better than prohibitive policies.

    Protection of minority rights through special provisions. Eg- Article 29,30.

    Secularism need not mean “absence of religion in public life,” but rather “equal respect and peaceful coexistence of all religions under a neutral State.”

  • Do you think that constitution of India does not accept principle of strict separation of powers rather it is based on the principle of ‘checks and balance’? Explain.

    SoP is derived from Montesquieu’s Spirit of Laws (1748) – dividing state power into Legislature, Executive, Judiciary to prevent concentration and arbitrariness.

    Separation of Powers in the Constitution

    Article 50 – Separation of executive and judiciary (Directive Principle).

    Articles 122 & 212 – Courts not to question proceedings of Parliament and State Legislatures.

    Articles 121 & 211 – Conduct of judges cannot be discussed in Parliament or State Legislatures (except during impeachment).

    Article 361 – President and Governors enjoy immunity; not answerable to courts for exercise of powers and duties.

    However, Strict Separation Does Not Exist due to

    Legislature & Executive Overlap – Executive is drawn from the legislature (Art. 74 & 75; Art. 163 & 164).

    Delegated Legislation – Legislature delegates rule-making powers to executive authorities.

    Judicial Functions of Legislature in cases of breach of privilege or impeachment of judges.

    Judicial Functions of Executive – pardons and commutations (Art. 72 & 161) by President and Governors.

    Checks and Balances in Practice

    Judicial Review – Judiciary can strike down unconstitutional laws and executive actions. Eg – NJAC Judgment.

    Legislative Control over Executive via questions, motions, and no-confidence votes.

    Executive’s Role in appointment of judges through the collegium system consultation.

    Judiciary review of laws for conformity with Fundamental Rights and Basic Structure. Eg – Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975).

    Legislative control over judiciary – Eg- 2018 Amendments to Atrocities Act, Impeachment Motions

    “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” – Lord Acton
    Thus, checks and balances are essential to prevent tyranny and preserve democracy.

  • What are the methods used by the Farmers organizations to influence the policy- makers in India and how effective are these methods?

    Farmers’ organisations are collective associations that represent the interests of cultivators, agricultural laborers, and rural producers and seek to influence agricultural policy and secure fair prices. Eg- Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU)

    Methods Used by Farmers’ Organisations to Influence Policymakers

    Protest and Agitation – Organize rallies, dharnas, sit-ins, and tractor marches etc. Eg- 2020-21 Farm Laws Protest.

    Lobbying and Negotiation – Engage directly with ministries, parliamentary committees, and NITI Aayog to submit memoranda, draft proposals, and policy recommendations.

    Electoral and Political Pressure

    Mobilize vote banks in rural constituencies and influence party manifestos.

    Forming political parties to contest elections. Eg- Shetkari Sanghatana in Maharashtra

    Use mass media, social media, and civil society networks to build public opinion. Eg- #NoFarmersNoFood campaigns on X.

    Coalition and Network Building – Create alliances with trade unions, civil society groups, and opposition parties. Eg- All India Kisan Sangharsh Coordination Committee (AIKSCC) unites over 200 farmer unions.

    Legal and Institutional Interventions – Eg- Farmer bodies filed PILs against land acquisition and farm laws.

    Effectiveness of Methods Used by Farmers’ Organisations

    Positive Outcomes

    Policy Reversals through sustained pressure. Eg- Repeal of the Three Farm Laws (2021) after year-long protests.

    Enhanced Political Awareness – Eg- Farmers’ mobilisation in western Uttar Pradesh and Punjab.

    Short-Term Economic Gains – Secured loan waivers, input subsidies, and MSP hikes.

    Brought rural issues to national discourse via social media.

    Greater Institutional Inclusion – Eg- Farmer representatives included in Committee on MSP (2022) for reform proposals.

    Strengthened Democratic Participation

    Limitations

    Fragmentation – divisions based on region, caste, and crop pattern. Eg- dominance of North Indian Farmers in Farm Laws protest

    Many farmer groups are linked with political parties, reducing credibility as neutral stakeholders.

    Role is majorly protective, limiting structural reforms. Eg- opposition to GM crops

    Weak Policy Research and Data-Based Advocacy

    Use of violent means – Eg- red fort incident during farm protests

    Marginalization of small and women farmers in representation

    Farmer movements represent the democratic heartbeat of rural India. They must move from protest-based mobilization to knowledge-based engagement with the state.

  • Judicial Legislation is antithetical to the doctrine of separation of powers as envisaged in the Indian Constitution. In this context justify the filing of large number of public interest petitions praying for issuing guidelines to executive authorities.

    Doctrine of separation of powers is derived from Montesquieu’s Spirit of Laws (1748) and divides state power into Legislature, Executive, Judiciary to prevent concentration and arbitrariness.

    Judicial legislation, i.e., when courts make laws or frame policies, is generally inconsistent with this doctrine.

    Separation of Powers in India

    Art. 245-246 & 368 – Only legislature can enact/amend laws under

    Article 105, 194 – Executive cannot breach parliamentary privileges

    Art. 122, 212 – Courts cannot inquire into parliamentary/state legislature proceedings ().

    Art. 124(4) Judicial Conduct Immunity

    Judicial Independence – Security of tenure, salaries, and contempt powers.

    Judicial Legislation Antithetical to Separation of Powers

    Encroachment on Legislative Domain undermines Separation of Powers.

    Undermines Democratic Accountability – judges are unelected and not responsible for policy outcomes. Eg- Criticism of Ban on firecrackers (2017)

    Creates judicial supremacy and Judicial governance (Bhikhu Parekh) – Eg- Prakash Singh guidelines on police reforms

    Weakens Public trust in Legislature and Executive – Eg- Coal Allocation Case (2014) – Court cancelled 214 coal blocks, creating policy paralysis in the energy sector.

    Courts lack technical and administrative expertise for framing complex policy guidelines. Eg- Ban on diesel vehicles in NCR (2016)

    Judicial itself has warned against overreach in

    Aravali Golf Club v. Chander Hass (2008)- Court warned against “judicial enthusiasm turning into judicial adventurism.”

    State of Tamil Nadu v. State of Kerala (2014)- Reiterated that courts should not enter the policy-making domain.

    Justification for Filing Large Number of PILs

    Executive Inaction or Policy Vacuum Eg- Vishaka guidelines on workplace sexual harassment.

    Protection of Fundamental Rights – Eg- Hussainara Khatoon (1979) case Recognized right to speedy trial as FR under Article 21.

    Accountability and Transparency – Eg- In Vineet Narain case, SC issued directions to make CBI independent from political interference.

    Access to Justice – Liberal locus standi allows citizens to represent the poor and marginalized.

    Legislative or Administrative Delay – Eg- Navtej Johar (2018)- Decriminalized homosexuality after years of legislative inaction.

    Constitutional Mandate under Article 141 and 142 to uphold complete justice.

    Rise of Civil Society Activism – NGOs and activists use PILs to expose violations and empower citizens.Eg- M.C. Mehta Cases on environmental protection.

    Judicial Review powers under Article 13, 32, 226 to uphold Constitutional Supremacy

    Speedy Justice – timely intervention in cases affecting public interest. Eg- Olga Tellis (1985)- Protected the right to livelihood.

    Public Trust in Judiciary – Rise in PILs reflects citizens’ confidence in the judiciary as the last resort for justice.

    Issues

    Judicial Overreach- Encroachment into executive and legislative domains. Eg- SC ban on firecrackers was criticized for overreach.

    Weak Enforcement Capacity- Eg- Prakash Singh Police Reforms (2006) – Non-compliance by most states.

    Frivolous or Politically Motivated PILs increase pendency (more than 5Cr cases pending) Eg- Misuse in Election-related PILs delaying legitimate processes.

    Lack of Judicial Accountability- Eg- In-House Inquiry (Justice Ramaswamy case) exposed inadequacies in judicial discipline.

    Opaque Collegium System- criticised for lack of transparency and nepotism. Eg- uncle judge syndrome (law commission)

    Inconsistency and Selective Intervention- Uneven judicial response to similar issues affects credibility. Eg- Contrasting stances in Bail cases.

    Frequent judicial intrusion weakens separation of powers.

    Way Forward

    Institutional Restraint- Judiciary must uphold separation of powers

    Enforce strict scrutiny of PILs to prevent misuse for personal, political, or publicity motives.

    Develop a judgment-monitoring mechanism to ensure effective execution of court orders

    Promote constitutional literacy and encourage responsible use of judicial remedies by citizens.

    Dedicated PIL Cells in High Courts

    PILs represent participatory constitutionalism, ensuring that justice remains accessible, accountable, and rights-oriented.

  • The strength and sustenance of local institutions in India has shifted from their formative phase of ‘Functions, Functionaries and Funds’ to the contemporary stage of ‘Functionality’. Highlight the critical challenges faced by local institutions in terms of their functionality in recent times.

    73rd and 74th CAA are the embodiment of grass-root democracy and democratic decentralization in India. They are inspired by Gandhiji’s concept of “Oceanic Circles of Power” and “Swaraj”. However, they have remained Half Baked Cake (Mani Shankar Iyer Committee).

    Issues in the Formative Phase of Local Governance (3Fs)

    Functions-

    Incomplete devolution of 11th & 12th Schedule subjects

    Limited administrative authority

    Functionaries-

    Lack of training & capacity

    Bureaucratic dominance over elected reps

    Funds-

    High fiscal dependence on states/centre

    Conditional and tied grants

    Critical Challenges to Functionality of Local Institutions

    Political Challenges

    Delayed Elections- Eg- Maharashtra’s 27 Municipal Corporations functioning under administrators since 2022.

    Weak Gram Sabhas- Low participation, elite domination, and token meetings.

    With rural population falling from 75% (1990) to about 60%, national development priorities have moved toward urban governance and municipal reforms.

    Functional and Planning Challenges

    District and Metropolitan Planning Committees are largely non-functional in most states.

    Poor digital capacity- Limited use of e-Gram Swaraj and GIS-based planning.

    Administrative Challenges

    Shortage of Functionaries- Severe staff vacancies-only 0.67 secretaries per Gram Panchayat (falling to 0.33 in Uttar Pradesh).

    Parastatal Dominance reduces the role of elected bodies. Eg- Delhi Jal Board

    Accountability issues- Weak social audit mechanisms and poor grievance redressal.

    Financial Challenges

    Declining Fiscal Autonomy- Local bodies generate <1% of GDP as own-source revenue (RBI, 2022).

    Post-GST Revenue Loss- Subsumption of octroi, market, and entertainment taxes.

    Irregular constitution and poor implementation of SFC recommendations.

    Social and Governance Challenges

    Elite Capture- Local elites dominate decision-making, sidelining marginalized voices.

    Despite reservation, proxy representation (Sarpanch Pati) reduces women’s leadership effectiveness.

    Way Forward

    Empower through Performance Grants linked to service outcomes (as per 15th Finance Commission).

    Regular Capacity Building via State Institutes of Rural/Urban Development.

    Digitization of Panchayats (e-GramSwaraj) for transparency and efficiency.

    Operationalize DPCs/MPCs for integrated local planning.

    Adopting Best Practices – Eg- Kerala’s People’s Plan Campaign grants local bodies control over 40% of the state’s plan budget.

    Local bodies are the cornerstones of participatory democracy and good governance. Their functional capacity and autonomy are essential for the constitutional vision of decentralization.

  • Rajya Sabha has been transformed from a ‘useless stepney tyre’ to the most useful supporting organ in past few decades. Highlight the factors as well as the areas in which this transformation could be visible.

    The Rajya Sabha, conceptualised under the Montague-Chelmsford Reforms (1918) and institutionalised by the Government of India Act, 1919, was envisioned as the Council of States-a forum of mature reflection.

    Rajya Sabha as a “Useless Stepney Tyre”

    Limited Legislative Powers – cannot initiate or amend Money Bills (Article 110)

    No Role in Government Formation – Council of Ministers is collectively responsible only to the Lok Sabha

    Joint sittings (Article 118) are dominated by Lok Sabha’s numerical majority.

    Viewed as a delaying or obstructive chamber rather than a constructive revising body.

    Cannot influence budgetary priorities or grants, diminishing its fiscal relevance.

    Factors Behind Transformation into a Useful Supporting Organ

    Rise of Coalition Politics – Need for consensus enhanced Rajya Sabha’s negotiating role.

    Federal Assertion – The rise of regional parties since the 1980s has strengthened federal politics

    Diversified Composition – Eminent professionals, academicians, and experts improved deliberation quality.

    Revitalized Committee System – Department-related committees (many chaired by RS members) improved policy scrutiny.

    Continuity and Stability – Not subject to dissolution, ensuring legislative stability and institutional memory.

    Judicial and Media Attention – Live telecast of sessions and judicial oversight improved transparency and accountability.

    Active Opposition Role – RS became a check on executive dominance during coalition and one-party phases alike.

    Areas Where Transformation is Visible

    Legislative Review and Refinement – Rajya Sabha acts as a revising chamber. Eg- Referred the GST Constitutional Amendment Bill (2014) to a Select Committee

    Federal Balance – Protects state interests against central overreach. Eg- discussed federal fiscal implications of the National Education Policy, 2020.

    Special Constitutional Powers – Can authorise creation of All-India Services (Article 312), make laws on State List (Article 249)

    Deliberative Forum – Provides in-depth, issue-based policy debates on national concerns. Eg- debates on COVID-19 management (2021)

    Accountability and Oversight – Through Question Hour, Zero Hour, and Calling Attention Motions. Eg- Rajya Sabha discussions led to clarifications on Pegasus spyware issue (2021) and farmers’ protests (2020-21).

    Voice to smaller and regional parties to represent state and sectional interests. Eg- state-specific issues such as river water disputes and fiscal devolution.

    Being a permanent chamber, it ensures institutional memory and continuity during Lok Sabha dissolutions.

    Way Forward-

    Equal representation for each state, so that large states do not dominate the proceedings. (US system)

    More debates, less disruptions- Eg – Introduce ‘whip-free debates’ for non-financial and non-confidence issues.

    Amend procedures so that laws disguised as Money Bills can be challenged and reviewed.

    NCRWC, 2002 – Called for a clear procedure for nominating eminent members under Article 80.

    Punchhi Commission (2010)– expanding the electoral college for Rajya Sabha to include panchayats and municipalities.

    As envisaged by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, RS must act as a “safety valve of federalism”, ensuring reasoned, representative, and regionally inclusive governance in India’s democracy.