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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Polity

  • West Bengal government to set up a Legislative Council

    The West Bengal government will set up a Legislative Council (Vidhan Parishad), as per a decision taken up at the Cabinet meeting chaired by its Chief Minister.

    What is a State Legislative Council?

    • The SLC is the upper house in those states of India that have a bicameral state legislature; the lower house being the State Legislative Assembly.
    • As of Jan 2020, 6 out of 28 states have a State Legislative Council. These are Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Telangana, Maharashtra, Bihar, and Uttar Pradesh The latest state to have a council is Telangana.

    Creation and abolition

    • According to Article 169, the Parliament can create or abolish the SLC of a state if that state’s legislature passes a resolution for that with a special majority.
    • The existence of an SLC has proven politically controversial.
    • A number of states that have had their LCs abolished have subsequently requested its re-establishment; conversely, proposals for the re-establishment of the LC for a state have also met with opposition.

    Its composition

    • The size of the SLC cannot be more than one-third of the membership of the State Legislative Assembly.
    • However, its size cannot be less than 40 members.
    • These members elect the Chairman and Deputy Chairman from the Council.

    MLCs are chosen in the following manner:

    • One third are elected by the members of local bodies such as municipalities, Gram panchayats, Panchayat samitis and district councils.
    • One third are elected by the members of Legislative Assembly of the State from among the persons who are not members of the State Legislative Assembly.
    • One sixth are nominated by the Governor from persons having knowledge or practical experience in fields such as literature, science, arts, the co-operative movement and social services.
    • One twelfth are elected by persons who are graduates of three years’ standing residing in that state.
    • One twelfth are elected by teachers who had spent at least three years in teaching in educational institutions within the state not lower than secondary schools, including colleges and universities.

    Answer this PYQ in the comment box:

    Q.Consider the following statements:

    1. The Legislative Council of a State in India can be larger in size than half of the Legislative Assembly of that particular State.
    2. The Governor of a State nominates the Chairman of Legislative Council of that particular State.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    (a) Only 1

    (b) Only 2

    (c) Both 1 and 2

    (d) Neither 1 nor 2

    Powers and functions

    • The Constitution of India gives limited power to the State Legislative Council.
    • The State Legislative Council can neither form nor dissolve a state government.
    • The State Legislative Council also have no role in the passing of money bills.
    • But some of the powers it has is that the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the State Legislative Council enjoy the same status as Cabinet Ministers in the state.

    Issues with LC

    • It was argued that a second House can help check hasty actions by the directly elected House, and also enable non-elected persons to contribute to the legislative process.
    • However, it was also felt that some of the poorer states could ill afford the extravagance of two Houses.
    • It has been pointed out that the Councils can be used to delay important legislation and to park leaders who have not been able to win an election.

  • Independent panel to appoint EC members

    A petition was filed in the Supreme Court seeking the constitution of an independent collegium to appoint members of the Election Commission.

    Election Commission of India (ECI)

    • The ECI is a constitutional body responsible for administering elections in India according to the rules and regulations mentioned in the Constitution of India.
    • It was established on January 25, 1950.
    • The major aim of the election commission of India is to define and control the process for elections conducted at various levels, Parliament, State Legislatures, and the offices of the President and Vice President of India.
    • It can be said that the Election Commission of India ensures the smooth and successful operation of the democracy.

    Functions

    According to Article 324 of the Indian Constitution:

    • the ECI has superintendence, direction, and control of the entire process for conduct of elections to Parliament and Legislature (state legislative assembly & state legislative council) of every State and to
    • the offices of President and Vice-President of India

    Answer this PYQ in the comment box:

    Q.Consider the following statements:

    1. The Election Commission of India is a five-member body.
    2. Union Ministry of Home Affairs decides the election schedule for the conduct of both general elections and bye-elections.
    3. Election Commission resolves the disputes relating to splits/mergers of recognized political parties.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (CSP 2017)

    (a) 1 and 2 only

    (b) 2 only

    (c) 2 and 3 only

    (d) 3 only

    Its composition

    • Initially, the commission had only a Chief Election Commissioner. Presently, it consists of a Chief Election Commissioner and two Election Commissioners.
    • For the first time, two additional Commissioners were appointed on 16th October 1989 but they had a very short term till 1st January 1990.
    • Afterwards, on 1st October 1993, two additional Election Commissioners were appointed.
    • The concept of a multi-member Commission has been in operation since then, with decision-making power by majority vote.

    Appointment & Tenure of Commissioners

    • The President has the power to select Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners.
    • They have a tenure of six years, or up to the age of 65 years, whichever is earlier.
    • They have the same status and receive pay and perks as available to Judges of the Supreme Court of India.
    • The CEC can be removed from office only through accusation by Parliament.
    • The election commissioner or a regional commissioner shall not be removed from office except on the recommendation of the CEC.

    Why such demand for independent collegium?

    • The plea filed has said that the practice of government making the appointments is a violation of the Basic Structure of the Constitution and creates a dent in free and fair elections in a democracy.
    • The petition said the recommendation to have a neutral collegium to fill up vacancies in the Election Commission has been given by several expert committees, commissions from 1975.
    • The recommendation was also part of the Law Commission in its 255th report in March 2015.

    Basis for such demand

    • The EC is not only responsible for conducting free and fair elections, but it also renders a quasi-judicial function between the various political parties including the ruling government and other parties.
    • In such circumstances, the Executive cannot be the sole participant in the appointment of members of the Election Commission as it gives unfettered discretion to the ruling party.
    • Therefore it could appoint someone whose loyalty is ensured and thereby renders the selection process vulnerable to manipulation.

  • App to view live proceedings of SC launched for media persons

    App to view virtual proceedings

    • Chief Justice of India launched a mobile app that would allow media persons to view the Supreme Court’s virtual proceedings live on their mobile phones.
    • The role of the media assumes importance in the process of disseminating information.
    • Justice A.M. Khanwilkar said the facility, which is now temporary, could be made permanent in the future depending on the operational issues.

    ‘Indicative Notes’ on the SC website

    • The CJI also launched a new feature in the Supreme Court’s official website called ‘Indicative Notes’.
    • This feature is aimed at providing concise summaries of landmark judgments in an easy-to-understand format.
    • This will serve as a useful resource for media persons and the general public who wish to be better informed about the rulings of the court.

  • Reading Maratha quota verdict

    • A five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down the Maharashtra law granting reservation to the Maratha community.
    • The court had framed six questions of law on the issue.
    • The court unanimously agreed on three of those issues, while the verdict was split 3:2 on the other three.

    Issue 1:  Whether Indra Sawhney judgment needs to be revisited

    • One of the key issues was to examine whether the 1992 landmark ruling by the nine-judge bench in Indra Sawhney v Union of India had to be revisited.
    • First, it said that the criteria for a group to qualify for reservation is “social and educational backwardness”.
    • Second, it reiterated the 50% limit to vertical quotas reasoning that it was needed to ensure “efficiency” in administration.
    • However, the court said that this 50% limit will apply unless in “exceptional circumstances”.
    • The Maratha quota exceeded the 50% ceiling. 
    • The arguments by state governments before the court was that the Indra Sawhney verdict must be referred to a 11-judge Bench for reconsideration since it laid down an arbitrary ceiling which the Constitution does not envisage.
    • The court said that the 50% ceiling, although an arbitrary determination by the court in 1992, is now constitutionally recognized and held that there is no need to revisit the case.

    Issue 2 and 3: Does Maratha quota law come under exceptional circumstances

    • The state government’s argument was that since the population of backward class is 85% and reservation limit is only 50%, an increase in reservation limit would qualify as an extraordinary circumstance.
    • All five judges disagreed with this argument.
    • The bench ruled that the above situation is not extraordinary.

    Issue 4,5 and 6: Validity of 102nd Amendment

    • The Constitution (One Hundred and Second Amendment) Act, 2018 gives constitutional status to the National Backward Classes Commission.
    • The Amendment also gives the President powers to notify backward classes.
    • The Bench unanimously upheld the constitutional validity of the 102nd Amendment but differed on the question of whether it affected the power of states to identify socially and economically backward classes (SEBCs).
    • Attorney General, appearing for the central government, clarified that this was not the intention of the law.
    • The Attorney General argued that it is inconceivable that no State shall have the power to identify backward class”.
    • The Attorney General explained that the state government will have their separate list of SEBCs for providing reservations in state government jobs and education.
    • The Parliament will only make the central list of SEBCs which would apply for central government jobs.
    • However, the Supreme Court held that “the final say in regard to inclusion or exclusion (or modification of lists) of SEBCs is firstly with the President, and thereafter, in case of modification or exclusion from the lists initially published, with the Parliament”.
    • This raises a question: How does this impact interventions by other states to provide reservations for other communities, for example Jats in Haryana and Kapus in Andhra?
    • The majority opinion essentially says that now the National Backward Classes Commission must publish a fresh list of SEBCs, both for states and the central list.
    • The Supreme Court also issued a direction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India which says that till the publication of the fresh list the existing lists will continue to operate.

    ————————————————-//————————————-

    BACK2BASICS

    • National Commission for Backward Classes is a constitutional body (102nd amendment 2018 in the constitution to make it a constitutional body) (Article 338B of the Indian Constitution).
    • It was constituted pursuant to the provisions of the National Commission for Backward Classes Act, 1993.
    • According to Article 338B, Commission shall consist of a Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson and three other Members and the conditions of service and tenure of office of the Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson and other Members so appointed shall be such as the President may by rule determine. The Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson and other Members of the Commission shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal.

  • Supreme Court struck down law for reservation to Maratha community

    About the judgment

    • The Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down the provisions of a Maharashtra law providing reservation to the Maratha community.
    • It rejected demands to revisit the verdict or to refer it to a larger Bench for reconsideration.

    What the Supreme Court said

    • The Bench said that “providing reservation for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward class in public services is not the only means and method for improving the welfare of backward class”
    • The 50% rule is to fulfill the objective of equality as engrafted in Article 14 of which Articles 15 and 16 are facets.
    • To change the 50% limit is to have a society that is not founded on equality but based on caste rule.
    • If the reservation goes above the 50% limit, it will be a slippery slope, the political pressure, make it hard to reduce the same.
    • It added that “the Constitution (Eighty-first Amendment) Act, 2000 by which sub-clause (4B) was inserted in Article 16 makes it clear that ceiling of 50% “has now received constitutional recognition”
    • The Supreme Court disapproved the findings of the Justice M G Gaikwad Commission on the basis of which Marathas were classified as a Socially and Educationally Backward Class.
    • It said that “the data collected and tabled by the Commission as noted in the report clearly proves that Marathas are not socially and educationally backward class”.

    SC upheld 102nd Constitution amendment

    • The SC also upheld the 102nd Constitution amendment, saying it does not violate the basic structure of the Constitution.
    • The bench, by 3:2 majority, held that after the amendment, only the President will have the power to identify backward classes in a state or Union Territory.
    • The amendment inserted Articles 338B and 342A in the Constitution.
    • Article 338B deals with the structure, duties and powers of the National Commission for Backward Classes.
    • Article 342A speaks about the power of the President to notify a class as Socially and Educationally Backward (SEBC) and the power of Parliament to alter the Central SEBC list. He can do this in consultation with Governor of the concerned State. However, law enacted by Parliament will be required if the list of backward classes is to be amended.

    ————————————//————————————————-

    BACK2BASICS

    • 102nd Constitution Amendment Act, 2018 provides constitutional status to the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC).
    • The Commission consists of five members including a Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson and three other Members appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal. It has the authority to examine complaints and welfare measures regarding socially and educationally backward classes.
    • Previously NCBC was a statutory body under the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment.

     

  • Judicial federalism

    The article discusses the idea of judicial federalism and autonomy of the High Courts.

    Issue of transfer of cases from High Courts to Supreme Court

    • Under Article 139A of the Constitution, the Supreme Court does have the power to transfer cases from the High Courts to itself if cases involve the same questions of law.
    • In Parmanand Katara v. Union of India (1989), the Supreme Court underlined that the right to emergency medical treatment is part of the citizen’s fundamental rights.
    • As such, constitutional courts owe a duty to protect this right.
    • In the face of a de facto COVID-19 health emergency, the High Courts of Delhi, Gujarat, Madras and Bombay, among others, have done exactly that.
    • These High Courts among others have directed the state governments on various issues related to COVID-19 health emergency.
    • However, Supreme Court issued an order asking the State governments and the Union Territories to “show cause why uniform orders” should not be passed by the Supreme Court.
    • Therefore, the Supreme Court indicated the possibility of the transfer of cases to itself.

    Issues with the SC’s move

    • According to the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, public health and hospitals come under the State List as Item No. 6.
    • There could be related subjects coming under the Union List or Concurrent List.
    • Also, there may be areas of inter-State conflicts.
    • But as of now, the respective High Courts have been dealing with specific challenges at the regional level, the resolution of which does not warrant the top court’s interference.
    • In addition to the geographical reasons, the constitutional scheme of the Indian judiciary is pertinent.
    •  In L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997), the Supreme Court itself said that the High Courts are “institutions endowed with glorious judicial traditions” since they “had been in existence since the 19th century”.
    • Even otherwise, in a way, the power of the High Court under Article 226 is wider than the Supreme Court’s under Article 32.
    • This position was reiterated by the court soon after its inception in State of Orissa v. Madan Gopal Rungta (1951).
    • Judicial federalism has intrinsic and instrumental benefits which are essentially political.
    • The United States is an illustrative case.
    • The U.S. Supreme Court reviews “only a relative handful of cases from state courts” which ensures “a large measure of autonomy in the application of federal law” for the State courts.
    • The need for a uniform judicial order across India is warranted only when it is unavoidable — for example, in cases of an apparent conflict of laws or judgments on legal interpretation.
    • Otherwise, autonomy, not uniformity, is the rule.
    • Decentralisation, not centrism, is the principle.

    Consider the question “Under Article 139A of the Constitution, the Supreme Court does have the power to transfer cases from the High Courts to itself if cases involve the same questions of law. However, transferring such cases should not impinge on judicial federalism. Comment.”

    Conclusion

    In the COVID-19-related cases, High Courts across the country have acted with an immense sense of judicial responsibility. This is a legal landscape that deserves to be encouraged. To do this, the Supreme Court must simply stay away.

  • Centre notifies GNCT Act that gives more powers to Delhi L-G

    GNCT Act comes into effect

    • The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) issued a gazette notification stating that the provisions of the Government of National Capital Territory (GNCT) of Delhi (Amendment) Act, 2021, would be deemed to have come into effect from April 27.
    • The Act defines the responsibilities of the elected government and the L-G along with the “constitutional scheme of governance of the NCT” interpreted by the Supreme Court in recent judgements regarding the division of powers between the two entities.

    What the Amendment seeks to achieve

    • The Act will clarify the expression Government and address ambiguities in legislative provisions.
    • It will also seek to ensure that the L-G is “necessarily granted an opportunity” to exercise powers entrusted to him under proviso to clause (4) of Article 239AA of the Constitution.
    • Clause (4) of Article 239AA provides for a Council of Ministers headed by a Chief Minister for the NCT to “aid and advise the Lieutenant Governor” in the exercise of his functions for matters in which the Legislative Assembly has the power to make laws.
    • Now Act will also provide for rules made by the Legislative Assembly of Delhi to be “consistent with the rules of the House of the People” or the Lok Sabha.

  • Need for diversity and propriety in judiciary

    The article highlights the issue of women representation and its implications for the role of the judiciary.

    Improving representation of women

    • Presently, the Supreme Court is left with only one woman judge, who is also going to retire next year, after which, the SC will be left without a woman judge.
    • The collegium failed to take timely steps to elevate more women judges in the SC.
    • In the 71 years of history of the SC, there have been only eight women judges — the first was Justice Fathima Beevi, who was elevated to the bench after a long gap of 39 years from the date of establishment of the SC.
    • In the submissions filed by the AG on the issue states that improving the representation of women in the judiciary could go a long way towards attaining a more balanced and empathetic approach in cases involving sexual violence.
    • The AG also brought up the fact that there has never been a woman Chief Justice of India (CJI).

    Women representation in developed countries

    • The situation is not any different in developed countries such as the US, UK, Ireland, France and China.
    • According to the data collected by Smashboard, a New Delhi and Paris-based NGO, not only has no woman ever been appointed as the CJI, the representation of women across different courts and judicial bodies is also abysmally low.

    Way forward

    • In the last few meetings of the collegium, there has been some talk of promoting women to the apex court.
    • In this regard, if Justice B V Nagaratha of the Karnataka High Court is elevated to the Supreme Court, she could become the first woman CJI in February 2027.
    • But her elevation will lead to the supersession of 32 senior judges.
    •  Supersession itself is perceived as a threat to an independent judiciary
    • Seniority combined with merit is the sacrosanct criteria for promotion in the judiciary.
    • New CJI should secure the trust of members of his collegium to fill the backlog of 411 vacancies across high courts and six vacancies in the SC.

    Consider the question “What are the various structural issues faced by the judiciary in India? Suggest the measures to deal with them.”

    Conclusion

    A greater number of women in the Supreme Court would eventually lead to a woman CJI. This would be a gratifying change, which may mark the beginning of a new era of judicial appointments.

  • Enforcing COVID-19 rules is State’s responsibility: ECI

    What prompted ECI to give clarification

    • In its oral observations, the Madras High Court blamed the ECI for the second wave of COVID-19 in Tamil Nadu and Puducherry.
    • The Madras High Court said the ECI was unable to ensure political parties followed the rules while campaigning for the Assembly elections.

    What the ECI said

    • The ECI said that the enforcement under the 2005 Act has to be ensured by the SDMA [State Disaster Management Authority] concerned and notified authorities under the Act.
    • The Commission has always emphasised that the State authorities shall ensure COVID-19 compliance in the matter of public gatherings, etc. for campaign purposes.
    • At no occasion, the Commission takes over the task of SDMA for enforcement of COVID-19 instructions.

  • Need to address the systemic issues plaguing the judiciary

    The article highlights the issues facing the judiciary in India and emphasises the need for addressing these issues.

    Separating judiciary from the executive

    • Today, the judiciary, especially the SC, is called upon to decide a large number of cases in which the government has a direct interest.
    • These can be politically sensitive cases too.
    • The framers of the Constitution understood the importance of the oath of office of judges of the Supreme Court of India (SC) and carefully designed its language.
    • The words, “without fear or favour” to “uphold the constitution and the laws” are extremely significant and stress the need for a fiercely independent court.
    • Article 50 of the Constitution provides: “The State shall take steps to separate the judiciary from the executive in the public services of the State.”

    Master of roaster issue

    • The Chief Justice of India is the first amongst the equals but by the virtue of his office assumes significant powers as the Master of the Roster to constitute benches and allocate matters.
    • The SC has re-affirmed this position in a rather disappointing decision in Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms v. Union of India, (2018).
    • The result has been catastrophic.
    • Many matters were either treated casually or deflected for no reason from serious hearing.

    Accountability from legislature and executive

    • The SC is expected to seek strict accountability from the legislature and executive and any infraction of the Constitution and laws must be corrected.
    • Yet, this is not happening.
    • A country of billion-plus needs its highest court to stand for the people, not seemingly for the executive of the day.

    Inherent and fundamental challenges

    • The judiciary is besieged by inherent and fundamental challenges.
    • Millions of pending cases, quality of judges and their decisions, organisational issues and its integrity and impartiality, need urgent attention.
    • Yet, in the last two decades precious little has been done.
    • Justice is eluding the common man, including the vulnerable sections of society.

    Way forward

    • The new Chief Justice must seriously introspect and free himself of the bias in constituting benches and allocating cases and take concrete steps to revitalise the administration of justice.
    • Only then will the rule of law be restored and the Constitution served.

    Consider the question “Examine the inherent and fundamental challenges faced by the judiciary in India. Suggest the measures to deal with these challenges.” 

    Conclusion

    The Chief Justice of India on account of the position he holds as paterfamilias of the judicial fraternity, was suspected by none other than Dr B R Ambedkar. Let us hope the new Chief Justice makes serious efforts to prove otherwise.