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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Polity

  • “The states in India seem reluctant to empower urban local bodies both functionally as well as financially.” Comment.

    73rd and 74th CAA are the embodiment of grass-root democracy and democratic decentralization in India. However, they have remained Half Baked Cake (Mani Shankar Iyer Committee) due to reluctance of states.

    Reluctance to empower Urban Local Bodies

    Funding Challenges

    High fiscal dependence- ULBs’ own revenue was only 47% of their total revenue in 2022, with property tax accounting for 29%.

    Post-GST revenue loss- Subsumption of Octroi, sales tax, and entertainment tax reduced ULB income. Eg- of revenue post-GST.

    Weak property tax collection- Only 10-11% of revenue from property tax vs 20-22% in China (Peterson Institute).

    Limited taxation powers- ULBs lack fiscal autonomy unlike China (land rights), Denmark (local income tax), or USA (broad local taxes).

    Weak SFC implementation- 15% shortfall in 15th FC grants and delayed State Finance Commissions reduce fiscal predictability.

    Functional Challenges

    Parastatal dominance- Urban authorities and public corporations control key functions like water, and transport, limiting ULB autonomy. Eg- Delhi Jal Board

    Rise of Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs)- Schemes like JNNURM (2005) and Smart Cities Mission (2015) implemented via SPVs, bypassing elected bodies. SPVs, led by bureaucrats, indicate “procedural distrust” of local democracy.

    Incomplete devolution- Most States haven’t transferred all 18 functions under the 12th Schedule.

    Inactive District Planning Committees (DPCs)- Non-functional in 9 States and ineffective in 15 others, hindering integrated planning.

    Greater Bengaluru Governance Bill (2024)- Empowers Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) to alter ULB boundaries and override elected councils.

    Reasons for States’ Reluctance to Empower ULBs

    Political Control – Fear of losing urban dominance.

    Discretionary Devolution – 74th Amendment left powers optional.

    Low Political Incentive – No short-term electoral gain.

    Weak Administrative Capacity – Perceived inefficiency of local bodies.

    Limited Citizen Pressure – Urban voter apathy enables state control.

    Way Forward

    Empower ULBs legally through activity mapping and fiscal autonomy.

    Constitute SFCs timely, link grants to performance.

    Integrate local bodies into planning via empowered DPCs and MPCs.

    Urban Local bodies are the cornerstones of participatory democracy and good governance as 50% of India’s population is expected to reside in urban areas by 2030.

  • Compare and contrast the British and Indian approaches to Parliamentary sovereignty.

    Parliamentary sovereignty is a fundamental principle of the British constitutional system, signifying that Parliament is the supreme legal authority. In India, Parliament’s power is limited by constitutional supremacy and judicial review.

    Similarities

    Representative Authority: In both countries, Parliament represents the will of the people and is the central law-making body.

    Supremacy in Legislative Function: Both Parliaments have broad legislative powers to make, amend, or repeal laws.

    Parliamentary Privileges: Members in both enjoy freedom of speech and immunity within legislative proceedings.

    Rule of Law Framework: Both function under the rule of law, ensuring legislation aligns with legal principles.

    Bicameral Legislature: Each has a two-house system (UK: Commons and Lords; India: Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha).

    While both systems share a parliamentary foundation and democratic ethos, the UK upholds parliamentary supremacy, whereas India enshrines constitutional supremacy

    Governance

    Important Aspects of Governance

  • Discuss the role of Presiding Officers of state legislatures in maintaining order and impartiality in conducting legislative work and in facilitating best democratic practices.

    Article 178 provides for Presiding Officers of state legislatures. According to Nehru,’Speaker represents dignity & freedom of house & as House represents nation, Speaker becomes a symbol of nation’s freedom & liberty.’

    Role in Maintaining Order

    Presiding Over Sessions – Conducts proceedings, enforces rules of procedure, and ensures smooth functioning of the House.

    Maintaining Order and Decorum – Eg- suspension under Rule 374A equivalent.

    Regulating Debates – Allots time to members, ensures balanced participation from treasury and opposition benches.

    Decision on Points of Order – Interprets procedural rules and resolves disputes.

    Certification Authority – Certifies Money Bills and authenticates proceedings.

    Safeguards the sanctity of legislative decision-making through accurate voting processes.

    Role in Upholding Impartiality

    Neutral Arbiter – Acts above party lines, ensuring equal treatment of all members.

    Adjudicator under Anti-Defection Law (Tenth Schedule) – Decides on disqualification of members.

    Protection of Members’ Privileges – Defends legislative freedom of speech and expression within the House.

    Guardian of Legislative Autonomy – Ensures the executive’s accountability to the legislature, maintaining separation of powers.

    Promoting Transparency – Ensures publication of debates, committee reports, and live telecast of proceedings to strengthen public trust.

    Facilitating Best Democratic Practices

    Encouraging Committee System – Strengthens Departmental Standing Committees for detailed policy review.

    Enhancing transparency and accountability – Eg- live telecast of sessions

    Training & Capacity Building of MLAs – Enhances understanding of legislative procedures and constitutional duties.

    Upholding Minority Rights – Protects the voice of opposition and smaller parties within the assembly.

    Adherence to Constitutional Morality – Ensures decisions reflect constitutional values rather than political expediency.

    Coordination with Lok Sabha & Other States – Fosters uniform parliamentary standards and best practices nationwide.

    Concerns Affecting Impartiality

    Partisan Bias in disqualification cases (e.g., Maharashtra, Manipur Assemblies, 2020-23).

    Executive Pressure in agenda-setting and session duration.

    Lack of Codified Conventions for neutrality and ethical norms.

    Absence of Independent Oversight of the Speaker’s procedural decisions.

    A truly impartial Speaker is the cornerstone of the edifice of parliamentary democracy.

  • “Constitutionally guaranteed judicial independence is a prerequisite of democracy”. Comment.

    Judicial independence refers to the freedom of judges from external pressures – political, or popular – enabling them to uphold the Constitution and rule of law without fear or favour.

    Constitutional Guarantee of Judicial Independence

    Separation of Powers (Article 50) – Directive to separate judiciary from the executive.

    Security of Tenure (Articles 124(4), 217) – Judges can be removed only through impeachment.

    Financial Autonomy (Article 112, 125) – Judicial salaries and pensions are charged on the Consolidated Fund.

    Appointment Process (Articles 124-147) – The Collegium system, evolved through Second Judges Case (1993), protects against executive dominance.

    Power of Judicial Review (Articles 13, 32, 226) – Enables courts to strike down unconstitutional laws or actions.

    Contempt of Court Powers (Article 129, 215) – Protects the dignity and authority of courts.

    Judicial independence as a prerequisite of democracy

    An independent judiciary safeguards rule of law over rule by power, ensuring that all state actions remain within constitutional limits.

    Courts act as guardians of the Constitution by protecting citizens’ fundamental rights from legislative or executive encroachment. Eg- Shreya Singhal case invalidating Section 66A of IT Act

    Maintains Separation of Powers and prevents concentration of power.

    In a democracy based on constitutional supremacy, courts act as a bulwark against populist or authoritarian tendencies. Eg- Basic Structure Doctrine.

    Ensures Accountability of the Government through judicial review (Articles 13, 32, 226). Eg- NJAC Judgment

    Upholds Constitutional Morality by progressive interpretation of laws. Eg- Sabrimala Verdict

    Prevents Executive Overreach – Independent courts can strike down arbitrary laws or actions (Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain, 1975).

    Ensures Peaceful Resolution of Disputes – A credible judiciary provides non-violent conflict resolution, strengthening democratic stability.

    “There is no better test of the excellence of government than the working of its judicial system.” – Lord Bryce

  • Examine the need for electoral reforms as suggested by various committees with particular reference to “one nation-one election” principle.

    Free and fair elections are the foundation of Indian democracy (Article 324). Thus, Electoral reforms are considered as ‘Mother of all Reforms’.

    Need for one nation-one election

    According to ECI, ONOE reduces frequency of MCC & ensures policy continuity

    NITI Aayog (2017): simultaneous polls can cut election-related costs by 4500 Cr due to lower administrative and security deployment, single logistics cycle, and reduced campaign spending.

    Combined elections reduce voter fatigue and improve participation, especially in urban areas.

    Stability – Aligning Centre-State electoral cycles, making governments more accountable and stable

    ONOE discourages reckless dissolution of assemblies due to high political cost.

    Check on political populism due to reduced frequency of elections. Eg- farm loan waivers

    Reduction in vote bank politics and communalism. Promote social cohesion

    Challenges

    Constitutional Amendments Needed – Articles 83, 85, 172, 174, 356

    Weak Political Consensus as regional parties fear loss of visibility.

    Synchronisation Issues – Assemblies dissolved mid-term would require caretaker governments, raising constitutional questions.

    Logistical Requirements – Twice the number of EVMs & VVPATs, enhanced storage facilities, and large-scale training.

    As suggested by the Parliamentary Standing Committee (2015), there is a need for wide political consultations.

  • Discuss India as a secular state and compare with the secular principles of the US constitution.

    Secularism implies the separation of religion from the State and equal treatment of all faiths.

    While the Indian Constitution follows the Principled Distance Model, the US Constitution establishes a strict wall of separation between religion and the State.

    India as a Secular State

    Constitutional Basis: Secularism is enshrined in the Preamble (added by the 42nd Amendment, 1976) and Articles 25-28 ensuring freedom of religion.

    Objective: To promote religious harmony and inclusive coexistence in a multi-faith society.

    Core Features:

    Freedom of conscience and religion (Art. 25).

    Right to manage religious affairs (Art. 26).

    Freedom from religious instruction in State institutions (Art. 28).

    State neutrality and equal respect for all religions.

    Positive Secularism: The State can intervene in religion to uphold social reform and equality-e.g., Abolition of untouchability (Art. 17), Temple Entry Acts, S.R. Bommai (1994) upheld secularism as a basic feature.

    Similarities with US secularism

    Constitutional Guarantee: India – Articles 25-28, US – First Amendment (1791).

    No State Religion: Neither India nor the US recognizes any official State religion.

    Religious Freedom: Citizens enjoy freedom of conscience, belief, and worship in both countries.

    Equality Before Law: Both uphold non-discrimination on religious grounds and equal protection under law (India – Art. 14; US – 14th Amendment).

    Judicial Enforcement: The Supreme Courts in both countries act as guardians of secular principles (S.R. Bommai, Everson v. Board).

    Protection from Religious Domination: Both prevent majoritarian religious influence over State policy.

    Democratic Pluralism: Both promote tolerance, coexistence, and religious pluralism as part of democratic ethos.

    Differences

    Both India and the US uphold freedom of religion, but their approaches differ-India’s secularism is inclusive and reformative, suited to its plural society, while the US model is exclusionary and separationist, reflecting its individualist liberal tradition.

  • Explain the reasons for the growth of public interest litigation in India. As a result of it, has the Indian Supreme Court emerged as the world’s most powerful judiciary?

    Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a judicial mechanism that allows any public-spirited individual or organization to approach the court on behalf of others for the enforcement of fundamental or legal rights. It evolved in India as a tool of “social action litigation”, expanding the reach of justice under Article 32 and 226.

    Objectives PIL

    Accessibility of Justice

    Government Accountability

    Judicial Oversight

    Rule of Law and Balance

    Reasons for the Growth of PIL in India

    Historical Reasons- Postcolonial India witnessed deep social inequality and poverty. PIL emerged as a tool for social transformation and distributive justice.

    Liberalization of Locus Standi- Shift from “personally aggrieved” to “any public-spirited citizen” can file a case.

    Judicial Activism- Post-Emergency judiciary reasserted itself as the guardian of rights and liberties. Eg- Justice Krishna Iyer first introduced the idea of public interest litigation in India in Mumbai Kamagar Sabha v. Abdul Thai in 1976.

    Decline of Parliament- Legislative inefficiency and lack of responsiveness to social issues. Eg- Visaka Guidelines

    Rise of Civil Society Activism- Growth of NGOs, media, and human rights groups. Began using PILs to advance environmental, social, and human rights causes. Eg- Right to livelihood under Article 32 in Bandhua Mukti Morcha judgment

    Executive Overreach and Inaction- Bureaucratic corruption, maladministration, and policy failures prompted the judiciary to step in as a corrective mechanism. Eg- Vineet Narain v. Union of India (1997) – CBI accountability case.

    Global Factors- Comparative judicial trends (e.g., U.S. public interest litigation) inspired Indian legal activism.

    Constitutional Powers and Design- Directive Principles of State Policy (Part IV) provided moral backing for socio-economic justice through judicial intervention.

    Expansion of Fundamental Rights- Courts interpreted Article 21 broadly – including right to livelihood, education, health, and clean environment (Olga Tellis, 1985; M.C. Mehta, 1986).

    Indian Supreme Court as the world’s most powerful judiciary

    Arguments in Favour

    Widest Judicial Review Powers- Can strike down laws, executive actions, and even constitutional amendments under Articles 13, 32, and 226. Eg- NJAC verdict

    Suo Motu Jurisdiction- Eg- SC took suo motu cognizance of COVID-19 Migrant Crisis (2020).

    Epistolary Jurisdiction- Allows letters/postcards as petitions, widening access to justice. Eg- Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration (1978) – Letter treated as habeas corpus.

    Expansion of Fundamental Rights- Eg- Puttaswamy (2017) – Right to Privacy recognized as a Fundamental Right.

    Judicial Oversight on Policy- Eg- Vishaka Guidelines (1997) – Workplace sexual harassment norms framed by the SC.

    Legislative powers under Article 141 and Executive powers under Article 142. Eg- SC judgment on government’s veto power

    Moral and Institutional Legitimacy- Eg- Navtej Johar (2018) – Decriminalized homosexuality on grounds of dignity and liberty.

    Arguments Against

    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

    As Justice J.S. Verma cautioned, “Judicial activism must not become judicial adventurism.” Thus, judicial activism must be balanced with Judicial Restraint.

  • Explain and distinguish between Lok Adalats and Arbitration Tribunals. Whether they entertain civil as well as criminal cases ?

    Both Lok Adalats and Arbitration Tribunals are alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms aimed at ensuring speedy, cost-effective, and accessible justice, reducing the burden on regular courts.

    Objectives of Lok Adalats and Arbitration Tribunals

    Speedy Justice Delivery

    Reduction in Judicial Burden

    Cost-Effective Dispute Resolution

    Encourage conciliation, compromise, and mutual agreement between disputing parties.

    Access to Justice (Article 39A)

    Procedural Flexibility

    Difference between Lok Adalats And Arbitration Tribunals

    Jurisdiction Over Civil and Criminal Cases

    Lok Adalats

    Can hear civil cases such as family disputes, land or property matters.

    Non-compoundable offences (e.g., murder, rape, theft) are outside its jurisdiction.

    Arbitration Tribunals

    Civil Jurisdiction – Deal with contractual, commercial, and property disputes arising from an agreement between parties.

    Have no jurisdiction over criminal cases since criminal liability is non-contractual and involves offences against the State.

    Both Lok Adalats and Administrative Tribunals ensure access to speedy justice under Article 39A. Their effective functioning is essential to ensure justice is neither delayed nor denied.

  • “The duty of the Comptroller and Auditor General is not merely to ensure the legality of expenditure but also its propriety.” Comment.

    The Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG), established under Article 148 of the Constitution, is the guardian of the public purse.
    While legality focuses on whether expenditure is made according to law, propriety examines whether such expenditure is justified, prudent, and in the public interest.

    Ensuring Legality of Expenditure

    Ensures all expenditures are authorized by Parliament or State Legislature through Appropriation Acts.

    Verifies that funds are drawn from the Consolidated Fund only under proper sanction.

    Checks compliance with financial rules, codes, and delegated authorities.

    Prevents unauthorized re-appropriation or excess expenditure beyond approved limits.

    Eg- CAG’s audit of defence expenditure.

    Ensuring Propriety of Expenditure

    Examines whether expenditure is necessary, justifiable, and in the public interest – Ensures Responsible Use of Public Funds

    Prevents Misuse – Evaluates waste, extravagance, or favouritism even if legally permissible.

    Strengthens spirit of financial responsibility – Questions whether spending ensures value for money and meets ethical standards of governance.

    Promotes a culture of fiscal morality and prudence in the use of public funds.

    Strengthens Parliamentary Control and oversight with insights on ethical and prudent financial management

    Examples of Propriety Concerns Highlighted by CAG

    2G Spectrum Allocation (2010)

    Commonwealth Games (2010)

    Coal Block Allocations (2012)- Identified procedural irregularities and favoritism

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

  • What changes has the Union Government recently introduced in the domain of Centre-State relations? Suggest measures to be adopted to build the trust between the Centre and the States and for strengthening federalism.

    As per Granville Austin, India is a “cooperative federalism” model, where Centre and States are bound in a “seamless web” to achieve socio-economic revolution. The recent changes highlight the spirit of ‘competitive-cooperative federalism’.

    Recent Changes in Centre-State Relations

    Legislative

    Farm Acts, 2020 – Parliament legislated in agriculture (State subject) under Concurrent List.

    GNCTD (Amendment) Act, 2021 – Enhanced LG’s powers in Delhi.

    All India Services rules amendment – Greater Centre control over deputation/discipline.

    Executive / Institutional

    Governor-State tensions – Delayed assent to bills (TN, Kerala, WB).

    Pandemic handling – Centralised lockdown and restrictions.

    Revival of Inter-State Council

    NITI Aayog – Replaced Planning Commission

    Financial

    15th Finance Commission – New devolution formula using 2011 census and performance criteria.

    GST Council – Extended GST compensation cess.

    Rise in cess & surcharges – increased from 10.4% in 2011-12 to 20% in 2021-22.

    Conditional borrowing – Linked to reforms under FRBM/Art. 293.

    Issues in Centre-State Relations

    Financial Issues

    Cesses & surcharges not shared with States.

    Special category status demand – Bihar, Andhra Pradesh.

    Finance Commission TOR – (e.g., use of 2011 Census penalising southern States).

    GST regime – Delayed compensation, reduced fiscal autonomy.

    Administrative Issues

    Governor’s appointment & dismissal (Art. 156) – Often politically motivated

    Control over All India Services

    Central agencies’ overreach – CBI, ED, NIA operating in States without consent.

    Legislative Issues

    Encroachment on State List – use of Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 and Disaster Management Act, 2005 in public health (a State subject).

    Measures to Build Trust & Strengthen Federalism

    Sarkaria Commission (1983-88)

    Inter-State Council (Art. 263) to be activated as a permanent forum for consultation.

    Governor’s role – should be impartial; appointment in consultation with CM.

    Centre’s use of Art. 356 – to be a measure of last resort.

    All India Services – joint consultation in rules of recruitment, posting, and deputation.

    Punchhi Commission (2007-10)

    Clear guidelines for Governor’s office – fixed tenure, limited discretion, no arbitrary withholding of assent to bills.

    Concurrent List – reduce overlap by greater consultation before Union laws are enacted.

    National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC, 2000)

    Decentralisation – strengthen local bodies and fiscal devolution.

    Inter-Governmental Forums – regular meetings between PM and CMs to resolve disputes.

    Second Administrative Reforms Commission (2nd ARC, 2005-09)

    Neutral federal institutions – e.g., CBI under Lokpal for credibility, not political misuse.

    Fiscal federalism – ensure predictability in devolution; reduce tied grants in Centrally Sponsored Schemes.

    Finance Commission Recommendations

    Suggested GST Council as a true federal forum for resolving fiscal disputes.

    “Federalism is not a monolith; it is a dialogue between self-rule and shared rule.” Thus, such Acts must be exercised with consultation and cooperation.