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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Polity

  • Representation of Women in Judiciary

    Attorney-General has told the Supreme Court that more women judges in constitutional courts would certainly improve gender sensitivity in the judiciary.

    Q.Women judges could bring a more comprehensive and empathetic perspective of gender sensitivity in the judiciary. Discuss.

    Women in Judiciary: A dismal figure

    • The Supreme Court has only two women judges as against a sanctioned strength of 34 judges.
    • There has never been a female Chief Justice. This figure is consistently low across the higher judiciary.
    • There are only 80 women judges out of the sanctioned strength of 1,113 judges in the High Courts and the Supreme Court.
    • Only two of these 80 women judges are in the Supreme Court and the other 78 are in various High Courts, comprising only 7.2% of the number of judges.
    • There are six High Courts — Manipur, Meghalaya, Patna, Tripura, Telangana, and Uttarakhand — where there are no sitting women judges.

    A short timeline

    • The first female Judge appointed in Supreme Court was Justice M. Fathima Beevi from Kerala in 1987.
    • She was later followed by Justice Sujata V. Manohar from Maharashtra in 1994 and in the year 2000, Justice Ruma Pal was appointed from West Bengal.
    • And in the year 2010, Justice Gyan Sudha Misra from Bihar was appointed.
    • In 2014, Justice Ranjana Desai from Mumbai was appointed and currently, Justice R. Banumathi from Tamil Nadu is the only woman judge in Supreme Court.

    (Note: This data might be useful for State PSCs or other exams. UPSC aspirants need not remember this.)

    What did the A-G say?

    • Improving the representation of women could go a long way towards a more balanced and empathetic approach in cases involving sexual violence.
    • Judges need to be trained to place themselves in the shoes of the victim of sexual violence while passing orders, said the AG.
    • There is a dearth of compulsory courses in gender sensitization in law schools.
    • Certain law schools have the subject either as a specialization or as an elective.

    Why need more women in Judiciary?

    • The entry of women judges into spaces from which they had historically been excluded has been a positive step in the direction of judiciaries being perceived as being more transparent, inclusive, and representative.
    • By their mere presence, women judges enhance the legitimacy of courts, sending a powerful signal that they are open and accessible to those who seek recourse to justice.
    • They could contribute far more to justice than improving its appearance: they also contribute significantly to the quality of decision-making, and thus to the quality of justice itself.
    • Women judges bring those lived experiences to their judicial actions, experiences that tend toward a more comprehensive and empathetic perspective.
    • By elucidating how laws and rulings can be based on gender stereotypes, or how they might have a different impact on women and men, a gender perspective enhances the fairness of the adjudication.

  • One nation One election

    Prime Minister once again raised the pitch for “One Nation, One Election” and a single voter list for all to prevent the impact of the model code of conduct on development works due to frequent elections.

    Try this question:

    Q.Discuss how a common electoral roll and simultaneous elections are ways to save the enormous amount of effort and expenditure on Elections in India. Also discuss the centralizing tendency behind the idea.

    Elections in India

    • Currently, elections to the state assemblies and the Lok Sabha are held separately — that is whenever the incumbent government’s five-year term ends or whenever it is dissolved due to various reasons.
    • This applies to both the state legislatures and the Lok Sabha. The terms of Legislative Assemblies and the Lok Sabha may not synchronize with one another.
    • For instance, Rajasthan faced elections in late 2018, whereas Tamil Nadu will go to elections only in 2021.

    Simultaneous Elections

    • But the idea of “One Nation, One Election” envisages a system where elections to all states and the Lok Sabha will have to be held simultaneously.
    • This will involve the restructuring of the Indian election cycle in a manner that elections to the states and the centre synchronize.
    • This would mean that the voters will cast their vote for electing members of the LS and the state assemblies on a single day, at the same time (or in a phased manner as the case may be).

    Birth of the Idea: A backgrounder

    • Simultaneous elections are not new to India. They were the norm until 1967.
    • But following dissolution of some Legislative Assemblies in 1968 and 1969 and that of the Lok Sabha in December 1970, elections to State Assemblies and Parliament have been held separately.
    • The idea of reverting to simultaneous polls was mooted in the annual report of the Election Commission in 1983.
    • The Law Commission’s Report also referred to it in 1999.
    • After PM floated the idea once again in 2016, the NITI Aayog prepared a working paper on the subject in January 2017.

    What are the proposals under it?

    There were two proposals to conduct elections synchronization in two batches.

    • One proposal was to make the shift to simultaneous polls in a phased manner, where general elections, of few States and UT may be synchronised in 2019.
    • For such a synchronization to happen, besides political consensus and extension of term up to six months in some states, amendments to the Constitution have to be made.
    • Elections to the remaining States and UTs with will be synchronised by the end of 2021.
    • Thereafter, elections to the Lok Sabha, all the State Legislative Assemblies and Union Territories (with legislatures) will be held simultaneously from 2024.

    Advantages of simultaneous elections

    • Reduce cost: The cost of an election has two components – one, expenditure incurred by the Election Commission and two, expenditure incurred by the political parties. A large number of government employees and public buildings are diverted from their regular responsibilities for election duties. Supporters of the simultaneous elections argue that it will reduce election expenditure in terms of finance and reduce diversion of human resources for election duties.
    • Reduce disruption due to MCC: Model Code of Conduct (MCC) comes into operation during election season. MCC is seen as an obstacle to the government service delivery mechanism. Simultaneous elections may reduce such disruption.
    • Reduce populism: During elections, political convenience takes precedence over public interest. To lure voters, political parties concede to popular demands without any consideration to public interest. Simultaneous elections reduce such opportunity for political parties.
    • National prespective: Simultaneous election promotes national perspective over the regional perspective. This is important for the unity of the country.
    • Strengthen National parties: Since it promotes national perspective, simultaneous elections strengthen national parties. This reduces mushrooming growth of political parties based on narrow vote bank politics.
    • Strengthens federalism: Simultaneous elections bring States on par with the Center. If the elections are to be held simultaneously once in five years, the elected state governments cannot be dismissed easily. This reduces the anomalies created by the Article 356 (President’s Rule) of the Indian constitution and hence, it strengthens federalism.
    • Stability: The simultaneous election once in five years provides stability to the governments. It allows the government to take difficult and harsh decision in larger public interest.

    Arguments against simultaneous elections

    • No guarantee that expenditure of the political parties will reduce: Simultaneous elections may reduce the expenditure incurred by the Election Commission. But there is no guarantee that expenditure of the political parties will reduce. Political parties may spend entire fund at once rather than in phases.
    • Reduce importance of state elections: Center and States are equal and sovereign within their jurisdiction. Simultaneous elections may reduce the importance of state elections. Thus it affects the concept of federalism.
    • Violates Article 83(2) and Article 172 : Article 83(2) and Article 172 of the Constitution requires that the Lok Sabha and State legislatures be in existence for five years from the date of its first meeting, “unless dissolved earlier”. Simultaneous elections ignore this phrase, as there would be no opportunity to dissolve Lok Sabha or State Assemblies.
    • Negates NCM: A government can be in power as long as it enjoys the confidence of Parliament. Simultaneous elections can work only if governments last for a fixed tenure of five years regardless of confidence of Parliament. It negates the concept of ‘no confidence motion’ – an important tool for legislative control over the executive.
    • Keep Government on toes: Elections are an important part of representative democracy. Simultaneous elections with fixed tenure of five years curtail people’s right to express their confidence or displeasure on the government.
    • Ignores diversity: Simultaneous elections will relegate local issues or issues of state importance to the background. This completely ignores the diversity of the country.
    • Logistical challenge: Holding simultaneous election once in five years may also face logistical challenges. For the free and fair conduct of the elections, security forces need to be deployed in large numbers. Given the current strength of security personnel, this may be a challenging task.

    Way forward

    • There needs to be a consensus and all hands on the deck to see whether the country suits for simultaneous elections.
    • All political parties should at least cooperate in debating this issue, once the debate starts, the public opinion can be taken into consideration.
    • India being a mature democracy, can then follows the outcome of the deliberation.

    Shekhawat solution

    • The former vice-president Bhairon Singh Shekhawat proposed a solution. He called for a review of provisions of the no-confidence motion.
    • He suggested that no-confidence motion must mandatorily be accompanied by an alternative government formation plan. This prevents premature dissolution of Lok Sabha on account of political instability.
    • But critics point out that, this solution will take away people’s right to elect or dismiss a government.

    Conclusion

    • The constitution of India has essentially prescribed a federal structure of state governance.
    • As we are aware that there are several levels of government such as Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha besides, state governments, Municipal Corporations and the Panchayats, which are forms of local governance.
    • As a result the entire power is not concentrated with one government.
    • But One Nation, One Election can lead to such concentration of power in a single hand.
    • So the new government needs to ensure such vast power is not gathered by a single domain through One Nation, One Election.

  • UP Law against Forceful Inter-Faith Marriage and Conversions

    The UP Cabinet has cleared a draft ordinance against forceful inter-faith conversions for marriage, amid similar steps by other states.

    Try this question:

    Q. In a world where religiosity is rising, the contemporary liberal ideas seem outdated and incapable of handling dangerous issues of religious bigotry. Critically comment.

    What is the proposed UP law on ‘love jihad’?

    • The proposed law defines punishment and fine for three different cases.
    1. Conversion done though “misrepresentation, force, undue influence, coercion, allurement or by any fraudulent means” would face jail term of one to 5 years, and a minimum fine of Rs 15,000.
    2. Conversion of a minor, a woman from the SC or ST would have to face a jail term from three to 10 years, with a minimum fine of Rs 25,000.
    3. If such conversion is found at the mass level, then those guilty would face jail term from three to 10 years, with a minimum fine of Rs 50,000.
    • It proposes among other things that a marriage will be declared “shunya” (null and void) if the “sole intention” of the same is to “change a girl’s religion”.

    Who can convert and how can they do it under the proposed law?

    • Under the new proposed law, anyone wanting to convert into another religion would have to give it in writing to the District Magistrate at least two months in advance.
    • The government is supposed to prepare a format for the application and the individual has to fill the application for conversion in that format.
    • However, under the new law, it would be the responsibility of the one going for the religious conversion to prove that it is not taking place forcefully or with any fraudulent means.
    • In case, any violation is found under this provision, then one faces a jail term from 6 months to 3 years and fine of minimum Rs 10,000.

    Need for such law

    • The state of UP is witnessing rising incidents of forced religious conversions or conversions through fraudulent ways.
    • The extreme right wing politicians in the state were quiet vocal against alleged religious conversions.
    • There are cases of being allegedly lured and honey-trapped by men and those girls now seeking their help to free themselves.

    Interfaith marriages and the Constitution

    • The right to marry a person of one’s choice is a guarantee under Article 21.
    • At the same time, freedom of conscience, the practice and propagation of a religion of one’s choice, including not following any religion, are guaranteed under Article 25.
    • One set of rights cannot invalidate the other.

    What do critics say?

    • Such law to regulate matrimonial relationships between two consenting adults is simply against the constitutional guarantees.
    • The right to marry a person of one’s choice flows from the freedom of individuality, naturally available to any individual.
    • Hence, interfaith marriages and religious conversions should not be the matter of concern for social watchdogs.
    • Hence, the mere statement of two consenting adults about the existence of their matrimonial relation is sufficient.

  • Importance of constitutional and public morality in democracy

    Democracy has evolved in many ways with time. The article examines its evolution in the Indian context.

    Historical background of democracy

    • In recorded history, the Greeks were the first to experiment with models of government.
    • There were monarchies, oligarchies and democracies among the Greek city-states of the 5th Century BCE.
    • Aristotle wrote that while monarchies were for the benefit of the monarchs and oligarchies for the benefit of men with means, democracies were for the benefit of men without means.
    • Democracy has travelled a long way from those times.
    • In the world’s successful democracies like the US, UK and India, there is a fine balance between the elected and non-elected institutions with enough safeguards.

    How democracy worked in India

    • There was much scepticism about the idea of universal adult franchise during the making of the Indian Constitution.
    • But Rajendra Prasad assured the Assembly’s members about the raw political wisdom of the average Indian as also the strength of the other institutions to safeguard the democratic process.
    • However, the infamous Emergency exposed the flaws in Indian democracy.

    Gandhiji’s and B R Ambedkar’s approach

    • Mahatma Gandhi was not a big admirer of the parliamentary system.
    • Gandhi’s view was that in the British system, the parliament works only for partisan interest — and not for the national interest.
    • He wrote in Harijan in January 1937 that by political independence he meant system suitable to Indian context i.e. Ram Rajya — sovereignty of the people based on pure moral authority.
    • B R Ambedkar too described democracy in India as “only a top-dressing” on an Indian soil “which is essentially undemocratic”.
    • He underscored the importance of social democracy for the success of political democracy.
    • Gandhi was referring to the tyranny of the British rule and Ambedkar was responding to the oppressive caste system.
    • Neither was against democracy, but both were against the idea of “majoritarian rule”.
    • For Gandhi, democracy meant the weak getting the same chance as the strong.
    • For Ambedkar, it was about giving voice to the voiceless.
    • For democracies to succeed, both believed that the parliamentary majorities need to be restrained through constitutional ethics and public morality.
    • Constitutional ethics is about leaders respecting constitutional order, conventions and institutions.
    • Gandhi’s greater emphasis was on public morality.
    • He insisted that for India’s democracy to succeed, the Congress should convert itself into a lok sevak sangh and work at the grassroots level.

    Consider the question “Public morality and unelected institution are necessary checks on the elected government not inimical to it. Comment.”

    Conclusion

    India’s democracy, as envisaged by the makers of its Constitution, thrived essentially because of the respect of the leaders for ethical constitutionalism and moral activism of the grassroots activists. Neither should see the other as an enemy and try to bring them down.

  • Protecting Article 32

    The article deals with the issue of recourse to Article 32 for violation of Fundamental Rights. But it is subject to fundamental principles of administration of justice.

    Context

    • The Chief Justice of India is reported to have stated during the hearing of journalist Siddique Kappan’s bail matter, that the Court was trying to “discourage” recourse to Article 32.

    Recourse under Article 32 is not absolute

    • The apex judicial process shows clearly that the Court regards Article 32 as a judicial power subject to the fundamental principles of administration of justice.
    • The Supreme Court has already extended rules and doctrines such as laches (delays) or res judicata (a matter already decided by a competent court) or any other principle of administration of justice.
    • Article 32 keep open “the doors of this court” and requires the state not to “put any hindrance” to a person seeking to approach the Court.
    • However, the Court must ignore all laws of procedure, evidence, limitation, res judicata and other provision.
    • The Supreme Court has also said that faith “must be inspired in the hierarchy of Courts [ Recourse under Article 226 should be sought before approaching the SC] and the institution as a whole” and not” only in this Court alone”.
    • So, even if there is a constitutional right to remedies it remains subject to the discipline of judicial power and process.

    New facets of Article 32

    • The Supreme Court has also discovered new facets of Article 32.
    • As early as 1950, it has ruled that powers under Article 32 are not limited to the exercise of prerogative writs.
    • In 1987 the Court ruled that it has powers to rule for compensation of violation of fundamental rights.
    • In 1999 it said that this power extended to the rectification of its own mistakes or errors.

    Comparing Article 226 and Article 32

    • Article 226 is the very dimension; the high court’s vast jurisdiction technically casts no duty on them to enforce fundamental rights.
    • They have the discretion to act or not to; in contrast, the Supreme Court must.
    • Fourth, Article 32 is not absolute, the Supreme Court decides on what “appropriate proceedings” should be for it to be so moved.
    • But the Court may not prescribe any process as it likes but only that process which preserves, protects and promotes the right to constitutional remedies.

    Need for effective bail system

    • The just demand for an expeditious and effective bail system stems from manifest discrimination in bail .
    • In several instances, one case is fast-tracked whereas others are consigned to slow-moving judicial action, even when rights to life and health are endangered.
    • Scandalous judicial delays, measures of decongestion and diversion, and a bold resolution of “who watches the watchman” syndrome now demand urgent apex response.

    Consider the question “Seeking remedy from the Supreme Court for the violation of fundamental rights under Article 32 is also a fundamental right. However, enforcement of it is not absolute. In light of this, examine the challenges in its enforcement by the Supreme Court.”

    Conclusion

    Article 32 makes the apex court into a “people’s court”. And future historians should not be able to conclude that the Court deliberately dealt deathblows to this “soul” of the Constitution, as Babasaheb Ambedkar described Article 32.

  • Punjab’s claim over Chandigarh

    Earlier this month, Haryana Dy. CM said it would be better if both Haryana and Punjab agreed on Chandigarh as a Union Territory and make their independent capitals and Benches of High Courts.

    Try answering this

    Q.The linguistic re-organization of Indian states in the post-Independence period has prevented its balkanization, unlike our neighbourhood. Comment.

    Why was Chandigarh created?

    • Chandigarh was planned to replace Lahore, the capital of erstwhile Punjab, which became part of Pakistan during the Partition.
    • In March 1948, the Government of (India’s) Punjab, in consultation with the Centre, approved the area of the foothills of the Shivaliks as the site for the new capital.
    • From 1952 to 1966 (till Haryana was carved out of Punjab), Chandigarh remained the capital of Punjab.

    How did it become a shared capital?

    • At the time of reorganization of Punjab in 1966, the city assumed the unique distinction of being the capital of both Punjab and Haryana.
    • Even as it was declared a union territory and was placed under the direct control of the Centre.
    • The properties in Chandigarh were to be divided into 60:40 ratio in favour of Punjab.

    Punjab’s claim

    • The-then PM Indira Gandhi had announced that Haryana, in due course, would have its own capital and Chandigarh would go to Punjab.
    • As per documents submitted in the Lok Sabha, the Centre had even issued a formal communication is this regard on January 29, 1970, almost three years after Haryana came into being.
    • Again, in 1985, under the Rajiv-Longowal accord, Chandigarh was to be handed over to Punjab on January 26, 1986, but the Rajiv Gandhi government withdrew at the last minute.

    Haryana’s counter-claim

    • As per the 1970 documents, the Centre had considered various alternatives for settling the matter, including dividing the city.
    • But that wasn’t feasible since Chandigarh was built as a planned city to serve as the capital of one state.
    • Haryana was told to use the office and residential accommodation in Chandigarh only for five years till it shifts to its own new capital.
    • The Centre had offered Rs 10 crore grant to Haryana and an equal amount of loan for setting up the new capital.
    • In 2018, Haryana CM suggested setting up a special body for the development of Chandigarh, but the Punjab CM rejected it, saying the city “indisputably belonged to Punjab”.

  • What is the ‘Office of Profit’?

    The Joint Parliamentary Committee on Office of Profit has deliberated on whether a Parliamentarian can continue to teach at University and if this draws the provisions of “Office of Profit” rules.

    Note: The Constitution of India does not define the Office of Profit. It has only mentioned it under Article 102 (1) and Article 191 (1).

    The concept of ‘Office of Profit’

    • MPs and MLAs, as members of the legislature, hold the government accountable for its work.
    • The essence of disqualification is if legislators hold an ‘office of profit’ under the government, they might be susceptible to government influence, and may not discharge their constitutional mandate fairly.
    • The intent is that there should be no conflict between the duties and interests of an elected member.
    • Hence, the office of profit law simply seeks to enforce a basic feature of the Constitution- the principle of separation of power between the legislature and the executive.

    What governs the term?

    • At present, the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959, bars an MP, MLA or an MLC from holding any office of profit under the central or state government unless it is exempted.
    • However, it does not clearly define what constitutes an office of profit.
    • Legislators can face disqualification for holding such positions, which bring them financial or other benefits.
    • Under the provisions of Article 102 (1) and Article 191 (1) of the Constitution, an MP or an MLA (or an MLC) is barred from holding any office of profit under the Central or State government.

    An Un-defined term

    • The officials of the law ministry are of the view that defining an office of profit could lead to the filing of a number of cases with the Election Commission and the courts.
    • Also, once the definition is changed, one will also have to amend various provisions in the Constitution including Article 102 (1) (a) and Article 109 (1) (a) that deal with the office of profit.
    • It will have an overarching effect on all the other sections of the Constitution.

    Factors constituting an ‘office of profit’

    • The 1959 law does not clearly define what constitutes an office of profit but the definition has evolved over the years with interpretations made in various court judgments.
    • An office of profit has been interpreted to be a position that brings to the office-holder some financial gain, or advantage, or benefit. The amount of such profit is immaterial.
    • In 1964, the Supreme Court ruled that the test for determining whether a person holds an office of profit is the test of appointment.

    Several factors are considered in this determination including factors such as:

    1. whether the government is the appointing authority,
    2. whether the government has the power to terminate the appointment,
    3. whether the government determines the remuneration,
    4. what is the source of remuneration, and
    5. the power that comes with the position.

  • National Population Register

    The office of the Registrar General of India (RGI) has said the schedule or the questionnaire of the National Population Register (NPR) is being finalised.

    The National Population Register (NPR)

    • The NPR is a database containing a list of all usual residents of the country. Its objective is to have a comprehensive identity database of people residing in the country.
    • It is generated through house-to-house enumeration during the “house-listing” phase of the census, which is held once in 10 years.
    • The last census was in 2011, and the next will be done in 2021 (and will be conducted through a mobile phone application).
    • A usual resident for the purposes of NPR is a person who has resided in a place for six months or more and intends to reside there for another six months or more

    How it is different from the Census?

    • The census involves a detailed questionnaire and there were 29 items to be filled up in the 2011 census.
    • They aimed at eliciting the particulars of every person, including age, sex, marital status, occupation, birthplace, mother tongue, religion, whether they belonged to any SC or ST etc.
    • On the other hand, NPR collects basic demographic data and biometric particulars.
    • Once the basic details of the head of the family are taken by the enumerator, an acknowledgement slip will be issued. This slip may be required for enrolment in NPR, whenever that process begins.
    • The details will be recorded in every local (village or ward), sub-district (tehsil or taluk), district and state level.
    • Once the details are recorded, there will be a population register at each of these levels. Together, they constitute the National Population Register.

    What is the legal basis for the NPR?

    • While the census is legally backed by the Census Act, 1948, the NPR is a mechanism outlined in a set of rules framed under the Citizenship Act, 1955.
    • Section 14A was inserted in the Citizenship Act, 1955, in 2004, providing for the compulsory registration of every citizen of India and the issue of a “national identity card” to him or her.
    • It also said the Central government may maintain a “National Register of Indian Citizens”.
    • The Registrar General India shall act as the “National Registration Authority” (and will function as the Registrar General of Citizen Registration).
    • Incidentally, the Registrar General is also the country’s Census Commissioner.

    Attempt this question

    Q.Enumerate the major points of the ‘Assam accord (1985)’. How is it associated with the present issue of the National Register of Citizens?

  • Inter state water Sharing disputes

    The article highlights the issue of challenges facing the water governance in India, how need for more coordination between the Centre and the States.

    Objectives of the two bills

    • Interstate River Water Disputes Amendment Bill 2019 and the Dam Safety Bill 2019 were passed by Lok Sabha and awaits Rajya Sabha nod.
    • The Interstate River Water Disputes Amendment Bill 2019 seeks to improve the inter-state water disputes resolution by setting up a permanent tribunal.
    • The Dam Safety Bill 2019 aims to deal with the risks of India’s ageing dams, with the help of a comprehensive federal institutional framework comprising.
    • The other pending bills also propose corresponding institutional structures and processes.

    Challenges to the federal water governance

    • The agenda of future federal water governance is not limited to the above cited issues.
    • These include emerging concerns of long-term national water security and sustainability, the risks of climate change, and the growing environmental challenges, including river pollution.
    • These challenges need systematic federal response where the Centre and the states need to work in a partnership mode.
    • Greater Centre-states coordination is also crucial for pursuing the current national projects — whether Ganga river rejuvenation or inland navigation or inter-basin transfers.

    Challenges to water governance

    • Water governance is perceived and practiced as the states’ exclusive domain, even though their powers are subject to those of the Union under the Entry 56 about inter-state river water governance.
    • The River Boards Act 1956 legislated under the Entry 56 has been in disuse.
    • No river board was ever created under the law.
    • The Centre’s role is largely limited to resolving inter-state river water disputes by setting up tribunals for their adjudication.
    • Combined with the states’ dominant executive power, these conditions create challenges for federal water governance.
    • This state of affairs puts the proposed bills at a disadvantage.

    Bridging the water governance gap

    • Each bill proposes their own institutional mechanisms and processes leaning on closer Centre-state coordination and deliberation.
    • The disputes resolution committee and dam safety authority rely on active Centre-states participation.
    • Segmented and fragmented mechanisms bear the risks of the federal water governance gap.

    Way forward

    • The massive central assistance (Rs 3.6 lakh crore- Centre and states together) through  Jal Jeevan Mission (JJM), is an opportunity to open a dialogue with the states to address this governance gap.
    • Globally, federated systems with comparable organisation of powers have used similar investments to usher key water sector reforms.
    • The symbiotic phase of implementing JJM can be productively used to engage in a dialogue with the states about the larger water resources management agenda, beyond the mission’s goals.
    • The Centre can work with the states in building a credible institutional architecture for gathering data and producing knowledge about water resources.

    Consider the question “Water governance in the country requires greater Centre-State coordination to deal with the current issues as well as future challenges. In light of this, examine the challenges and suggest the strategies to deal with it.”

    Conclusion

    Bridging the governance gap between the Centre and State and creation of institutional framework is at the heart of addressing the future challenges to the federal water governance in the country.

    Back2Basics: River Board Act 1956

    • The act to provide for the establishment of River Boards for the regulation and development of inter-state rivers and river valleys.
    • It empowers the Central Government, on a request received in this behalf from a State Government to establish a River Board for advising the Governments on regulation or development of an inter-State river or river valley or any specified part thereof.

  • Mahajan Commission Report on Maha-K’taka boundary dispute

    A Maharashtra leader has sparked a controversy, when he called the incorporation of Belgaum (Belagavi), Karwar and Nipani areas of Karnataka into Maharashtra, as a dream of the ruling party.

    Try answering this

    Q.The linguistic re-organization of India in the post-Independence period has prevented its balkanization, unlike our neighbourhood. Comment.

    Maha-K’taka boundary dispute

    • The erstwhile Bombay Presidency, a multilingual province, included the present-day Karnataka districts of Vijayapura, Belagavi, Dharwad and Uttara-Kannada.
    • In 1948, the Belgaum municipality requested that the district, having a predominantly Marathi-speaking population, be incorporated into the proposed Maharashtra state.
    • However, the States Reorganization Act of 1956, which divided states into linguistic and administrative lines, made Belgaum and 10 taluka of Bombay State a part of the then Mysore State

    The Mahajan Commission

    • While demarcating borders, the Reorganization of States Commission sought to include talukas with a Kannada-speaking population of more than 50 per cent in Mysore.
    • Opponents of the region’s inclusion in Mysore argued, and continue to argue, that Marathi-speakers outnumbered Kannadigas who lived there in 1956.
    • In September 1957, the Bombay government echoed their demand and lodged a protest with the Centre, leading to the formation of the Commission under former CJI Mehr Chand Mahajan in October 1966.

    Beginning of the dispute

    • The Commission recommended that 264 villages be transferred to Maharashtra (which formed in 1960) and that Belgaum and 247 villages remain with Karnataka.
    • Maharashtra rejected the report, calling it biased and illogical, and demanded another review.
    • Karnataka welcomed the report and has ever since continued to press for implementation, although this has not been formally done by the Centre.

    A case pending in the Supreme Court

    • Successive governments in Maharashtra have demanded their inclusion within the state– a claim that Karnataka contests.
    • In 2004, the Maharashtra government moved the Supreme Court for a settlement of the border dispute under Article 131(b) of the Constitution.
    • It demanded 814 villages from Karnataka on the basis of the theory of village being the unit of calculation, contiguity and enumerating linguistic population in each village.
    • The case is pending in the apex court.