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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Transparency and Accountability

  • If amendment bill to the Whistleblowers Act, 2011 tabled in the Parliament is passed, there may be no one left to protect. Critically evaluate.

  • In the light of the Satyam Scandal (2009), discuss the changes brought in corporate governance to ensure transparency, accountability.

  • In the integrity index of Transparency International, India stands very low. Discuss briefly the legal, political, economic, social and cultural factors that have caused the decline of public morality in India.

  • Effectiveness of the government system at various levels and people’s participation in the governance system are inter-dependent. Discuss their relationship with each other in context of India.

  • “Recent amendments to the Right to Information Act will have profound impact on the autonomy and independence of the Information Commission”. Discuss.

    The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 is a cornerstone of transparent and accountable governance in India. The RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 introduced changes to the service conditions of the CIC and ICs.

    Amendments to the RTI Act, 2019

    The tenure of the CIC and ICs (earlier fixed at 5 years) is now to be determined by the Central Government.

    The salaries, allowances, and other service conditions of CICs and ICs are also subject to executive notification, replacing the earlier parity with Election Commissioners.

    The status and equivalence of the CIC and ICs with constitutional authorities like the Election Commission have been removed.

    Impact on Autonomy and Independence

    Executive Control Over Tenure, undermines security of office and increasing executive dependence.

    The original status equal to the Election Commission is withdrawn, reducing the Commission’s symbolic and functional autonomy.

    Threat to Federal Autonomy- Centre’s control over State Information Commissions’ service conditions.

    Chilling Effect on Decision-Making- Fear of punitive transfers or reduced tenure can deter bold and impartial rulings against powerful authorities.

    Perceived loss of independence can erode citizens’ confidence in the Commission as a neutral watchdog.

    Compromised autonomy weakens enforcement of the right to information, curbing transparency and accountability.

    Other issues (Satark Nagrik Sangathan Report)

    7 out of 29 Information Commissions were completely defunct between July 2023 and June 2024

    In 2024, 9 Commissions were functioning without a Chief Information Commissioner

    Rising Backlogs- Over 4 lakh appeals and complaints pending

    High Rejection Rate- The CIC returned 42% of appeals/complaints received

    Since 2005, only 9% of all Information Commissioners have been women

    Way Forward

    Establish a National Coordination Committee (NCC) to monitor RTI implementation and ensure uniformity across states.

    Fill vacancies in Information Commissions promptly to prevent delays and backlogs.

    Engage information management experts for proper classification, cataloguing, and storage of records.

    Introduce a separate legal chapter to protect RTI applicants and activists from harassment and retaliation.

    Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Thus, the autonomy of the Information Commissions must be safeguarded to strengthen Right to Information under Article 19.

  • Reforming the government delivery system through the Direct Benefit Transfer Scheme is a progressive step, but it has its limitations too. Comment.

    As per World Bank (2023), India’s DBT architecture is the largest social protection systems globally, covering over 900 million people.

    Progressive Aspects of the DBT Scheme

    Cost Savings – DBT system helped India achieve by eliminating ghost beneficiaries, duplication, and leakages. (BlueKraft Digital Foundation, 2025)

    Better targeting – Subsidy allocations reduced from 16% (pre-DBT) to 9% of total government expenditure.

    Transparency and Reduction in Leakages – DBT has significantly reduced ghost beneficiaries and duplication. Eg-In PAHAL (LPG subsidy)

    Financial Inclusion – PM Jan Dhan Yojana enabled over 50 crore accounts, empowering poor women and rural households to receive funds directly.

    Efficiency and Timeliness – Eliminated intermediaries and delays. Eg-MNREGA, PM-KISAN, and PMUY payments.

    Strengthening Governance Accountability – Real-time monitoring via Public Financial Management System (PFMS) ensures audit trails and transparency.

    Inclusive Welfare Delivery and targeted support during crises. Eg-20 crore women Jan Dhan accounts.

    Promotes Digital and Cashless Economy – Eg- UPI handles 85% of India’s digital payments, processing (June 2025).

    Limitations of DBT Implementation

    Exclusion Errors: Aadhaar authentication failures lead to denial of benefits. Eg- Jharkhand PDS (2017) saw 10-15% exclusion (NITI Aayog).

    Digital Divide: Only 43% rural households have internet access (NFHS-5, 2021).

    Weak Banking Infrastructure: Shortage of bank branches and CSPs in rural and hilly areas.

    Data Privacy and Security Risks: Eg- Aadhaar and CoWIN data leaks.

    Technocratic Bias: Focus on automation sidelines those lacking digital literacy or documentation

    Administrative Delays: Verification and coordination issues cause payment rejections or delays. Eg- payment delays in MGNREGA

    Limited Grievance Redressal: Weak feedback mechanisms for correction of DBT errors.

    Way Forward

    Improve Authentication: Use offline Aadhaar, multi-factor verification, and local validation.

    Institutional Reforms: Apply Business Process Re-engineering (2nd ARC) for simpler workflows.

    Social Audits and Human Interface: Combine digital governance with local institutions for last-mile trust.

    Strengthen Digital Infrastructure: Accelerate BharatNet Phase-II to connect all Gram Panchayats

    Enhance Digital Literacy: Expand PMGDISHA and integrate digital literacy in school curricula (e-Kidz, IT clubs).

    India must move toward “Technology with Inclusion” – ensuring no beneficiary is left behind.

  • What are the aims and objects of the recently passed and enforced, The Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024? Whether University/State Education Board examinations, too, are covered under the Act?

    The Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024, was enacted to curb widespread malpractices, paper leaks, and organised cheating in recruitment and entrance examinations conducted by central authorities.

    Aims and Objectives of the Act

    Provide clear legal framework to deal with issue of paper leaks

    Defining Unfair Practices – Includes leakage of question papers, tampering of answer sheets, manipulation of computer systems, and collusion with officials or service providers.

    Empowering Examination Authorities – Allows surprise checks, blacklisting of service providers, and enhanced oversight mechanisms.

    Authorises the Centre to refer cases to Central Investigation Agencies for probing large-scale malpractices.

    Enables setting up of special courts for time-bound adjudication of offences.

    Stringent Punishments – Prescribes 3-5 years of imprisonment and fines up to , extendable for organised crimes, to restore public confidence.

    Addressing Organised Examination Crimes – Provides for property attachment and prosecution of institutions involved in organised cheating networks.

    Deterring Unfair Means – Prevents cheating, impersonation, and paper leaks, ensuring transparency, fairness, and credibility in examinations.

    Significance

    Ensuring Integrity of Public Examinations

    Deterring Organised Malpractices

    Protecting Merit and Equal Opportunity

    Enhancing Accountability of Examination Authorities

    Promoting Transparency and Trust

    Strengthening Governance and Fair Recruitment

    Coverage under the Act

    The Act applies to “Public Examinations” conducted by authorities listed in its Schedule or notified later by the Central Government.

    The Schedule presently includes:

    Union Public Service Commission (UPSC)

    Staff Selection Commission (SSC)

    Railway Recruitment Boards (RRBs)

    Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (IBPS)

    National Testing Agency (NTA) and other Central Government recruitment bodies.

    University and State Education Board examinations are not automatically covered unless specifically notified by the Central Government under Section 2 of the Act.

    Limitations of the Act

    Limited Coverage – State Boards and Universities are not automatically covered.

    No Dedicated Investigative Mechanism – Investigation left to DSP-level officers

    Technology Gaps – Insufficient use of digital tracking, encryption, and data protection tools to prevent leaks.

    Ambiguity in Defining “Unfair Means” – The broad wording may lead to subjective interpretation and misuse.

    Heavy reliance on Central Government notification powers may limit federal flexibility.

    Focuses mainly on punitive measures, not on systemic prevention and capacity-building.

    Judicial Burden – Creation of special courts without adequate infrastructure may lead to delays in trial.

    Training Deficit – Lack of awareness and training among invigilators and exam staff undermines effective implementation.

    The Act represents a major reform to uphold the integrity, fairness, and accountability of India’s examination system.

    Civil Services

  • Coal Exchange Rules, 2026

    Why in the news?

    The Ministry of Coal notified the Coal Exchange Rules, 2026 on 4 June 2026, paving the way for the establishment of Coal Exchanges in India. The initiative aims to modernise coal marketing through transparent, competitive, and market-driven trading.

    Background

    • Legal Basis: The concept of Coal Exchanges emerged from the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2025
    • The amendment:
      • Introduced the concept of a Mineral Exchange.
      • Empowered the Central Government to facilitate transparent mineral trading.
    • Covers: Coal, Processed forms of coal, Other notified minerals.

    What is a Coal Exchange?

    A Coal Exchange is an organised electronic marketplace where multiple buyers and sellers can trade coal through transparent mechanisms.

    • Traditional System: One seller → Many buyers to Exchange-Based System: Many sellers ↔ Many buyers
    • Coal Exchanges will be authorised by the Coal Controller Organisation (CCO).
    • Registration validity: 25 years
    • Establish and operate trading platforms.
    • Frame market rules and bye-laws.
    • Facilitate coal transactions.
    • Ensure compliance with regulations.

    Role of Coal Controller Organisation (CCO)

    • Established in 1945.
    • Functions under the Ministry of Coal.
    • Headquarters Kolkata.
    • Functions
      • Regulates coal quality.
      • Collects and disseminates coal statistics.
      • Ensures compliance with coal grading standards.
      • Registers and regulates Coal Exchanges under the 2026 Rules.

    [2022] In India, what is the role of the Coal Controller’s Organization (CCO)?
    1.CCO is the major source of coal Statistics in Government of India.
    2.It monitors progress of development of Captive Coal/ Lignite blocks.
    3.It hears any objection to the Government’s notification relating to acquisition of coal-bearing areas.
    4.It ensures that coal mining companies deliver the coal to end users in the prescribed time.
    Select the correct answer using the code given below:

    [A] 1, 2 and 3

    [B] 3 and 4 only

    [C] 1 and 2 only

    [D] 1, 2 and 4

  • Grievance Redressal Assessment and Index (GRAI)

    Why in the News

    According to the Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances (DARPG), the Department of Financial Services’ Insurance Division topped the Grievance Redressal Assessment and Index (GRAI) rankings in the Group A category for March 2026.

    About Grievance Redressal Assessment and Index (GRAI)

    • The Grievance Redressal Assessment and Index (GRAI) is an evaluation framework developed by Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances to assess the performance of Ministries and Departments in handling public grievances.
    • The first edition, GRAI 2022, was released on 21 June 2023.

    Objective

    • To measure the effectiveness and efficiency of grievance redressal mechanisms.
    • To improve accountability and citizen-centric governance.
    • To evaluate how quickly and effectively ministries resolve grievances through the CPGRAMS platform.

    Four Major Dimensions

    • Efficiency
    • Feedback
    • Domain
    • Organisational Commitment
      • These dimensions are measured using 11 indicators.

    Significance of GRAI

    • Encourages timely disposal of grievances.
    • Promotes transparency in administration.
    • Improves public service delivery.
    • Creates competition among departments for better governance standards.
    • Strengthens citizen trust in government institutions.

    Centralized Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS)

    • CPGRAMS is an online grievance redressal platform that allows citizens to lodge complaints regarding public service delivery.
    • It is Available 24×7
    • A single integrated portal linked with Central Ministries, Departments, and States
    • Developed and monitored by: Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances under the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions.
    [2021] With reference to the Union Government, consider the following statements: 
    1. N. Gopalaswamy Iyengar Committee suggested that a minister and a secretary be designated solely for pursuing the subject of administrative reform and promoting it. 
    2. In 1970, the Department of Personnel was constituted on the recommendation of the Administrative Reforms Commission, 1966, and this was placed under the Prime Minister’s charge. 
    Which of the statements given above is/are correct? 
    [A] 1 only [B] 2 only [C] Both 1 and 2 [D] Neither 1 nor 2

  • [29th April 2026] The Hindu OpED: The RTE Act and the idea of social inclusion 

    PYQ Relevance[UPSC 2022] The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 remains inadequate in promoting incentive-based system for children’s education without generating awareness about the importance of schooling. Analyse.Linkage: The PYQ directly connects to Section 12(1)(c) by questioning effectiveness vs intent of RTE, especially in inclusion and awareness. The article strengthens this PYQ by showing that the issue is now implementation gaps (costs, compliance, access) rather than policy inadequacy.

    Mentor’s Comment

    The January 2026 judgment of the Supreme Court has reaffirmed the constitutional purpose of Section 12(1)(c) of the Right to Education Act, 2009. This comes at a time when declining enrolment in government schools and rising private schooling had triggered concerns about a silent shift toward privatization. The ruling is significant because it rejects the narrative that the provision dilutes public education and instead frames it as a tool for social integration, not welfare. 

    What is Section 12(1)(c) of the Right to Education (RTE) Act, 2009?

    It mandates that private unaided and special category schools reserve at least 25% of their entry-level seats (Class I or pre-school) for children from economically weaker sections (EWS) and disadvantaged groups. It ensures free, compulsory elementary education to these students, with states reimbursing schools for costs. 

    Key Details of Section 12(1)(c)

    1. Mandate: Private non-minority schools must reserve 25% of entry-level seats for EWS and disadvantaged group children, such as those from SC/ST, OBC, or with disabilities.
    2. Free Education: The provision covers tuition and fees until the completion of elementary education (typically up to Class 8).
    3. Reimbursement: State governments are responsible for reimbursing private schools for the fees of these students based on their actual cost or government school expenditure, whichever is lower.
    4. Purpose: The provision, often referred to as the “25% quota for weaker sections in private schools” or “RTE inclusion mandate,” seeks to promote social integration and equity, reducing the education gap between the privileged and underprivileged.
    5. Scope: This applies to Class I or pre-school, whichever is the entry point, and lasts throughout the elementary education cycle.

    Why is Section 12(1)(c) seen as a tool of social integration rather than welfare?

    1. Equality of Status: Ensures children from diverse socio-economic backgrounds study together, reducing social segregation.
    2. Shared Learning Spaces: Facilitates interaction across class lines; example, child of a judge studying with a street vendor’s child.
    3. Constitutional Morality: Operationalizes Article 14 and 21A of the Constitution of India through lived equality, not symbolic guarantees.
    4. Non-zero-sum Framework: Integrates public and private schooling systems instead of replacing one with the other.

    Does Section 12(1)(c) dilute the State’s responsibility towards public education?

    1. State Obligation: Retains primary duty to provide free and compulsory education.
    2. Complementary Role: Positions private schools as participants in achieving constitutional goals.
    3. Misplaced Criticism: Declining government school enrolment linked to infrastructure and teacher issues, not RTE
    4. Empirical Evidence: ASER 2006 highlights shift to private schools due to perceived quality gaps.

    What evidence exists on the ground regarding its impact?

    1. Scale of Reach: Over 5 million children benefited since rollout.
    2. Retention Rates: Maintains above 90% retention, indicating sustainability.
    3. Urban Normalisation: Cities like Delhi and Ahmedabad show blended classrooms as standard.
    4. Behavioural Outcomes: Research (Rao, Gautam, 2019) shows reduced discrimination and improved pro-social behaviour.
    5. Academic Neutrality: No negative impact on academic outcomes or classroom discipline observed.

    What are the key implementation challenges?

    1. Private School Resistance: Limits full inclusion and compliance.
    2. Hidden Costs: Uniforms, books, materials create barriers for poor families.
    3. Administrative Gaps: Weak grievance redressal and transparency mechanisms.
    4. Inter-state Variation: Uneven implementation across states.
    5. Awareness Deficit: Limited last-mile outreach reduces access for eligible families.

    What reforms have improved implementation outcomes?

    1. Digital Admissions: State-driven systems ensure transparent allocation (e.g., Rajasthan, Gujarat, Delhi).
    2. Reimbursement Systems: Streamlined financial flows to private schools improve compliance.
    3. Monitoring Mechanisms: Strengthens accountability and reduces discretion.
    4. Policy Clarity: Court judgment removes ambiguity about intent and scope.

    What is the way forward for effective realization?

    1. Cost Elimination: Removes hidden financial burdens on beneficiaries.
    2. Regulatory Enforcement: Strengthens compliance norms for private institutions.
    3. Institutional Accountability: Improves grievance redressal frameworks.
    4. Inclusive Norms: Ensures experiential equality, not just access.
    5. Administrative Focus: Shifts policy debate from ideology to execution.

    Conclusion

    The reaffirmation of Section 12(1)(c) marks a shift from ideological contestation to administrative responsibility. The core challenge lies in ensuring that access translates into meaningful inclusion, thereby fulfilling the constitutional promise of social integration.