💥UPSC 2026, 2027, 2028 UAP Mentorship (March Batch) + Access XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF
Talk to mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

Type: SC Judgements

  • Judicial Reforms

    Advocate-on-Record (AoR) in Supreme Court

    SC Judgements | Polity | Mains Paper 2: Executive & Judiciary

    Note4Students

    From UPSC perspective, the following things are important:

    Prelims level: Advocate-on-Record (AoR)

    Mains level: Read the attached story

    advocate

    Central Idea

    • In a recent development, the Supreme Court of India dismissed a public interest litigation filed by an Advocate-on-Record (AoR), emphasizing that an AoR cannot be a mere “signing authority.”
    • This incident has sparked discussions on the role and significance of AoRs in the Indian legal system.

    Who is an Advocate-on-Record (AoR)?

    • Historical Roots: The AoR system is influenced by British legal practices, distinguishing between barristers who argue cases and solicitors who handle client matters. In India, senior advocates are designated by the Court, akin to barristers, and cannot solicit clients but are briefed by other lawyers, including AoRs.
    • Exclusive Right to File Cases: Only an AoR is authorized to file cases before the Supreme Court of India. They serve as a vital link between litigants and the highest judicial authority in the country.
    • Elite Legal Practitioners: AoRs are a select group of elite lawyers, primarily based in Delhi, whose legal practice predominantly revolves around the Supreme Court. They may also represent clients in other courts.
    • Court of Last Opportunity: The concept behind the AoR system is to ensure that a litigant is represented by a highly qualified lawyer because the Supreme Court is often considered the last resort for legal remedies.

    Becoming an AoR

    • Eligibility Criteria: To qualify as an AoR, an advocate must meet specific criteria set by the Supreme Court Rules, 2013.
    • Examination: Aspiring AoRs must clear an examination conducted by the Supreme Court, which includes subjects like Practice and Procedure, Drafting, Professional Ethics, and Leading Cases.
    • Training Requirement: Before taking the exam, an advocate must undergo training with a court-approved AoR for at least one year. This training is preceded by a minimum of four years of legal practice.

    Responsibilities and Rules Governing AoRs

    • Geographical Presence: AoRs must maintain an office in Delhi within a 16-kilometer radius of the Supreme Court.
    • Employment of Registered Clerk: Upon registration as an AoR, an undertaking is required to employ a registered clerk within one month.
    • Regulatory Authority: While Section 30 of the Advocates Act grants lawyers the right to practice law nationwide, it explicitly acknowledges the Supreme Court’s authority to establish rules under Article 145 of the Constitution for regulating its own procedure.

     

    Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

    Attend Now

  • Electoral Reforms In India

    SC flags Selective Confidentiality in Electoral Bonds

    SC JudgementsSchemes | Governance | Mains Paper 2: Governance, Transparency & Accountability, Citizens Charters

    Note4Students

    From UPSC perspective, the following things are important:

    Prelims level: Electoral Bond Scheme

    Mains level: Transparency in Election Funding

    Electoral Bonds

    Central Idea

    • The Supreme Court expressed concerns about the selective confidentiality of the electoral bonds scheme, which allows the ruling party to discover the identities of donors to opposition parties.
    • The court questioned the government’s presumption of confidentiality and explored the potential disadvantages faced by opposition parties in the electoral process.

    About Electoral Bond Scheme

    Definition Banking instruments for political party donations with donor anonymity.
    Purchase Method Available to Indian citizens and Indian-incorporated companies from select State Bank of India branches. Can be bought digitally or via cheque.
    Donation Process Purchasers can donate these bonds to eligible political parties of their choice.
    Denominations Available in multiples of ₹1,000, ₹10,000, ₹10 lakh, and ₹1 crore.
    KYC Requirements Purchasers must fulfill existing KYC norms and pay from a bank account.
    Lifespan of Bonds Bonds have a 15-day life to prevent them from becoming a parallel currency.
    Identity Disclosure Donors contributing less than ₹20,000 need not provide identity details like PAN.
    Redemption Electoral Bonds can be encashed only by eligible political parties through an Authorized Bank.
    Eligibility of Parties Only parties meeting specific criteria, including securing at least 1% of votes in the last General Election, can receive Electoral Bonds.
    Restrictions Lifted Foreign and Indian companies can now donate without disclosing contributions as per the Companies Act.
    Objective To enhance transparency in political funding and ensure funds collected by political parties are accounted or clean money.

    Selective Confidentiality Challenges

    • Justice Khanna’s Address: The Judge pointed out that the ruling party had easier access to information about contributions to opposition parties, creating an imbalance in transparency.
    • State Bank of India’s Role: CJI Chandrachud questioned whether the SBI, through which electoral bonds were purchased, had a statutory obligation to maintain confidentiality.

    Government’s Defense

    • Confidentiality Key: The solicitor-General argued that confidentiality regarding donor identities and contributions was crucial to the electoral bonds scheme. He contended that eliminating the scheme would revert the country to a period when political donations were made in unaccounted cash, leading to black money circulation.
    • Economic Impact: He emphasized that the scheme aimed to channel clean money into the electoral system, reducing the influence of black money. He referred to a report highlighting the increase in income from unknown sources to political parties and the discovery of shell companies during the previous donation regime.

    Concerns Raised by CJI

    • Information Blackhole: The CJI noted that while the scheme aimed to bring white money into the electoral process, it introduced opacity, creating an “information blackhole.” He emphasized the need for proportionality in achieving the scheme’s objectives.
    • Expectations of Donors: Chandrachud questioned how substantial donations were consistently made to the ruling party, implying certain expectations from donors.
    • Donations Not Charity: Solicitor-General Mehta clarified that donors were primarily motivated by their own interests, often related to business or market-driven factors. He argued that larger donations to a party did not necessarily indicate an issue with the scheme.
    • Right to Privacy: Mehta argued that revealing the political affiliations of donors would infringe on their right to privacy.

    Transparency and Quid Pro Quo Concerns

    • Justice Khanna’s Query: Justice Khanna raised concerns about how confidentiality in the electoral bonds scheme could prevent quid pro quo arrangements between political parties and donors.
    • Proxy Donations: The judge questioned the possibility of parties funneling unaccounted money back into the system through proxy political donations.

    Conclusion

    • The Supreme Court’s scrutiny of the electoral bonds scheme centers on issues of transparency, confidentiality, and potential imbalances in the electoral process.
    • The court’s questions and concerns highlight the importance of ensuring fairness and proportionality in political funding mechanisms.

    Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

    Attend Now

  • Surrogacy in India

    Supreme Court upholds Woman’s Right to Parenthood in Surrogacy Case

    SC Judgements | Governance | Mains Paper 2: Health & Education

    Note4Students

    From UPSC perspective, the following things are important:

    Prelims level: Gestational Surrogacy

    Mains level: Read the attached story

    surrogacy

    Central Idea

    • In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of India has safeguarded a woman’s right to parenthood, particularly in cases of medical conditions, by suspending the enforcement of a law that jeopardized her aspiration to become a mother through surrogacy.
    • This significant ruling provides protection and empowerment for women facing unique medical challenges on their journey to parenthood.

    Case Details

    • Medical Condition: The woman suffers from the rare Mayer Rokitansky Kuster Hauser (MRKH) syndrome. Medical records confirm her condition, which includes “absent ovaries and absent uterus,” rendering her unable to produce her own eggs.
    • Hope through Gestational Surrogacy: She and her husband embarked on the path of gestational surrogacy using a donor’s eggs (a process where one person, who did not provide the egg used in conception, carries a fetus through pregnancy and gives birth to a baby for another person or couple.).

    Threatening Amendment

    • No donor gamete use: A government notification dated March 14 of the current year introduced an amendment to the law, prohibiting the use of donor gametes in surrogacy. It mandated that “intending couples” must employ their own gametes for the surrogacy process.
    • A Violation of Parenthood Rights: This amendment was challenged in the Supreme Court, alleging a violation of a woman’s fundamental right to parenthood. The court found that the amendment contradicted the core provisions of the Surrogacy Act, both in form and substance.

    Gametes Regulation and ART Act, 2021

    • Gametes are reproductive cells. In animals, the male gametes are sperms and female gamete is the ovum or egg cells.
    • On March 14, 2023, the Health Ministry published Rules that said:
    1. A couple undergoing surrogacy must have both gametes from the intending couple and donor gametes are not allowed;
    2. Single women (widow/divorcee) undergoing surrogacy must use self-eggs and donor sperms to avail surrogacy procedure.
    • Section 2(h) of the Assisted Reproductive Technology Regulation Act, 2021 defines a “gamete donor” as a person who provides sperm or oocyte with the objective of enabling an infertile couple or woman to have a child.

    Court’s Ruling: Allows Donor’s Gametes

    • Prima Facie Contradiction: The SC Bench issued a decisive order, stating that the amendment obstructed the intending couple from achieving parenthood through surrogacy and was prima facie contrary to the Surrogacy Act’s intentions.
    • Petitioner’s Argument: Senior advocate Sanjay Jain, representing the petitioner, argued that the amendment invalidated the possibility of gestational surrogacy, which the Surrogacy Act, 2021, recognized as a valid option for couples facing medical conditions.
    • Rule 14(a) Clarification: Jain referred to Rule 14(a) of the Surrogacy Rules, emphasizing that it explicitly listed medical or congenital conditions, such as the absence of a uterus, as valid reasons for gestational surrogacy. The rule affirmed that the choice was solely the woman’s.
    • Retrospective Implementation: The petitioner contended that the amendment could not be applied retrospectively to her case.

    Court’s Ruling and Interpretation

    • Woman-Centric Perspective: The court concurred with Mr. Jain’s argument that gestational surrogacy was “woman-centric.” It recognized that the decision to opt for surrogacy was driven by the woman’s inability to become a mother due to her medical or congenital condition.
    • Validation of Rule 14(a): The court asserted that the amendment could not contradict Rule 14(a), which explicitly acknowledged medical conditions, including the absence of a uterus, as valid reasons necessitating gestational surrogacy.
    • Genetic Relation Interpretation: Addressing the government’s contention that the surrogate child must be “genetically related” to the couple, the court clarified that this related to the husband when Rule 14(a) applied.

    Conclusion

    • The Supreme Court’s decision in favour of ‘Mrs. ABC’ not only upholds her right to parenthood but also reinforces the significance of gestational surrogacy as a woman-centric solution for individuals facing challenging medical conditions on their path to becoming parents.
    • This ruling sets a precedent for protecting the parenthood rights of women across India.

    Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

    Attend Now

  • Intellectual Property Rights in India

    Copyright Protection for Religious Texts

    SC Judgements | Economics | Mains Paper 3: Intellectual Property Rights

    Note4Students

    From UPSC perspective, the following things are important:

    Prelims level: Copyright Act of 1957

    Mains level: Not Much

    copyright

    Central Idea

    • The recent ruling by the Delhi High Court has brought attention to copyright infringement concerning religious texts, particularly the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust’s works on Indian religious philosophy and spiritualism.
    • This landmark case addresses copyright protection for sacred texts and the implications for digital platforms.
    • Let’s explore the details of the case and its broader implications.

    Are Religious Texts Copyright-Protected?

    • Public Domain: Most religious scriptures, such as the Old Testament and New Testament, are in the public domain. Copyright law does not apply to works in the public domain.
    • Exceptions: Modern translations of religious texts, like the New International Version (NIV) of the Bible, may enjoy copyright protection as they represent new creative works by translators.
    • Protections: Additionally, transformative works, like television adaptations of epics like the Ramayana and Mahabharata, are protected.

    Understanding Copyright Law in India

    • Scope of Protection: The Indian Copyright Act of 1957 safeguards “original work,” creative expressions independently created and fixed in a tangible medium.
    • Exclusive Rights: It grants exclusive rights to creators/authors, including the right to use, reproduce, distribute, perform, and display their work.
    • Transformative Works: The Act also protects transformative works, which creatively modify, reinterpret, or build upon existing material to create something distinct.

    Duration of Copyright Protection

    Literary, Dramatic, Musical, Artistic Works Lifetime of the author plus 60 years from the year following the author’s death or last surviving author’s death.
    Cinematographic Films 60 years from the year of publication or creation.
    Sound Recordings 60 years from the year of first publication.
    Anonymous or Pseudonymous Works 60 years from the year of publication, or lifetime of the author plus 60 years if the author’s identity is disclosed during this period.

    Bhaktivedanta Book Trust’s Case

    • Founder’s Works: The trust claimed copyright ownership of its founder’s works, which had simplified religious books and scriptures, making them accessible to the common man.
    • Infringement Allegation: The trust alleged that various websites, mobile apps, and Instagram handles were reproducing a significant number of its copyrighted works almost verbatim on their online platforms without authorization, constituting infringement.

    Delhi High Court’s Ruling

    • Copyright Protection: The court ruled that adaptations of sacred scriptures, including explanations, meanings, interpretations, and audio-visual works, are entitled to copyright protection because they represent original works by authors themselves.
    • Reproduction Clarification: While the reproduction of the actual text of sacred texts, such as the Srimad Bhagavad Gita, is permissible, the court emphasized that copyright protection applies to the original parts of literary works that preach, teach, or explain the scripture.
    • Trust’s Rights: Given that Srila Prabhupada had entrusted the copyrights to be administered by the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, the court emphasized that the works cannot be reproduced without the trust’s authorization, license, or permission.
    • Preventing Piracy: The court acknowledged that unauthorized reproduction, including shlokas (verses), translations, and interpretations, by defendant entities would result in immense revenue loss for the trust.

    Conclusion

    • The Delhi High Court’s ruling on copyright protection for religious texts has far-reaching implications for safeguarding the originality and rights associated with sacred scriptures.
    • While religious texts themselves may not be copyright-protected, creative adaptations, explanations, and interpretations enjoy legal protection.
    • This decision serves as a precedent for preserving the intellectual property rights of organizations involved in disseminating spiritual knowledge while discouraging unauthorized reproduction and piracy.

    Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

    Attend Now

  • LGBT Rights – Transgender Bill, Sec. 377, etc.

    CJI lists measures against LGBTQI Discrimination

    SC Judgements | Indian Society | Mains Paper 1: Salient features of Indian Society

    Note4Students

    From UPSC perspective, the following things are important:

    Prelims level: NA

    Mains level: Preventing LGBTQI Discrimination

    Central Idea

    • In a significant ruling, CJI D Y Chandrachud made a series of directions to address discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community and underscored the need for legislative action to recognize same-sex marriages.
    • This decision reflects a pivotal moment in India’s LGBTQ+ rights movement, emphasizing the intersection of legal and societal norms.

    Preventing LGBTQI Discrimination: Key Directions by CJI

    • Creation of Safe Houses: The ruling called for the establishment of “Garima Grehs” or safe houses in all districts to provide shelter to LGBTQ+ individuals facing violence or discrimination. These safe houses aim to offer refuge and support to those in need.
    • Anti-Discrimination Measures: The Centre, States, and Union Territories were urged to ensure that LGBTQ+ community members are not subjected to discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation. This includes equal access to goods and services available to the public.
    • Public Awareness: The ruling emphasized the need to sensitize the public about queer identity, affirming that it is natural and not a mental disorder. It encourages educational efforts to promote understanding and acceptance.
    • Hotline Numbers: The authorities were directed to establish hotline numbers that LGBTQ+ individuals can contact when facing harassment or violence. This initiative aims to provide immediate assistance and support.
    • End of Harmful “Treatments”: The ruling called for an immediate cessation of any “treatments” offered by doctors or others that attempt to change gender identity or sexual orientation. It prioritizes the well-being and autonomy of LGBTQ+ individuals.
    • Protection from Family Pressure: Police were advised not to force LGBTQ+ persons to return to their natal families if they choose not to do so. Furthermore, the ruling emphasized the importance of verifying the claims of LGBTQ+ individuals when they file complaints against their families, ensuring their freedom is not curtailed.
    • Fair Preliminary Investigation: Before registering an FIR against a queer couple or one of the parties involved, a preliminary investigation should be conducted. This step ensures that the complaint discloses a cognizable offence, preventing unnecessary legal action against LGBTQ+ individuals.

    Historical Context

    • The ruling underscored that India has a rich history of LGBTQ+ lives, encompassing various identities and communities.
    • It emphasized that queerness is not limited to urban settings or privileged classes but exists across different regions, castes, and economic backgrounds.

    Future Steps

    • The ruling has set a precedent for addressing discrimination and ensuring the protection of LGBTQ+ rights.
    • Justice S K Kaul expressed the need for a comprehensive anti-discrimination law prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation.
    • State governments have also been prompted to create guidelines and committees to address LGBTQ+ issues, demonstrating the broader impact of this ruling beyond the courtroom.

    Conclusion

    • The Supreme Court’s ruling on LGBTQ+ rights signifies a significant milestone in the ongoing struggle for equal rights and acceptance.
    • While legislative recognition of same-sex marriages remains pending, the directions provided by the CJI emphasize the importance of dismantling discriminatory practices and promoting inclusivity in Indian society.
    • The ruling paves the way for a more equitable future for LGBTQ+ individuals in the country.

    Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

    Attend Now

  • LGBT Rights – Transgender Bill, Sec. 377, etc.

    Judicial Perspectives on LGBTQI Marriage and Adoption Issues

    SC Judgements | Polity | Mains Paper 2: Executive & Judiciary

    Note4Students

    From UPSC perspective, the following things are important:

    Prelims level: NA

    Mains level: Read the attached story

    Central Idea

    • In a recent landmark decision, the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, deliberated on granting legal status to same-sex marriages.
    • This case has sparked significant interest as it explores the intersection of individual rights and societal norms.

    Judicial Perspectives on Various Issues:

    [A] Fundamental Right to Marry

    Issue Minority View (CJI) Majority View
    Petitioner Argument
    • Marriage is not fundamentally important;
    • It gained significance through state regulation as Civil Union.
    • Marriage’s importance is personal preference and social status.
    • It is necessarily NOT a fundamental right.

     

    [B] Interpretation of Special Marriage Act

    Issue Minority View (CJI) Majority View
    Framing the Issue
    • Cautioned against expansive interpretations;
    • Suggested encroachment on the legislature’s domain.
    • Concurred with the minority view.
    • Emphasized the SMA’s purpose for facilitating civil marriages between heterosexual couples.

     

    [C] Queer Couples’ Right to Adopt a Child

    Issue Minority View (CJI) Majority View
    Discriminatory Regulations
    • Struck down certain CARA regulations, asserting that they do not serve the child’s best interests.
    • Highlighted the discriminatory impact on the queer community based on their sexuality.
    • Acknowledged the discriminatory aspect.
    • But believed legislative action, rather than judicial imposition, should bring about this change.

     

    [D] Civil Unions for Queer Couples

    Argument Minority View (CJI Chandrachud) Majority View
    Recognition of Civil Unions
    • Connected the right to form intimate associations with freedom of speech and expression.
    • Proposed that the state should acknowledge various entitlements for such relationships.
    • Disagreed with prescribing a “choice” of civil unions.
    • Suggested that the state should facilitate this choice for those who opt for it.

     Conclusion

    • The Supreme Court’s decision on same-sex marriage reflects a complex interplay of legal, social, and legislative factors.
    • While the minority view leans towards immediate recognition of civil unions and highlights the importance of individual rights, the majority opinion emphasizes the legislative role in bringing about changes in societal norms.
    • The verdict underscores the evolving landscape of LGBTQ+ rights in India and the ongoing dialogue surrounding equal rights and inclusivity.

    Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

    Attend Now

  • LGBT Rights – Transgender Bill, Sec. 377, etc.

    Supreme Court declines to Legalize Same-Sex Marriage

    SC Judgements | Polity | Mains Paper 2: Indian Constitution – historical underpinnings, evolution, features, amendments, significant provisions and basic structure

    Note4Students

    From UPSC perspective, the following things are important:

    Prelims level: Special Marriage Act

    Mains level: Read the attached story

    Central Idea

    • The Supreme Court of India has declined to approve same-sex marriages in a blow to LGBTQ rights.
    • CJI said that it was outside the court’s remit to decide the issue and that parliament should write the laws governing marriage.

    Same-Sex Marriage Demand

    • Petitioners are urging for the reinterpretation of the Special Marriage Act (SMA), 1954, by replacing “man and woman” with “spouses” to accommodate LGBTQIA+ couples.
    • Such right to marry not only symbolizes equality but also grants access to numerous legal benefits, including insurance, adoption, and inheritance.

    Petitioners’ Demands

    Arguments Summary
    Constitutional Basis Asserted that the right to marry for non-heterosexual couples is implicit in various constitutional articles, including Articles 14, 15, 16, 19, and 21.
    Previous Landmark Judgments Referenced key Supreme Court judgments such as ‘Navtej Singh Johar vs. Union of India’ (2018) and ‘KS Puttaswamy vs. Union of India’ (2017) to support their case.
    Benefits and Rights Emphasized the importance of equal access to marriage-related benefits and rights, such as pensions and provident funds.
    Minimum Marriageable Age Suggested different minimum marriageable ages for lesbian, gay, and transgender couples based on gender identity.
    Recognition of Fundamental Rights Cited the Transgender Persons Protection Act, 2019, as a precedent recognizing the right to marry for all queer identities.

    Respondent’s Arguments

    Arguments Summary
    Maintainability and Jurisdiction Questioned the court’s jurisdiction to hear the case and raised concerns about the maintainability of the petitions.
    Impact on Existing Laws Argued that introducing marriage equality would impact 160 existing laws, making it the prerogative of Parliament to enact such changes.
    SMA Character and Intent Emphasized that the Special Marriage Act (SMA) was intentionally designed for heterosexual marriages, and changing its character and intent would require legislative action.
    Legitimate State Interest Contended that the State has a legitimate interest in regulating marriages, addressing aspects such as age of consent, bigamy, and prohibited degrees of marriage.
    Welfare of Children Advocated for prioritizing the welfare of children born to heterosexual parents, leading to differential treatment of heterosexual and homosexual couples.
    Public Perception Expressed concerns about societal acceptance and potential collateral damage to various legal provisions if same-sex marriage were declared a fundamental right.

    States Responses

    • Rajasthan, Assam, and Andhra Pradesh opposed the plea for legal recognition of same-sex marriages.
    • Sikkim, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, and Manipur sought more time to respond.
    • Also, many fundamentalist religious organizations are opposed to such marriages.

    Conclusion

    • It must be noted that only Taiwan and Nepal allow same-sex unions in Asia, where largely conservative values still dominate politics and society.
    • The Supreme Court’s verdict on marriage equality in India is poised to shape the country’s LGBTQIA+ rights landscape profoundly.

    Also read:

    [Sansad TV] Perspective: Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage

    Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

    Attend Now

  • Minority Issues – SC, ST, Dalits, OBC, Reservations, etc.

    Minority Institutions need NOT provide Reservations: Madras HC

    SC Judgements | Polity | Mains Paper 2: Indian Constitution – historical underpinnings, evolution, features, amendments, significant provisions and basic structure

    Note4Students

    From UPSC perspective, the following things are important:

    Prelims level: Minority Institutions

    Mains level: Not Much

    Central Idea

    • Reservation exemption: The Madras High HC ruled that the concept of communal reservation for SC/ST/OBC citizens does not apply to minority institutions.
    • No government constraint: The judges held that the government cannot compel minority institutions to implement such reservation policies.

    Key Highlights by Madras HC

    • Continued Status: The court emphasized that once minority status is granted to an institution, it will persist until the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions (NCMEI) cancels it for valid reasons, such as a shift in its educational objectives.
    • Merit-Based Admissions: The court upheld the government’s right to stipulate that minority institutions can admit students from the respective religious and linguistic minorities up to 50% of the sanctioned intake based on merit.
    • Exclusion Clause: The judges clarified that students admitted on merit should not be counted within the first 50% of admissions allocated for minorities.

    Case Background

    • Petitioner’s Argument: The petitioner challenged a Govt Order (GO) issued in November 2021. The GO denied the extension of religious minority status to the college due to its admission of 52% minority students in the academic years 2018-19 and 2019-20.
    • Advocate General’s Stand: Advocate General argued that such admissions violated a 1998 GO that restricted minority admissions to 50%.
    • College’s Position: It contended that minority educational institutions should receive permanent status without the need for periodic extensions. It also asserted that the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Seats in Private Educational Institutions) Act, 2006, should not apply to minority institutions.

    Legal Analyis

    • Constitutional Provisions: The judges found support in Article 15(5) of the Constitution, introduced through the 93rd amendment in 2005, which specifically excludes minority institutions from the State Government’s authority to provide special provisions for reservations.
    • Definition of Private Educational Institution: They pointed out that Section 2(d) of the 2006 Act also excludes minority institutions established under Article 30(1) of the Constitution from its definition of ‘private educational institution.’ Thus, the State cannot impose reservation provisions on minority educational institutions.
    • Permanent Status: The court stated that the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutes Act, 2004, does not envision granting minority status for a temporary or restricted period. Instead, it continues until the Commission cancels it.

    Conclusion

    • Ultimately, the court quashed the 2021 GO and directed the government to allow the petitioner institution to maintain its status as a minority institution, provided it complies with other requirements.

    Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

    Attend Now

  • Temple entry for women : Gender Equality v/s Religious Freedom

    Debate over Temple Priest Appointments in Tamil Nadu

    SC Judgements | Polity | Mains Paper 2: Indian Constitution – historical underpinnings, evolution, features, amendments, significant provisions and basic structure

    Note4Students

    From UPSC perspective, the following things are important:

    Prelims level: Freedom of Religion

    Mains level: Temple Priest Appointments issue in TN

    Central Idea

    • The Supreme Court has issued an order for maintaining the current state of affairs regarding the appointment of archakas (priests) in Agamic temples in Tamil Nadu.
    • The reforms introduced by the ruling government, aiming to change the hereditary system of appointing archakas, have faced opposition from the association of archakas.

    Why discuss this?

    • Such appointments violated religious rights protected under the Constitution, emphasizing the need for rigorous training under experienced Gurus to comprehend the significant religious practices of the Agamas.

    Government and Judicial Actions

    The debate over temple priest appointments in Tamil Nadu has evolved over the years, with several key actions shaping its course:

    • 1971 Amendment: In 1971, the DMK government, led by Chief Minister M Karunanidhi, amended the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment (HR & CE) Act. This amendment abolished hereditary priest appointments and allowed individuals from all castes to become priests.
    • 2006 Declaration: In 2006, the government declared all qualified individuals eligible to be priests. However, this move was challenged in the Supreme Court, which, in 2015, emphasized the importance of adhering to Agama Sastras while safeguarding constitutional rights.
    • Gender Equality: In a landmark ruling in 2009, the Madras High Court favored a woman priest from Usilampatti, Madurai, who faced opposition from male priests regarding her inherited right to conduct puja at a temple. The court underscored the need to eliminate gender bias from temples to fulfill constitutional mandates.
    • Inclusivity: The Supreme Court’s rulings in the Guruvayoor Devaswom Case (2004) and the N Adithayan case (2002) upheld the appointment of non-believers and non-Brahmins as temple priests, emphasizing inclusivity and non-discrimination.

    Complex Divine Contradictions

    Despite the legal framework and the abolition of hereditary priest appointments, the Agama tradition continues to influence temple administrations in Tamil Nadu. This persistence has given rise to debates and challenges:

    • Regional Variations: Similar debates have emerged in Kerala, where questions have been raised about why only Hindu temples are under government control, while churches and mosques are not. Tamil Nadu has also witnessed campaigns for temple “reclamation.”
    • Historical Shift: During the colonial era, British officials’ involvement in Hindu rituals raised concerns among Christian establishments in India. This led to the transfer of temple control to local communities. In 1951, the HR & CE Act limited government involvement to administration and finance.
    • Friction between Tradition and Modernity: The ongoing tensions between traditional practices and modern principles are exemplified by debates over hereditary priest rights and resistance to the entry of women into the Sabarimala temple. These issues defy simple solutions.

    What about Religious Freedom?

    • Complexity of Hinduism: A prominent temple priest in Chennai argued that rules applied to other faiths may not directly apply to Hinduism. Hinduism is characterized by its diversity of traditions, contradictions, and numerous deities. Temples are perceived as centers of “soul energy” with unique purposes and practices.
    • Role of Empathy: The priest emphasized the importance of empathy when dealing with matters of faith. Logic and reasoning cannot always apply to beliefs deeply rooted in tradition and spirituality. He highlighted the significance of experiential concepts, dedication, and the unique nature of temple administration.
    • Agama Sastra Expertise: The priest pointed out that learning Agama Sastra in a year does not equip an individual to manage a temple. Temple administration is a combination of experiential concepts, ideas, and dedication, distinct from running a company. Agama Sastra is not a simple manual but a profound tradition.

    Conclusion

    • The debate surrounding temple priest appointments in Tamil Nadu remains complex, reflecting the ongoing struggle to balance tradition with modern principles.
    • It highlights the challenges in applying uniform rules to diverse faiths and underscores the profound significance of temples in Hinduism.

    Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

    Attend Now

  • Goods and Services Tax (GST)

    Interim Stay on Taxation of Online Games

    SC Judgements | | Mains Paper 2: Governance, Transparency & Accountability, Citizens Charters

    Note4Students

    From UPSC perspective, the following things are important:

    Prelims level: Online Gaming, GST

    Mains level: Read the attached story

    Central Idea

    • The Supreme Court has issued an interim stay on the Karnataka High Court’s ruling that online games, such as rummy, should not be taxed as ‘betting’ and ‘gambling’ under the Central Goods and Services (GST) Act, 2017.
    • This decision follows the Union Cabinet’s approval to increase the GST rate for online games from 18% to 28%.
    • The interim stay aligns online skill games played for stakes with online gambling for taxation purposes.

    Why discuss this?

    • The GST department had issued a show-cause notice to a company for dues worth Rs 21,000 crore, which was quashed by the Karnataka High Court.
    • The Karnataka HC had ruled that online rummy is a game of skill and should not be taxed as gambling.

    Taxing Online Games

    • Karnataka High Court Ruling: The Karnataka HC had determined that online rummy is substantially a game of skill, not chance, and should not be considered gambling. This ruling was based on the Goods and Services Act, which taxes games of skill at 19% and games of chance at 28%.
    • GST Department’s Notice: The GST department had issued a notice to GamesKraft under Section 74(5) of the CGST Act, demanding a substantial sum to be deposited along with interest and penalty by September 16, 2022. This notice was challenged in the Karnataka HC and led to an interim stay.
    • Show-Cause Notice: Following the interim stay, the GST department issued a show-cause notice under Section 74(1) of the CGST Act to GamesKraft and its founders, CEOs, and CFOs. This notice sought an explanation regarding the tax evasion and penalties.
    • Distinction between Skill and Chance: The Karnataka HC emphasized the distinction between games of skill and games of chance, citing relevant legal precedents. It noted that the question of whether a game of skill could still be classified as gambling remained to be seen.

    Key takeaways

    • The Supreme Court’s interim stay temporarily taxes online skill games played for stakes on par with online gambling.
    • The Karnataka High Court’s ruling that online rummy is a game of skill and not gambling has been challenged by the GST department.
    • Legal distinctions between games of skill and games of chance remain a subject of debate and legal scrutiny in India’s taxation system.

    Prospects of online gaming

    • State List Subject:  The state legislators are, vide Entry No. 34 of List II (State List) of the Seventh Schedule, given exclusive power to make laws relating to betting and gambling.
    • Distinction in laws: Most Indian states regulate gaming on the basis of a distinction in law between ‘games of skill’ and ‘games of chance’.
    • Classification of the dominant element: As such, a ‘dominant element’ test is utilized to determine whether chance or skill is the dominating element in determining the result of the game.
    • Linked economic activity: Staking money or property on the outcome of a ‘game of chance’ is prohibited and subjects the guilty parties to criminal sanctions.
    • ‘Game of Skill’ debate: Placing any stakes on the outcome of a ‘game of skill’ is not illegal per se and may be permissible. It is important to note that the Supreme Court recognized that no game is purely a ‘game of skill’ and almost all games have an element of chance.

    Conclusion

    • This case reflects the need for a nuanced approach in crafting tax policies that adapt to the evolving landscape of online entertainment and gaming.
    • Further legal proceedings will likely shed more light on the classification of such games and their tax implications.

    Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

    Attend Now