Background: The Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, built in 1528 by Mir Hindu Beg, a general under Mughal Emperor Babur, is at the center of a legal dispute. The petitioners claim that it was constructed on the site of a pre-existing Hari Har Mandir (Hindu temple).
Architectural Significance: The mosque's distinct stone masonry and architectural style, which differ from other Mughal mosques, have fueled speculation about a possible connection to earlier Hindu temples.
Legal Involvement: A district court ordered a peaceful survey of the mosque, but the situation escalated into violent clashes during a subsequent survey. The mosque is a protected monument under the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904 and listed by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) as a Monument of National Importance.
The Places of Worship Act, 1991 aims to preserve the religious identity of places of worship in India, prohibiting the alteration of a religious site’s character. The Act is a legislative measure to prevent the alteration of religious identities for maintaining communal harmony and protecting sensitive religious sites from disputes.
Section 3: Prohibits the conversion of a place of worship from one religious denomination to another.
Section 4(1): Stipulates that the religious identity of places of worship must remain unchanged from their status on 15th August 1947.
Section 4(2): Ends all ongoing legal proceedings concerning changes to the religious character of places of worship prior to 15th August 1947 and prohibits new lawsuits to alter their status.
Section 5 (Exceptions):
The Ayodhya dispute (Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi case) is exempted from the Act.
Exempts historical monuments or archaeological sites under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
Also excludes places where mutual agreements have been reached or conversion occurred prior to the Act.
Section 6 (Penalties): Penalties for violating the Act include up to three years of imprisonment and fines for attempts to alter the religious character of a place of worship.
Limiting Judicial Review: The Act has been criticized for limiting judicial review, effectively blocking courts from revisiting religious disputes over places of worship, potentially undermining the judiciary’s role in resolving such matters.
Retrospective Cutoff Date (15th August 1947): The Act’s retrospective cutoff date has been called arbitrary. Critics argue it disregards claims of certain religious communities who believe that places of worship they consider sacred were wrongfully altered or destroyed in the past.
Exemption for Certain Disputes: The exemption of the Ayodhya dispute has raised questions about the selective treatment of religious disputes. The legal exemption for this case has led to accusations of inconsistency in applying the law, fueling further controversy and speculation.
Rising Communal Tensions: Legal challenges to the Act are often intertwined with communal tensions. Critics argue that disputes over religious sites could exacerbate communal conflicts and fuel religious polarization, especially concerning sensitive sites like mosques, temples, and churches.
Impact on Secularism: The Act was designed to preserve India’s secular fabric by preventing religious conversion of worship places. However, it has been criticized for potentially undermining religious minorities' claims to historical sites, creating a dilemma between protecting secularism and upholding religious claims.
In May 2022, the Supreme Court of India clarified that inquiries into the religious character of places of worship can be allowed, but only as long as such inquiries do not result in altering the religious character of these sites. This judgment supports the preservation principle behind the Act but leaves the door open for verification, provided the character of the site is not changed.
Legal Clarity: Given the varying interpretations of the Act’s provisions, there is a pressing need for the Supreme Court to provide clear and definitive guidelines on its applicability, especially in contentious cases like the Shahi Jama Masjid dispute.
Preventing Local Court Overreach: The increasing frequency of local court interventions in sensitive religious matters calls for a reevaluation of the jurisdictional limits of lower courts. It is important for the Supreme Court to oversee cases that have wider social and political implications.
De-politicizing Religious Legal Cases: Legal challenges over religious sites should be free from political influence to preserve the integrity of judicial processes. De-politicizing such cases would ensure that religious disputes are handled without being misused for ideological or electoral purposes.
Focus on Unity: Political leaders and civil society must emphasize unity rather than division, prioritizing the shared cultural and historical heritage that binds India together. This approach is crucial for safeguarding India’s pluralistic and secular fabric.
The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 is a significant legislative effort to preserve the religious status of worship places in India and maintain communal harmony. However, it has generated debate, particularly due to concerns about judicial oversight, retrospective decisions, and religious exemptions. The Shahi Jama Masjid dispute highlights the challenges of applying the Act in sensitive and historically complex situations. A balanced approach, ensuring legal clarity and secular principles, is essential for maintaining India's diversity and unity amidst ongoing religious disputes.
The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 is at the center of ongoing legal challenges, particularly highlighted by the Shahi Jama Masjid dispute in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh. The dispute revolves around the historical and religious status of the Shahi Jama Masjid, a 16th-century mosque, and whether its religious character can be changed based on claims that it was built over a pre-existing Hindu temple. This dispute has reignited debates over the Places of Worship Act and its application in preserving religious harmony.
Background: The Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, built in 1528 by Mir Hindu Beg, a general under Mughal Emperor Babur, is at the center of a legal dispute. The petitioners claim that it was constructed on the site of a pre-existing Hari Har Mandir (Hindu temple).
Architectural Significance: The mosque's distinct stone masonry and architectural style, which differ from other Mughal mosques, have fueled speculation about a possible connection to earlier Hindu temples.
Legal Involvement: A district court ordered a peaceful survey of the mosque, but the situation escalated into violent clashes during a subsequent survey. The mosque is a protected monument under the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904 and listed by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) as a Monument of National Importance.
The Places of Worship Act, 1991 aims to preserve the religious identity of places of worship in India, prohibiting the alteration of a religious site’s character. The Act is a legislative measure to prevent the alteration of religious identities for maintaining communal harmony and protecting sensitive religious sites from disputes.
Section 3: Prohibits the conversion of a place of worship from one religious denomination to another.
Section 4(1): Stipulates that the religious identity of places of worship must remain unchanged from their status on 15th August 1947.
Section 4(2): Ends all ongoing legal proceedings concerning changes to the religious character of places of worship prior to 15th August 1947 and prohibits new lawsuits to alter their status.
Section 5 (Exceptions):
The Ayodhya dispute (Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi case) is exempted from the Act.
Exempts historical monuments or archaeological sites under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
Also excludes places where mutual agreements have been reached or conversion occurred prior to the Act.
Section 6 (Penalties): Penalties for violating the Act include up to three years of imprisonment and fines for attempts to alter the religious character of a place of worship.
Limiting Judicial Review: The Act has been criticized for limiting judicial review, effectively blocking courts from revisiting religious disputes over places of worship, potentially undermining the judiciary’s role in resolving such matters.
Retrospective Cutoff Date (15th August 1947): The Act’s retrospective cutoff date has been called arbitrary. Critics argue it disregards claims of certain religious communities who believe that places of worship they consider sacred were wrongfully altered or destroyed in the past.
Exemption for Certain Disputes: The exemption of the Ayodhya dispute has raised questions about the selective treatment of religious disputes. The legal exemption for this case has led to accusations of inconsistency in applying the law, fueling further controversy and speculation.
Rising Communal Tensions: Legal challenges to the Act are often intertwined with communal tensions. Critics argue that disputes over religious sites could exacerbate communal conflicts and fuel religious polarization, especially concerning sensitive sites like mosques, temples, and churches.
Impact on Secularism: The Act was designed to preserve India’s secular fabric by preventing religious conversion of worship places. However, it has been criticized for potentially undermining religious minorities' claims to historical sites, creating a dilemma between protecting secularism and upholding religious claims.
In May 2022, the Supreme Court of India clarified that inquiries into the religious character of places of worship can be allowed, but only as long as such inquiries do not result in altering the religious character of these sites. This judgment supports the preservation principle behind the Act but leaves the door open for verification, provided the character of the site is not changed.
Legal Clarity: Given the varying interpretations of the Act’s provisions, there is a pressing need for the Supreme Court to provide clear and definitive guidelines on its applicability, especially in contentious cases like the Shahi Jama Masjid dispute.
Preventing Local Court Overreach: The increasing frequency of local court interventions in sensitive religious matters calls for a reevaluation of the jurisdictional limits of lower courts. It is important for the Supreme Court to oversee cases that have wider social and political implications.
De-politicizing Religious Legal Cases: Legal challenges over religious sites should be free from political influence to preserve the integrity of judicial processes. De-politicizing such cases would ensure that religious disputes are handled without being misused for ideological or electoral purposes.
Focus on Unity: Political leaders and civil society must emphasize unity rather than division, prioritizing the shared cultural and historical heritage that binds India together. This approach is crucial for safeguarding India’s pluralistic and secular fabric.
The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 is a significant legislative effort to preserve the religious status of worship places in India and maintain communal harmony. However, it has generated debate, particularly due to concerns about judicial oversight, retrospective decisions, and religious exemptions. The Shahi Jama Masjid dispute highlights the challenges of applying the Act in sensitive and historically complex situations. A balanced approach, ensuring legal clarity and secular principles, is essential for maintaining India's diversity and unity amidst ongoing religious disputes.
A notifiable disease is one that healthcare providers are legally required to report to public health authorities. The declaration of a disease as "notifiable" enables public health authorities to closely monitor its prevalence, track outbreaks, and intervene in a timely manner to prevent further spread or fatalities. This system of surveillance is vital for public health management.
Purpose of Reporting: The main goal is to enable timely and appropriate interventions to manage the disease.
Examples of Other Notifiable Diseases in India:
AIDS
Hepatitis
Dengue
Cholera
Tuberculosis
This helps in effective tracking and controlling diseases that could pose a serious risk to public health.
Snakebite envenoming is a significant health issue, especially in rural areas of India. According to various health studies, India has one of the highest incidences of snakebite cases globally, with thousands of deaths reported annually. By declaring it a notifiable disease, India aims to improve its public health response and reduce the burden caused by snakebites.
Improved Surveillance: Health authorities will be able to gather more accurate data on the incidence of snakebite cases and the geographic distribution of such incidents.
Timely Medical Intervention: This can lead to more timely medical responses in areas where snakebites are common. The declaration will facilitate better treatment and the allocation of resources like antivenoms.
Enhanced Public Awareness: The recognition of snakebite envenoming as a notifiable disease may help raise awareness in the public and among healthcare providers, encouraging quicker reporting and more proactive prevention.
Data for Policy Planning: By tracking and documenting snakebite cases more effectively, the government will be better equipped to implement targeted healthcare programs in high-risk regions.
The National Action Plan for Prevention and Control of Snakebite Envenoming (NAPSE) was developed with the aim of addressing the growing public health concern of snakebites in India. It outlines various strategies to reduce the number of deaths and disabilities caused by snakebites. One of the key targets is to halve snakebite-related deaths and disabilities by 2030.
Reduce Deaths and Disabilities: The overarching aim is to halve snakebite-related deaths and disabilities by the year 2030. Given that India records thousands of snakebite fatalities every year, this ambitious target is essential to improving public health outcomes.
Enhanced Medical Training: The plan emphasizes the need for training healthcare professionals in better handling of snakebite cases, including the correct use of antivenoms and supportive treatments.
Accessibility of Antivenoms: Increasing the availability and access to antivenoms, especially in rural and remote areas, is a central focus. This also includes making antivenoms more affordable and ensuring their availability in hospitals and health centers.
Strengthening Public Awareness: Increasing awareness among the public about snakebite prevention, first aid practices, and the importance of seeking timely medical help is also an important component of the plan.
Strengthening Surveillance and Reporting: The designation of snakebite envenoming as a notifiable disease aligns with this goal, ensuring better data collection and outbreak tracking.
Better Data Collection:
Enhanced surveillance through mandatory reporting will provide accurate data on the number of cases, the regions most affected, and the types of snakes involved. This will help public health authorities to act more decisively.
Focused Healthcare Response:
With better data, targeted medical interventions can be rolled out in high-risk areas, including providing adequate stocks of antivenoms and organizing medical camps in vulnerable regions.
Resource Allocation:
The government can allocate resources more efficiently to prevent and treat snakebites in areas where they are most prevalent, especially in rural and tribal areas.
Public Health Awareness:
This move will also encourage community-based efforts to tackle snakebite incidents through awareness programs and first-aid training.
Reduction in Mortality:
The implementation of the NAPSE in combination with the notifiable status can potentially reduce the number of fatalities and long-term disabilities by improving medical responses.
Accessibility to Medical Treatment:
Despite improved surveillance and the availability of antivenoms, there are still regions, especially rural and remote areas, where access to medical care is limited. Improving infrastructure and making antivenoms accessible is a continuing challenge.
Training Healthcare Workers:
Although the National Action Plan outlines the need for better training, many healthcare workers in rural areas still lack proper knowledge of handling snakebite cases, which affects treatment outcomes.
Public Awareness:
A lack of awareness about preventive measures, first aid, and timely medical intervention still contributes to high mortality rates from snakebites.
Data Gaps:
While declaring snakebite envenoming a notifiable disease will improve data collection, there may still be challenges related to underreporting due to lack of awareness or reluctance in reporting, especially in remote areas.
Declaring snakebite envenoming as a notifiable disease is an important step in India's efforts to tackle this longstanding public health issue. It aligns with the objectives of the National Action Plan for Prevention and Control of Snakebite Envenoming (NAPSE) to reduce deaths and disabilities related to snakebites by 2030. With better data collection, improved access to treatment, and greater public awareness, this move has the potential to significantly reduce the burden of snakebites in India. However, challenges such as accessibility to medical treatment, adequate training for healthcare workers, and rural healthcare infrastructure need to be addressed for maximum effectiveness.
Established: In 2005 by the UN General Assembly and Security Council.
Objective: The PBC is an intergovernmental advisory body tasked with supporting peace efforts in countries emerging from conflict. It provides strategic advice, coordinates peacebuilding activities, and promotes long-term peace and stability.
Advisory Role: The PBC offers guidance to the UN Security Council and the General Assembly regarding post-conflict recovery and peacebuilding.
Coordination: It brings together key stakeholders, including UN agencies, regional organizations, and civil society actors, to create comprehensive strategies for countries transitioning from conflict to peace.
Monitoring and Supporting Recovery: The PBC works to support countries in their efforts to rebuild, strengthen institutions, and foster social and economic recovery.
Promotion of Sustainable Peace: The Commission works on preventing the recurrence of conflict by focusing on building resilient institutions and societies.
The Commission is composed of 47 member states, elected by the UN General Assembly. It includes countries from various regions, with a focus on those with a specific interest in peacebuilding.
It has three main components:
The Organizational Committee – responsible for setting policies.
The Peacebuilding Support Office – handles the day-to-day functioning.
The Peacebuilding Fund – finances the Commission's programs.
India’s re-election reflects its longstanding commitment to international peacebuilding efforts and its active role in supporting peace and stability, both within the UN framework and in its regional neighborhood.
Advocacy for Comprehensive Peacebuilding: India has consistently advocated for inclusive and sustainable peacebuilding, focusing on the importance of development, reconciliation, and institution-building in post-conflict societies.
Support for Developing Nations: India’s emphasis on the South-South cooperation approach has been central in its contribution to peacebuilding. India has actively supported regional and international peace efforts while promoting the sovereignty and self-determination of nations.
Cooperation with the UN: India has been an active partner in UN-led peacebuilding efforts and often plays a central role in discussions around peacebuilding policies and the implementation of post-conflict reconstruction.
India is known for its substantial contributions to UN peacekeeping operations, and its involvement in peacebuilding is an extension of this broader role in maintaining global peace and stability.
Troop Contributions: India is one of the largest contributors of troops to UN peacekeeping missions. Thousands of Indian soldiers, police personnel, and civilian experts have been deployed in various conflict zones around the world, especially in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia.
Commitment to Global Peace: India has participated in many peacekeeping missions, such as in Congo, South Sudan, Sierra Leone, and Lebanon. India’s peacekeepers have been involved in the disarmament, humanitarian relief, and reconstruction of post-conflict societies.
Financial Contributions: India is also a significant financial contributor to the UN peacekeeping budget, further supporting the implementation of peacekeeping and peacebuilding operations globally.
Humanitarian Assistance: Indian peacekeepers are often involved in providing humanitarian aid, assisting in disaster relief, and ensuring civilian protection in conflict zones.
India’s commitment to peace is not limited to global efforts. The country has a significant interest in promoting peace and stability in its neighborhood, where it has been involved in conflict resolution and peacebuilding in countries such as Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, and Nepal.
Afghanistan: India has been a key player in Afghanistan’s reconstruction after the fall of the Taliban, providing humanitarian aid, infrastructure development, and capacity building for local institutions.
Sri Lanka: India played an instrumental role in post-conflict reconciliation in Sri Lanka after the end of the Tamil Eelam conflict, supporting efforts to ensure peace and development in the Tamil-majority areas.
Nepal and Bhutan: India has been a consistent partner in development cooperation and peacebuilding efforts in Nepal and Bhutan, focusing on strengthening democratic institutions and economic stability.
India's re-election to the UN Peacebuilding Commission is a testament to its global standing and its role as a responsible player in fostering international peace and security. The country’s seat on the PBC will allow it to continue playing an active role in shaping global peacebuilding strategies and addressing the root causes of conflict, including poverty, inequality, and governance challenges.
Conflict Prevention and Resolution: India will continue to push for preventive diplomacy, dialogue, and inclusive peacebuilding strategies in conflict-affected countries.
Promotion of Development: India’s role in the PBC will focus on the interlinkages between development and peace, emphasizing the need for economic recovery, social integration, and institution-building in post-conflict societies.
Strengthening Multilateralism: India will also work to strengthen multilateral peace initiatives and advocate for the importance of regional cooperation in fostering lasting peace.
India’s re-election to the United Nations Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) underscores the country’s longstanding commitment to global peace and security. Through its active participation in UN peacekeeping missions, its contributions to peacebuilding in conflict-affected nations, and its emphasis on inclusive development, India continues to play a critical role in the international community’s efforts to prevent conflict, rebuild societies, and promote lasting peace.
The 13th edition of the National Seed Congress (NSC) recently took place, bringing together scientists, policymakers, and industry representatives for a three-day event aimed at strengthening the agricultural sector both in India and globally. The NSC serves as an important platform for discussing innovations in the seed industry, fostering collaborations, and enhancing the role of seeds in ensuring food security.
Theme: "Innovating for a Sustainable Seed Ecosystem."
The congress emphasizes innovative seed technologies that can enhance the productivity and resilience of crops. It serves as a meeting point for researchers, policymakers, and farmers to discuss ways to improve seed production, distribution, and use, ultimately benefiting agricultural sustainability.
Key Highlights of the 13th edition:
Focus on Hybrid and Biofortified Crops: The event concentrated on improving crop varieties through hybridization and biofortification, with a focus on stress-tolerant and drought-resistant varieties.
Accelerating Breeding Cycles: Spearheading the adoption of faster breeding methods to create superior crop varieties.
Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs): Promoting collaborations between government bodies and private sectors to ensure sustainable seed production and efficient distribution.
South-South Collaboration: Encouraging cooperation among developing countries to enhance the global seed sector and share knowledge and resources.
Implementation and Support: The outcomes from the congress will be implemented with the full support of state governments, aiming for food security, economic growth, and farmer welfare.
Definition: Hybrid crops are created by crossbreeding genetically different plants from the same or different species to combine the best traits of both parents. These traits can include:
Increased yield
Disease resistance
Drought tolerance
Improved nutritional content
Challenges: Hybrid seeds do not always produce offspring with the same beneficial traits as the parent plant. As a result, farmers must purchase new seeds every year.
Definition: Biofortified crops are specially bred to have higher levels of essential nutrients (e.g., vitamins, minerals, amino acids) compared to conventional crops. Biofortification is achieved through:
Traditional breeding
Genetic modification
Biotechnological methods
Goal: The main aim is to enhance the nutritional value of crops, especially in regions where nutrient deficiencies are common. For example, Golden Rice is genetically modified to produce higher levels of provitamin A (beta-carotene) to address vitamin A deficiencies.
Merits of Biofortification:
Sustainability: It is considered a sustainable approach to combat malnutrition.
Affordability: Biofortified foods are affordable, as they do not require additional costs compared to conventional foods.
High Yielding: Biofortified varieties offer the same yields as traditional crops, ensuring no loss to farmers.
Minimal Infrastructure: Unlike other fortification methods, biofortification does not require complex processing or infrastructure.
Key Difference between Hybrid and Biofortified Crops:
Hybrid Crops: Focus on improving physical traits like yield, disease resistance, and drought tolerance.
Biofortified Crops: Focus on improving nutritional content to address deficiencies in essential micronutrients.
To promote sustainable seed production and distribution, the Indian government has introduced several initiatives and policies:
Encourages both private and public sectors to improve seed production, quality control, and distribution systems.
Maintains the genetic diversity of crops by conserving both traditional and indigenous seed varieties for future use.
Support local farmers by conserving native seed varieties and facilitating the exchange of seeds to promote local biodiversity.
Aims to increase the production of staple crops like rice, wheat, and pulses, while encouraging the use of high-quality seeds.
Focuses on using climate-resilient seeds to address challenges in water-scarce regions, improving agricultural sustainability in such areas.
Encourages organic seed production, providing subsidies for organic inputs and promoting seed-saving techniques.
These organizations help farmers produce and distribute locally adapted seeds, promoting seed diversity and increasing farmer involvement in seed systems.
The 13th National Seed Congress (NSC) emphasized the importance of innovation and collaboration to ensure sustainable agricultural growth. By focusing on hybrid and biofortified crops, accelerating breeding cycles, and fostering public-private partnerships, India aims to enhance its seed sector and contribute to global food security. With the support of state governments and the adoption of innovative practices, these efforts can significantly benefit the country's agricultural landscape and its farmers.
We provide offline, online and recorded lectures in the same amount.
Every aspirant is unique and the mentoring is customised according to the strengths and weaknesses of the aspirant.
In every Lecture. Director Sir will provide conceptual understanding with around 800 Mindmaps.
We provide you the best and Comprehensive content which comes directly or indirectly in UPSC Exam.
If you haven’t created your account yet, please Login HERE !
We provide offline, online and recorded lectures in the same amount.
Every aspirant is unique and the mentoring is customised according to the strengths and weaknesses of the aspirant.
In every Lecture. Director Sir will provide conceptual understanding with around 800 Mindmaps.
We provide you the best and Comprehensive content which comes directly or indirectly in UPSC Exam.
Offline/Online Class
