Recently, an impeachment motion has been considered against a sitting judge of the Allahabad High Court following controversial remarks made at an event organized by a religious organization. The remarks, which were perceived by many as communally charged, have raised concerns about the judge's judicial propriety and impartiality.
Impeachment, though not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, refers to the process by which a judge can be removed from office by Parliament. It serves as a crucial mechanism for judicial accountability while preserving the independence of the judiciary.
The Indian Constitution provides specific safeguards and procedures for the impeachment of judges, ensuring that they are not removed arbitrarily.
Article 124(4):
Outlines the removal process for Supreme Court judges. This process is applicable to High Court judges as well, as per Article 218.
The grounds for impeachment are "proved misbehavior" and "incapacity".
Proved Misbehavior:
This refers to actions or conduct by a judge that breach the ethical and professional standards expected of them.
Incapacity:
Refers to a judge's inability to perform judicial duties due to physical or mental infirmity.
Initiation of Motion:
A motion for impeachment must be supported by at least 100 members in the Lok Sabha or 50 members in the Rajya Sabha.
The Speaker or Chairman reviews the materials and may consult relevant individuals before deciding whether to admit or reject the motion.
For example, in 2018, a motion against Chief Justice Dipak Misra was rejected after due consideration.
This ensures that the process cannot be initiated casually or without substantial support.
Formation of an Inquiry Committee:
If the motion is admitted, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha or Chairman of the Rajya Sabha forms a three-member inquiry committee.
The committee comprises:
The Chief Justice of India or a Supreme Court judge.
The Chief Justice of a High Court.
A distinguished jurist.
The committee conducts a thorough inquiry, gathers evidence, and examines witnesses to determine the validity of the allegations.
Committee Report and Parliamentary Debate:
If the judge is found guilty of the alleged misconduct, the inquiry committee submits its report to the presiding officer of the House where the motion was introduced.
The report is debated in both Houses of Parliament, where both must approve the motion with a special majority.
Special Majority:
A majority of the total membership of the House.
At least two-thirds of the members present and voting.
Final Removal by the President:
Once the motion is adopted in both Houses, it is presented to the President.
The President has the final authority to remove the judge.
High Thresholds for Impeachment:
Stringent requirements for initiating and approving the motion protect against the misuse of the process, ensuring it is not used for partisan or frivolous reasons.
Objective Inquiry by Experts:
The inclusion of judicial and legal experts ensures an impartial investigation into the allegations.
Parliamentary Oversight:
Involving both Houses of Parliament ensures accountability through democratic scrutiny.
India has witnessed several attempts at impeachment of judges, although none have resulted in complete removal. Notable examples include:
Justice V. Ramaswami (1993): The impeachment motion against him was not successful.
Justice Soumitra Sen (2011): While impeachment proceedings were initiated, he resigned before the process could be completed.
These cases highlight the rigorous nature of the impeachment process, reinforcing its role in ensuring judicial accountability.
Freedom of Expression with Responsibility:
Judges have the right to freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. However, this right is subject to reasonable restrictions, especially when it may undermine the integrity of their office.
Public Statements and Judicial Conduct:
Judges' public statements must be measured and avoid any bias or partiality. Statements that harm the dignity of the judiciary can lead to disciplinary action.
Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (2002) and Restatement of Values of Judicial Life (1997):
These guidelines regulate judges’ conduct, emphasizing independence, impartiality, integrity, and propriety in their public engagements.
In-House Mechanisms for Judicial Conduct:
The judiciary has internal protocols to address inappropriate conduct by judges, including public statements that compromise their impartiality.
Judges must adhere to the following guidelines to ensure impartiality and uphold judicial propriety:
Non-Interference in Political Matters:
Judges must refrain from commenting on political events or policies to avoid being perceived as partisan.
Refraining from Prejudging Cases:
Judges must avoid statements about ongoing cases that may be interpreted as prejudgment or bias.
No Participation in Controversial Events:
Judges should avoid events or forums that may compromise their independence or align them with specific ideologies or groups.
Adherence to Constitutional Values:
Judges must interpret laws based on principles of equality, justice, and secularism as enshrined in the Constitution.
Ensuring Representation in the Judiciary:
The judiciary should reflect India's diversity through inclusive recruitment, gender balance, and sensitivity to marginalized communities.
Training and Sensitization of Judges:
Judicial academies should conduct training programs focusing on cultural competence, implicit bias, and social diversity.
Objective Decision-Making:
Judges must base their decisions solely on facts and evidence, ensuring impartiality and fairness.
Review of Precedents: Courts should critically examine past judgments to identify and address instances where biases may have influenced decisions.
Equitable Interpretation of Laws: Judges must ensure that laws are applied in a manner that promotes justice and equality, especially for disadvantaged groups.
Proactive Measures for Vulnerable Groups:
Social Justice Bench: Specialized benches can address issues affecting marginalized communities.
Legal Aid and Pro Bono Services: Ensuring legal assistance for the economically disadvantaged promotes inclusivity and impartiality.
Civil society and media play a crucial role as watchdogs, ensuring that the judiciary remains transparent and accountable while maintaining its independence.
Constructive criticism and scrutiny of judicial actions help uphold judicial accountability without undermining its autonomy.
Impartiality is essential for the credibility and integrity of the judiciary in a diverse democracy like India. Controversial conduct by judges can undermine public trust, but a robust impeachment process, adherence to constitutional values, and proactive measures like training and inclusive recruitment can ensure judicial accountability without compromising independence. By upholding these principles, the judiciary can continue to serve as the guardian of justice and equality in India.
Arvind Panagariya, Chairman of the 16th Finance Commission, recently termed the increasing reliance of the Centre on cesses and surcharges as a "complicated issue." This has raised debates on the fiscal implications and fairness of such tax measures in India’s federal structure.
Cess:
A cess is an additional tax imposed on top of an existing tax (e.g., income tax, excise), earmarked for specific purposes. It is a "tax on tax."
Cesses are generally intended for temporary use to fund a particular cause, like education, cleanliness, or infrastructure development.
Cess revenues are excluded from the divisible pool, meaning the states do not share in the revenue, according to Article 270 of the Indian Constitution.
Examples: Education Cess (for financing primary education), Swachh Bharat Cess (for sanitation programs), Fuel Cess (for road development).
Surcharge:
A surcharge is an additional levy imposed on existing duties, often targeting specific income brackets or sectors. It is also known as a "tax on tax."
Surcharges are designed to be progressive, meaning higher-income individuals or businesses pay more, thus promoting social equity.
Funds collected through surcharges go into the Consolidated Fund of India (CFI) and are used for general purposes, such as financing infrastructure projects or social welfare programs.
Examples: Income Tax Surcharge (imposed on high-income earners), Corporate Tax Surcharge.
Cess: Funds must be spent on specific purposes (education, cleanliness, etc.), and are excluded from the divisible pool, i.e., they are not shared with states.
Surcharge: Revenue is used like other taxes, for general governmental purposes, and also excluded from the divisible pool.
Centre’s Fiscal Constraints:
With states' share in the divisible pool increasing from 32% in the 13th Finance Commission to 41% in the 15th Finance Commission, the Centre's share has reduced, leaving it with less fiscal space.
To compensate, the Centre has increasingly relied on cesses and surcharges, which are not shared with states. What started as a temporary measure has now become a permanent feature of the tax system, raising concerns about its long-term impact on fiscal federalism.
State Concerns:
The share of cesses and surcharges in total tax revenue increased from 10.4% in 2011-12 to 20% in 2021-22, shrinking the pool of taxes shared with states.
States' fiscal flexibility is limited, and their ability to fund critical programs (e.g., health, education) is compromised.
States have consistently demanded a cap on cesses and surcharges and that any excess collections be included in the divisible pool for a fairer revenue distribution.
Lack of Transparency and Vagueness:
Cesses are earmarked for specific purposes, but there is a lack of transparency regarding their allocation and use.
Cesses like the Swachh Bharat Cess and Krishi Kalyan Cess are often broadly defined, and many are not subjected to the same parliamentary oversight as other taxes.
For example, the Research and Development Cess was partly used to finance the Union’s revenue deficit, deviating from its intended use.
Criticism: This bypasses the principles of equitable revenue sharing between the Centre and states.
Inequitable Taxation:
Cesses and surcharges disproportionately affect wealthier segments of society, as they are the primary contributors.
Critics argue that this creates fairness issues and could lead to capital flight, where businesses and high-income individuals relocate to tax-friendly jurisdictions.
The Divisible Pool of Taxes refers to the share of central tax revenues that the Union government distributes to states. This pool is a key part of fiscal federalism.
Key Taxes in the Pool: Taxes like Corporation Tax, Personal Income Tax, and Goods and Services Tax (GST) form part of the divisible pool.
The Finance Commission is responsible for recommending the share of the divisible pool that each state receives. The 15th Finance Commission recommended 41% of the divisible pool be allocated to states for the period 2021-2026.
Vertical and Horizontal Devolution:
Vertical Devolution: Allocation of the divisible pool between the Centre and the States.
Horizontal Devolution: Distribution among states based on factors like population, income disparity, and tax effort.
Surcharges:
Germany: The solidarity surcharge was introduced in 1991 to fund German reunification and Gulf War expenses. It has continued since, despite its initial temporary nature.
France: Imposes temporary surcharges to address fiscal challenges.
Cess Taxes:
United States: States like Alabama earmark substantial tax revenue for specific purposes like infrastructure.
Australia: The Medicare Levy, a personal income tax introduced in 1984, funds the national healthcare system. Other temporary taxes have been short-lived.
For Cesses:
Avoid levying cesses for issues that fall under the State List (e.g., health, education), as this undermines federal principles.
Set a ceiling on cess collection and ensure it is not exceeded.
Transparency: Allocate cess funds clearly and ensure regular audits to evaluate their necessity and effectiveness.
Abolish ineffective cesses that generate minimal revenue or create complexity.
Introduce sunset clauses: Cesses should only be imposed for a fixed period (e.g., 5 years with one possible extension).
For Surcharges:
Rationalize income tax: Instead of relying on surcharges to impose progressive taxes, restructure the income tax itself.
Temporary nature of surcharges: Surcharges should be used only in times of fiscal distress, with clear sunset clauses to prevent their indefinite continuation.
The increasing reliance on cesses and surcharges has raised concerns regarding efficiency, equity, and transparency in India’s taxation system. A balanced approach, with clear guidelines, periodic reviews, and sunset clauses, is needed to prevent their perpetual use and ensure a fair and transparent tax system. The Centre should also ensure that surcharges and cesses are used only for their intended purposes and in exceptional circumstances.
The Supreme Court of India has expressed concern over the growing misuse of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which penalizes cruelty against married women by their husbands or in-laws. Section 498A, introduced to protect women from domestic abuse, has been criticized for being increasingly used inappropriately in matrimonial disputes.
Objective: Section 498A was introduced to address cruelty faced by married women, particularly in the context of dowry harassment.
Definition of Cruelty:
Physical or mental cruelty that could drive the woman to suicide or cause grave injury to her.
Harassment to coerce the woman or her family to meet unlawful dowry demands.
Punishment: The accused (husband or in-laws) can face imprisonment for up to 3 years and a fine. The offense is cognizable (immediate arrest is possible) and non-bailable (difficult to secure bail).
Time Limit: A complaint must be filed within 3 years of the alleged incident.
Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) is a significant legal provision introduced in 1983 to address the rising concern of domestic violence and harassment faced by married women in India. This section provides a legal remedy for married women subjected to cruelty by their husbands or in-laws.
Under Section 498A, cruelty is defined as any willful conduct that is likely to:
Drive the woman to commit suicide, or
Cause grave injury to her life, limb, or health, whether physical or mental.
Cruelty also includes harassment or torture with the intention to coerce the woman or her relatives to meet unlawful demands for property or money (commonly related to dowry demands).
Section 498A applies to married women only. This means that the provision does not apply to unmarried women or women in relationships outside of marriage.
The law extends to include live-in relationships. If a woman is in a live-in relationship, she can seek protection under this law as the term "husband" is broadly defined to include:
Live-in partners, or
A man who claims to be married to the woman, even if the marriage is not legally valid.
The punishment for subjecting a wife to cruelty under Section 498A is imprisonment for up to three years, along with a fine.
The offense is cognizable, meaning the police can arrest the accused without a warrant.
Non-bailable and non-compoundable: Once an FIR (First Information Report) is filed under Section 498A, the accused cannot compound the offense, and they cannot seek bail easily (except through a Magistrate’s court).
No time limitation: Unlike other criminal offenses, there is no specific time limit for filing a complaint under Section 498A. A woman can file a complaint at any point in time, regardless of when the alleged cruelty occurred.
Bail under Section 498A can only be granted by a Magistrate after an FIR is filed.
The provision is often criticized for leading to immediate arrests, with limited preliminary investigation, which could lead to undue hardship for the accused before guilt is established.
The law was introduced in response to the rise in dowry deaths and domestic violence in the 1980s.
Its primary aim was to provide legal protection for women suffering from physical and mental abuse, dowry-related violence, and coercion in marriages.
Despite its noble intention, Section 498A has been increasingly misused in the following ways:
Growing Misuse: The rise in matrimonial disputes has led to Section 498A being used for personal vendettas against the husband and his family, often with little or no factual basis.
Coercion for Financial Gain: False cases are filed to extort money or gain leverage in divorce proceedings.
Vague Allegations: Many cases rely on generalized, vague accusations without specific details or evidence, making it difficult to ascertain the truth and leading to the harassment of innocent family members.
Social and Psychological Damage: The stigma attached to allegations of domestic violence can have serious social, mental, and emotional consequences for the accused, even if they are later acquitted.
Immediate Arrests: As the offense is cognizable, arrests can be made immediately upon the filing of a complaint, which can lead to unfair pressure on the accused before any investigation or guilt is established.
Ethical Concerns: The misuse of such laws raises serious concerns about the integrity of legal proceedings, as well as the ethical responsibility of those involved in enforcing the law.
Several factors contribute to the growing misuse of Section 498A:
No Immediate Verification: Section 498A being a cognizable and non-bailable offense means that arrests can occur without preliminary investigation, creating scope for abuse of power and false accusations.
Matrimonial Disputes: In interpersonal conflicts or divorces, false accusations are often used to settle scores or manipulate the legal process.
Lack of Accountability: There are no strict penalties for filing false complaints, which incentivizes some individuals to exploit the provision for personal gain.
The Supreme Court has taken a firm stance against the misuse of Section 498A:
Scrutiny of Allegations: The court emphasized the need to scrutinize vague allegations to prevent misuse and the use of legal provisions as a tool for personal vendetta or harassment.
Specific Details Required: The Court stated that FIRs (First Information Reports) should contain specific allegations with details such as date, time, and place of the alleged cruelty or harassment. This would help in distinguishing between genuine cases and false accusations.
Contextual Analysis: The timing and circumstances of the complaint should be considered when determining its genuineness. The context of the relationship and the nature of the dispute could also play a crucial role in understanding the case.
Protecting Innocent Family Members: The Supreme Court stressed the importance of protecting innocent family members from being unjustly dragged into matrimonial disputes. This could be prevented by ensuring that there is substantial evidence before accusations are made.
Judicial Responsibility: The Court emphasized the responsibility of the judiciary in preventing the misuse of the law by carefully scrutinizing complaints and ensuring that legal processes are not misused for personal gain.
Balanced Legal Framework: The law must be gender-just, ensuring that the rights of all individuals, regardless of gender, are protected while ensuring justice for genuine victims of domestic violence.
Preliminary Investigation: Before an FIR is filed under Section 498A, a preliminary investigation should be made mandatory. This will help filter out false cases and provide a more balanced approach to the matter.
Family Welfare Committees: In line with the Rajesh Sharma case, it is suggested that independent family welfare committees should examine cases before formal arrests are made. This would help identify whether the accusations are genuine or part of a personal vendetta.
Accountability for False Complaints: There should be strict accountability for filing false complaints under Section 498A. Penalties for false accusations will discourage misuse and protect innocent people from wrongful imprisonment.
Patriarchal Norms: Deeply ingrained societal norms that normalize violence as a means of control and perpetuate gender inequality.
Cultural Acceptance: In many cultures, domestic violence is tacitly accepted or overlooked, with victims often reluctant to seek help due to shame or fear.
Economic Dependence: Many women are financially dependent on their male family members, which traps them in abusive relationships.
Substance Abuse: Alcohol or drug abuse can increase the likelihood of domestic violence in the family.
Lack of Education and Awareness: A significant number of women are unaware of their legal rights and the support systems available to them, preventing them from seeking justice.
While Section 498A was introduced with the noble intention of protecting women from domestic violence and dowry harassment, its growing misuse in matrimonial disputes has raised serious concerns. The Supreme Court has called for greater scrutiny of complaints, specific allegations, and protective measures for innocent family members. There is a pressing need for reform to ensure that the law remains a tool for genuine justice rather than being weaponized for personal vendettas. Further accountability and preliminary investigations are crucial steps in safeguarding the integrity of legal processes.
The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 emphasizes the importance of teaching children in their mother tongue or local language, especially during the foundational stages of education. This policy shift is intended to foster a deeper understanding of children's cultural roots while enhancing their academic, cognitive, and emotional development. The push for mother tongue education aligns with the idea that learning in a familiar language is essential for effective comprehension, better communication, and a stronger sense of identity.
Improved Comprehension and Learning:
When children are taught in their mother tongue, they can understand and retain information more effectively.
Learning in a language they are familiar with allows them to grasp complex concepts and build foundational knowledge more easily.
Cognitive Development:
Education in a familiar language supports cognitive skills, including problem-solving, critical thinking, and creativity.
It facilitates conceptual understanding, helping children to think analytically and express themselves better.
Stronger Communication Skills:
Teaching in the mother tongue helps children develop strong oral and written communication skills, which are crucial for academic success and overall development.
It builds confidence in children to express themselves clearly and effectively.
Cultural Identity and Preservation:
Mother tongue education strengthens children’s connection to their cultural heritage, instilling pride and preserving cultural traditions.
It fosters a sense of belonging and helps children retain a connection to their community and roots.
Emotional Well-being:
When children can express themselves in their mother tongue, they are better able to participate in both social and academic activities, improving their emotional well-being.
It makes learning a less stressful and more inclusive experience, encouraging greater participation and engagement.
Social Inclusivity:
Education in the mother tongue ensures equal opportunities for children from diverse linguistic backgrounds to succeed academically.
It promotes social inclusivity, ensuring children from marginalized communities are not left behind due to language barriers.
India's Constitution recognizes the significance of mother tongue education and includes several provisions aimed at protecting and promoting linguistic diversity:
Article 29(1) – Protection of Interests of Minorities:
It guarantees the right of any section of citizens, including linguistic minorities, to conserve their language, script, and culture.
Section 29(f) of the Right to Education Act (RTE), 2009:
It specifies that the medium of instruction should be, as far as practicable, in the child’s mother tongue.
Article 30(1) – Right of Minorities to Establish Educational Institutions:
This article allows linguistic minorities the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice, promoting education in their native languages.
Article 350A – Facilities for Instruction in Mother Tongue at the Primary Stage:
It directs the State to provide facilities for teaching in the mother tongue at the primary school level.
Article 350B – Special Officer for Linguistic Minorities:
It provides for the establishment of an officer to safeguard and promote the interests of linguistic minorities.
India has initiated several programs and policies aimed at promoting education in the mother tongue across the country:
National Education Policy (NEP) 2020:
The NEP advocates for medium of instruction to be in the home language, mother tongue, or local language up to at least Class 5, and preferably up to Class 8.
The policy emphasizes making high-quality textbooks available in the mother tongue and encouraging a bilingual approach in classrooms.
Unified District Information System for Education Plus (UDISE+) 2020-21:
According to UDISE+, 28 languages are used as the medium of instruction for children in grades 1-5, ensuring that students have access to education in their native language.
AICTE Guidelines:
The All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) has issued guidelines allowing technical institutions to offer courses in local languages, with 19 institutions in 10 states already implementing this.
AICTE has also developed an Artificial Intelligence tool to translate online courses into 11 Indian languages.
DIKSHA Portal:
The DIKSHA Portal, a government initiative, offers textbooks and teaching resources for Grades 1-12 in 33 Indian languages, including Indian Sign Language, ensuring that students from various linguistic backgrounds can access quality learning materials.
JEE and NEET Exams in Multiple Languages:
The Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) and National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) are now conducted in 13 Indian languages, providing opportunities for students from diverse linguistic backgrounds to pursue higher education.
India is not alone in recognizing the importance of mother tongue education. Several countries have adopted similar approaches to promote educational success and cultural preservation:
In the Soviet Union in the early 20th century, the policy of nativization promoted education in the mother tongue of various ethnic groups.
In the 1950s, China introduced policies to encourage mother tongue education for its ethnic minorities, aiming to bridge the educational divide and promote linguistic diversity.
Such initiatives globally reinforce the idea that mother tongue education is not only an educational strategy but also a tool for cultural preservation and social inclusivity.
The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 is a transformative policy designed to address the growing demands of the Indian education system in the 21st century. Approved by the Union Cabinet on July 29, 2020, this policy aims to make India's education system more inclusive, holistic, and flexible, with a focus on quality and equity. The NEP replaces the National Policy on Education (NPE) 1986, with the goal of shaping an education system that is aligned with the needs of the modern world while staying rooted in India’s cultural and ethical values.
Universal Access to Education:
Ensuring universal access to quality education for all children, regardless of their socio-economic background.
Focus on early childhood care and education (ECCE), which is critical for the cognitive development of young children.
Inclusion and Equity:
Providing equitable opportunities for marginalized groups such as economically weaker sections, Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), other backward classes (OBC), and girls.
Ensuring that education is accessible to all, especially in remote and rural areas.
Quality of Education:
Transforming the education system to ensure holistic, experiential, inquiry-driven, and student-centric learning.
Focus on critical thinking, creativity, and problem-solving skills rather than rote learning.
Multi-disciplinary Education:
Encouraging a multi-disciplinary approach to education, with the flexibility to choose subjects across different fields of knowledge.
Emphasis on interdisciplinary learning from early education through higher education.
Integration of Technology:
Promoting the use of technology for education and creating a robust infrastructure to support digital learning.
Development of online learning platforms and the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI), Virtual Reality (VR), and augmented reality (AR) into the educational process.
The foundation stage of education, covering age 3 to 6, is given priority.
National Mission on ECCE will be launched to ensure that all children have access to high-quality early education.
Play-based learning and a focus on cognitive development in the early years, rather than formal schooling.
The policy aims to move away from rote learning and encourages critical thinking, experiential learning, and application of knowledge.
The curriculum will be reduced to focus on core concepts, and the content will be more skill-oriented.
Mother tongue/regional language will be the medium of instruction at least until Class 5, and preferably up to Class 8. This is intended to improve comprehension and learning outcomes.
The NEP introduces a new 5+3+3+4 structure for school education, replacing the earlier 10+2 system.
5 years of foundational stage (ages 3-8): Focus on play-based and activity-based learning.
3 years of preparatory stage (ages 8-11): Focus on more formal education with a focus on discovery, inquiry, and hands-on learning.
3 years of middle stage (ages 11-14): Building on the foundational and preparatory stages.
4 years of secondary stage (ages 14-18): This stage will have greater flexibility with more electives and vocational courses.
The NEP allows for a multidisciplinary approach, enabling students to choose subjects across streams (arts, science, commerce) and pursue interdisciplinary learning.
The 3-year undergraduate program can have flexibility in the structure, with exit options at different stages—certificate (after one year), diploma (after two years), and a degree (after three years).
Vocational education will be integrated from the middle school level to ensure that students acquire skills and gain hands-on experience.
A major reform in the NEP is the emphasis on teacher training and improving the quality of teachers.
Establishment of a National Mission for Mentoring to support teachers.
Teachers will be encouraged to continually upgrade their skills through professional development programs and digital platforms.
The policy advocates for continuous and comprehensive assessment based on conceptual understanding rather than rote memorization.
Standardized tests will be reformed to focus on critical thinking and problem-solving skills.
Use of technology in assessments will enable better tracking and evaluation of students' progress.
Autonomy to Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs): The NEP promotes autonomy for universities and colleges in terms of curriculum design, admission processes, and examinations.
Multidisciplinary institutions will be encouraged, allowing universities to offer integrated degrees such as BSc-MSc, BA-MA, or BTech-MTech in a seamless manner.
The establishment of National Research Foundation (NRF) will promote research and innovation in higher education.
The policy envisions a single regulator for all higher education institutions (except for medical and legal education).
The Higher Education Commission of India (HECI) will oversee the regulation and accreditation of universities and colleges.
The National Accreditation Council will be established to oversee the accreditation process of institutions.
The NEP emphasizes the integration of digital technology to enhance teaching, learning, and the delivery of education.
The National Educational Technology Forum (NETF) will be established to encourage the use of technology and digital content.
Digital learning will be promoted through platforms like DIKSHA, SWAYAM, and e-Pathshala.
The successful implementation of NEP 2020 requires significant investment in infrastructure, teacher training, and technology.
Several state governments, along with central institutions, will play a key role in implementing the policies and reforms laid out in the NEP.
The policy's success will depend on addressing challenges such as funding gaps, access to technology, and the need for long-term monitoring of progress.
The emphasis on mother tongue education in the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 marks a significant step towards enhancing the learning experience of children in India. By fostering strong cognitive and communication skills, strengthening cultural identity, and promoting inclusivity, this policy can help ensure that India's diverse linguistic communities are not only academically proficient but also socially empowered and culturally enriched.
The government's initiatives, including bilingual teaching approaches, the translation of course materials, and the promotion of technical education in regional languages, reflect a commitment to making education more accessible, inclusive, and effective for every child in India.
The issue of manual scavenging continues to be a severe social and human rights challenge in India. Despite legal prohibitions and government initiatives, this practice persists in some parts of the country. On December 12th, 2024, the Supreme Court of India reaffirmed its commitment to eradicating manual scavenging, urging authorities to take further steps for its complete abolition.
Eradication of Manual Sewer Cleaning: The Court directed that manual sewer cleaning should be phased out through strict policies, and all states and Union Territories should adopt guidelines aligned with the central directives.
Full Rehabilitation: Comprehensive measures for the rehabilitation of sewage workers, including those who die while performing hazardous duties, must be ensured. This includes the development of a portal to track incidents of sewer deaths, victims' details, and compensation disbursement.
Increased Compensation: The Court raised the compensation for sewer deaths from ₹10 lakh to ₹30 lakh, reflecting the severity of the risks involved.
Manual scavenging refers to the hazardous practice of manually cleaning, carrying, or disposing of human excrement from latrines, sewers, or open drains, often using primitive tools or even bare hands. It is historically associated with marginalized caste groups, particularly those within the Dalit community. The practice continues despite being illegal, largely due to entrenched social stigma and caste-based discrimination.
The Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 prohibits manual scavenging and mandates:
Ban on Employment: The law criminalizes manual scavenging, including employment of individuals in this practice.
Ban on Dry Latrines: It outlaws the construction of dry latrines (those that do not use water-based systems) and mandates the conversion of these to modern sanitary toilets.
Penalties: Employers involved in manual scavenging may face imprisonment of up to 2 years, a fine of ₹1 lakh, or both.
Rehabilitation and Compensation: The law provides financial support, housing, and access to alternate livelihoods for those engaged in manual scavenging, and sets up surveys to identify these individuals.
Commissions: The establishment of the National Commission for Safai Karamcharis and state-level commissions ensures ongoing oversight and advocacy for the affected communities.
Despite legal reforms, challenges persist in addressing manual scavenging:
Non-compliance: Local authorities and employers often fail to comply with the law, particularly in rural or remote areas where traditional practices are entrenched.
Social Stigma: Deep-rooted caste-based discrimination continues to affect the social reintegration of manual scavengers, hindering their ability to transition into dignified work.
Inadequate Rehabilitation: The government’s rehabilitation programs are often poorly implemented, and many manual scavengers do not receive the financial or livelihood support to which they are entitled.
Over the years, the government has launched several initiatives aimed at eliminating manual scavenging and improving sanitation conditions:
Swachh Bharat Mission (2014): A nationwide initiative to improve sanitation, reduce open defecation, and convert dry latrines into sanitary toilets, thereby minimizing the need for manual scavenging.
National Safai Karamcharis Finance and Development Corporation (NSKFDC): Provides financial aid to manual scavengers for rehabilitation, including loans for skill development and self-employment.
Skill Development Programs: The government offers training for manual scavengers to help them acquire new skills and transition to more dignified jobs.
NAMASTE Scheme: National Action for Mechanized Sanitation Ecosystem (NAMASTE) aims to promote mechanized equipment for cleaning sewers and septic tanks, reducing human involvement in hazardous waste management. This initiative emphasizes worker safety and modernizing sanitation practices.
To address the challenges of manual scavenging, the following steps are crucial:
Strict Enforcement of Laws: Strengthening the enforcement of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013, with robust monitoring mechanisms, harsher penalties for violations, and increased accountability for local authorities.
Promotion of Mechanization: Encouraging the widespread use of mechanized equipment for sewer cleaning and septic tank maintenance to eliminate manual labor and ensure the safety of sanitation workers.
Comprehensive Rehabilitation and Skill Development: Expanding training programs to provide manual scavengers with alternative livelihood opportunities, ensuring their full rehabilitation, and offering financial support for self-employment.
Social Awareness and Inclusion: Combatting caste-based discrimination and promoting social integration by fostering dignity and respect for all workers, irrespective of their social background.
Inclusive Policies: Developing and implementing targeted policies that address the welfare of manual scavengers and their families, including provisions for education, healthcare, housing, and social security.
While significant legal frameworks and government schemes exist, manual scavenging remains a pervasive issue due to social, cultural, and systemic barriers. The commitment of the Supreme Court, along with the necessary strengthening of laws, social programs, and technological interventions, can play a pivotal role in eradicating this practice and improving the lives of those impacted. Achieving a caste-free, dignified work environment for all, especially sanitation workers, must be the priority to ensure a just and equitable society.
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
