Supreme Court directs States, Union Territories to reclaim reserved forests allotted to private parties

UPSC CURRENT AFFAIRS – 20th May 2025 Home / Supreme Court directs States, Union Territories to reclaim reserved forests allotted to private parties Why in News? The Supreme Court of India has delivered a landmark judgment concerning the misuse and illegal allotment of forest lands by Revenue Departments across various States and Union Territories (UTs). Background of the Case The case centered on a specific instance of illegal forest land diversion in Kondhwa Budruk, Pune (Maharashtra): In 1998, 11.89 hectares of reserved forest land was illegally allotted for agricultural use. In 1999, the same land was sold to a builder. In 2007, the builder obtained an Environmental Clearance from the Ministry of Environment and Forests to use the land for construction. This was challenged and ultimately declared illegal by the Supreme Court. This case is seen as a representative example of the broader problem of politician–bureaucrat–builder nexus, resulting in the conversion of forest land into commercial properties. Key Supreme Court Directives Formation of Special Investigation Teams (SITs) All Chief Secretaries (States) and Administrators (UTs) must constitute SITs. Purpose: Examine whether forest lands under Revenue Department control have been illegally allotted to private individuals or institutions for non-forest use. Recovery and Restoration of Forest Land If forest land is found to have been wrongly allotted: Authorities must take back possession from private parties. The land must be handed over to the Forest Department. Exception – If Restoration is Against Public Interest In rare cases where taking back the land is not in larger public interest, the following applies: The government must recover the cost of the land from the private party. This amount must be used exclusively for forest development (e.g., afforestation). Deadline for Action All these actions—investigation, recovery, handover—must be completed within one year. Future Use of Land Hereafter, such forest lands should be used only for afforestation and no other purpose. Past Illegal Allotments Invalid The judgment invalidates any forest land allotments after 12 December 1996 that were made without prior approval from the Central Government. This is based on an earlier Supreme Court order (1996), which mandated that: “All ongoing activity within any forest in any State throughout the country, without the prior approval of the Central Government, must cease immediately.” Thus, any transfer or use of forest land for non-forest purposes after this date is unlawful. Issues Identified by the Court The judgment highlights a systemic problem: Large areas of land classified as ‘forest’ are still under the control of Revenue Departments. These lands were often allotted despite resistance from Forest Departments. Result: Depletion of green cover, violating environmental laws and Supreme Court orders. A Central Empowered Committee (CEC) report, presented by amicus curiae K. Parameshwar, showed widespread illegal allotments across India. Case Study: Telangana – Kancha Gachibowli The court warned the Telangana government in a related case involving tree-felling in Kancha Gachibowli. The SC ordered restoration of the forest, failing which officials would face jail. Broader Implications A significant step towards: Conservation of forest resources. Holding State officials accountable for illegal transfers. Strengthening environmental governance. Decreased oxygen-carrying capacity of RBCs. Increased fragility and cell stiffness. Vascular blockage, causing pain and organ injury. Increased susceptibility to infections, anemia, and stroke. Past Illegal Allotments Invalid

India–Bangladesh Trade Tensions and Political Fallout

UPSC CURRENT AFFAIRS – 21th May 2025 Home / India–Bangladesh Trade Tensions and Political Fallout Why in News? India has imposed trade restrictions on Bangladeshi garments and specific goods, signalling worsening bilateral relations following Dhaka’s increasing proximity to China and internal political instability. Key Highlights: Trade Restrictions: The Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) imposed curbs on Bangladeshi readymade garments and specific commodities. This move targets Bangladesh’s apparel export sector, a critical driver of its economy. India also blocked access to the northeast market, a key outlet for Bangladeshi trade.   Political Background: The action followed interim Bangladeshi leader Mohammed Yunus’s March 2025 visit to China. Yunus described India’s northeast as “landlocked”, suggesting Chinese access through Bangladesh — viewed as strategically provocative by India.   Internal Political Shifts in Bangladesh: Yunus’s interim government assumed power after anti-Awami League protests. Its decisions — including banning the Awami League and increasing engagement with Pakistan and China — have strained ties with New Delhi.   India’s Strategic Dilemma: Trade restrictions may hurt Bangladeshi exports, but are unlikely to yield strategic gains. They risk fueling anti-India narratives and instability in the northeast. India must maintain functional ties with the interim government while pushing for democratic transition.   Recommended Approach: India should encourage free and fair elections in Bangladesh, aligning with international norms. Political engagement, not economic coercion, is the sustainable way forward. Broader regional stability and connectivity are at stake. Background: India–Bangladesh Relations in Recent Years Strong Bilateral Ties Under Sheikh Hasina (2009–2024): India and Bangladesh witnessed a “golden era” in relations under Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. Land Boundary Agreement (2015) and border management cooperation were landmark achievements. India supported Bangladesh’s development goals, supplying vaccines, power, and credit lines.   Trade and Connectivity Boost: Bangladesh is India’s largest trading partner in South Asia. Bilateral trade crossed USD 18 billion in 2022–23. Key projects include: BBIN Motor Vehicles Agreement Maitree power projects Chattogram and Mongla port access for Indian goods   Challenges Emerge (2024–2025): Political transition and instability in Dhaka post-Hasina created uncertainty. India’s perceived closeness to the Awami League has led to suspicion from the interim regime. China’s growing footprint in Bangladesh, including infrastructure and defense ties, has further complicated India’s strategic calculus. India’s Broader Concerns: Strategic Concern – Countering China’s Influence: Bangladesh’s growing proximity to China, especially proposals for Chinese access to India’s northeastern region via Bangladeshi territory, raises alarms for India. It threatens to undermine India’s Act East Policy, strategic depth, and regional balance of power in South Asia. China’s inroads into infrastructure, ports, and telecom in Bangladesh mirror its string-of-pearls strategy elsewhere. Security Concern – Border Stability and Internal Peace: India shares a 4,096-km border with Bangladesh — the longest land border it shares with any country. Political instability in Bangladesh could spill over into India’s northeast, fostering: Cross-border infiltration Radicalization and communal tensions Illicit trade and arms smuggling Maintaining a stable and cooperative border regime is critical for India’s internal security architecture. Diplomatic Concern – Navigating a Volatile Transition: With Bangladesh in political flux, India must avoid appearing partisan while preserving long-term goodwill. Overt pressure or punitive trade moves could backfire, strengthening anti-India narratives. India must balance firm signaling with constructive engagement, leveraging its regional leadership role, soft power, and track record of democratic support. Strategic Concern – Countering China’s Influence: Bangladesh’s growing proximity to China, especially proposals for Chinese access to India’s northeastern region via Bangladeshi territory, raises alarms for India. It threatens to undermine India’s Act East Policy, strategic depth, and regional balance of power in South Asia. China’s inroads into infrastructure, ports, and telecom in Bangladesh mirror its string-of-pearls strategy elsewhere.   Security Concern – Border Stability and Internal Peace: India shares a 4,096-km border with Bangladesh — the longest land border it shares with any country. Political instability in Bangladesh could spill over into India’s northeast, fostering: Cross-border infiltration Radicalization and communal tensions Illicit trade and arms smuggling Maintaining a stable and cooperative border regime is critical for India’s internal security architecture.   Diplomatic Concern – Navigating a Volatile Transition: With Bangladesh in political flux, India must avoid appearing partisan while preserving long-term goodwill. Overt pressure or punitive trade moves could backfire, strengthening anti-India narratives. India must balance firm signaling with constructive engagement, leveraging its regional leadership role, soft power, and track record of democratic support. Decreased oxygen-carrying capacity of RBCs. Increased fragility and cell stiffness. Vascular blockage, causing pain and organ injury. Increased susceptibility to infections, anemia, and stroke. Past Illegal Allotments Invalid

Supreme Court struck down the Centre’s orders on retrospective green clearances

UPSC CURRENT AFFAIRS – 19th May 2025 Home / Supreme Court struck down the Centre’s orders on retrospective green clearances Why in News? The Supreme Court struck down the 2017 MoEF&CC notification and 2021 SOP allowing post-facto environmental clearances, declaring them unconstitutional for violating the right to a healthy environment under Article 21.  Key Highlights Recently, the Supreme Court of India struck down a 2017 notification issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC), which allowed post facto environmental clearances for industrial projects that had commenced operations without prior approval.  The Court also invalidated the 2021 office memorandum (OM) that institutionalized a standard operating procedure (SOP) for handling such cases. Background: The Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification, 2006, mandates prior environmental clearance before the commencement of any project with potential environmental impacts. The clearance involves multi-stage scrutiny, including: Screening and scoping of the project Impact assessment Public hearing Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) recommendations   Despite this, in March 2017, the MoEF&CC issued a notification allowing a “one-time” six-month window for industries to obtain post facto clearance, even if they had already violated the EIA norms by beginning operations or modifying existing projects. Rationale Behind the 2017 Notification: Regulatory Compliance: The Centre argued that it was better to bring violators under the environmental regulatory net rather than leaving violations unregulated. Remediation Costs: Violators would be compelled to pay for remediation and pollution damage, nullifying any economic advantage gained through non-compliance. Centralized Appraisal: All violation cases, regardless of scale, were to be appraised centrally. Closure Clause: Only activities permissible at the site would be allowed to proceed; others faced closure. Supreme Court’s Judgment: A bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan declared: The 2017 notification and 2021 OM are illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. The right to a clean and pollution-free environment is part of the right to life under Article 21. Post facto clearance undermines environmental law and encourages illegal project execution. The Court restrained the Centre from issuing any future notifications or memoranda similar in intent or effect. Violation of Judicial Precedents: The Court cited two key judgments: Common Cause v. Union of India (2017) Alembic Pharmaceuticals v. Rohit Prajapati (2020) Both judgments held that ex-post facto clearances are contrary to environmental jurisprudence and cannot be allowed as they defeat the preventive intent of EIA norms. Criticism of the Centre’s Approach: The Court criticized the Centre for protecting violators instead of upholding environmental laws. It noted that in the Alembic case, even a one-time amnesty was considered illegal. The 2021 SOP, although not using the term post facto, was seen as an indirect attempt to regularize violations, which the Court found unacceptable. Key Constitutional Principles Upheld: Article 21: Right to life includes the right to a healthy environment. Article 14: Equal treatment under law; violators cannot be treated at par with law-abiding project proponents. Doctrine of Public Trust: The State has a duty to protect natural resources for present and future generations. Implications of the Judgment: Reinforces the principle of prior environmental clearance as a non-negotiable legal requirement. Acts as a deterrent against regulatory bypass and upholds environmental governance. Places greater responsibility on the MoEF&CC, State Authorities, and Pollution Control Boards to ensure compliance with EIA norms. May affect projects that had earlier obtained post facto clearance between 2017–2021. Conclusion: The Supreme Court’s decision reaffirms India’s commitment to environmental protection and constitutional rights, rejecting a compliance regime that favours industrial interests at the cost of ecological integrity. The judgment sets a landmark precedent in Indian environmental jurisprudence, ensuring that development does not override the fundamental right to a clean environment. Decreased oxygen-carrying capacity of RBCs. Increased fragility and cell stiffness. Vascular blockage, causing pain and organ injury. Increased susceptibility to infections, anemia, and stroke. Past Illegal Allotments Invalid

Scheme to produce electronic components

UPSC CURRENT AFFAIRS – 19th May 2025 Home / Scheme to produce electronic components Why in News? The ₹22,805-crore Electronics Component Manufacturing Scheme (ECMS) aims to reduce import dependence and bridge the demand-supply gap in electronic components by supporting domestic production, especially among SMEs. Introduction The Government of India launched the Electronics Component Manufacturing Scheme (ECMS) on May 1, 2025, with a financial outlay of ₹22,805 crore.  The scheme is designed to strengthen India’s domestic capabilities in the manufacturing of electronic components and sub-assemblies, thereby reducing reliance on imports and supporting the goal of self-reliance under the Atmanirbhar Bharat initiative. Purpose of the Scheme India is rapidly growing as a global electronics manufacturing hub. However, there is a significant demand-supply deficit in the production of key electronic inputs. According to the Electronic Industries Association of India (Elcina): By the year 2030, the deficit in the supply of electronic components is projected to reach $248 billion (approximately ₹21 lakh crore). This shortfall is in the context of an anticipated $500 billion electronics production market in India. Without intervention, most of the required components would need to be imported, undermining the government’s efforts to promote domestic manufacturing. The ECMS aims to bridge this gap by encouraging the establishment and expansion of component and sub-assembly manufacturing facilities within India. Structure and Funding of the Scheme The total financial outlay of ₹22,805 crore is divided into two major categories: Category A – Sub-Assemblies Fund Allocation: ₹21,093 crore Focus: To support the manufacturing of high-value electronic sub-assemblies that go directly into final products. Eligible Products Include: Display modules (used in televisions, smartphones, and monitors) Camera modules (used in mobile phones, surveillance equipment) Multi-layered printed circuit boards (PCBs) Flexible PCBs Passive components (such as resistors and capacitors that are machine-mounted on PCBs) Category B – Bare Components and Capital Goods Fund Allocation: ₹1,712 crore Focus: To encourage the production of core components and machinery essential for electronics manufacturing. Eligible Products Include: Non-surface mount devices Bare multi-layered PCBs Lithium-ion cells (used in digital devices) IT hardware components and devices Capital goods and machinery used in the electronics manufacturing process Application Response Since applications opened on May 1, 2025, the scheme has received a strong response: Total Applications Received: 70 Duration: Within just 15 days Key Observation: According to Union Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw, 80 percent of the applications have come from small and medium enterprises (SMEs). While the minister did not disclose specific names, sources have indicated that large companies such as Tata Electronics, Dixon Technologies, and Foxconn have shown interest in the scheme. Significance of SME Participation The large share of applications from small and medium enterprises is particularly significant. It reflects: Strong interest in electronics manufacturing across the broader industry, beyond just large corporations. The potential for decentralized industrial growth, with opportunities in tier-2 and tier-3 cities. Increased scope for innovation, employment generation, and skill development. Expected Impact Development of a robust domestic ecosystem for electronics manufacturing. Reduction in import dependence, improving the country’s trade balance. Support for the Make in India and Digital India initiatives by ensuring the availability of locally manufactured, high-quality components. Decreased oxygen-carrying capacity of RBCs. Increased fragility and cell stiffness. Vascular blockage, causing pain and organ injury. Increased susceptibility to infections, anemia, and stroke. Past Illegal Allotments Invalid

RBI ‘surplus’ transfer to the government

UPSC CURRENT AFFAIRS – 19th May 2025 Home / RBI ‘surplus’ transfer to the government Why in News? The RBI transfers its annual surplus to the central government based on the Economic Capital Framework, ensuring financial stability while supporting fiscal needs. Economic Capital Framework (ECF) The Economic Capital Framework (ECF) is a mechanism used by the RBI to determine how much risk provisioning it needs to maintain (to safeguard against potential financial shocks) and how much surplus (profit) it can transfer to the government.  It ensures a balance between maintaining the RBI’s financial stability and meeting the fiscal needs of the government. Record Surplus Transfer in 2024-25 For the financial year 2024-25, the RBI is expected to transfer a record surplus in the range of Rs 2.5 lakh crore to Rs 3 lakh crore to the central government.  This follows the highest-ever transfer of Rs 2.11 lakh crore in 2023-24. Although RBI doesn’t declare a “dividend” like commercial banks, it transfers the surplus (profits) to the government annually after meeting its reserve and operational requirements. How Does the RBI Earn Profits? The RBI earns income through the following operations: Foreign Currency Assets: The RBI invests in foreign currency assets like bonds, treasury bills of other central banks, and top-rated securities. The interest or returns earned from these are part of its income. Domestic Government Securities: It earns interest from its holdings of rupee-denominated government bonds and securities. Lending to Banks: It lends money to commercial banks for short durations (such as overnight) under liquidity adjustment facilities, earning interest in the process. Management Fees: It charges the central and state governments a fee for managing their borrowings. Expenditure:RBI’s main expenditures include: Printing and distribution of currency. Staff salaries and administrative expenses. Commissions paid to banks for government transactions and to primary dealers for underwriting bond issues. Legal Basis for Surplus Transfer According to Section 47 of the RBI Act, 1934, after making provisions for: Bad and doubtful debts Depreciation of assets Staff-related funds Other customary banking provisions …the remaining surplus is transferred to the Central Government. Does the RBI Pay Tax on its Profits? No. Under Section 48 of the RBI Act, 1934, the RBI is exempt from paying: Income tax Super-tax Wealth tax This exemption applies to all profits, income, or gains earned by the central bank. Is There a Fixed Policy for Surplus Distribution? There is no explicit policy, but various committees have guided the process: Malegam Committee (2013): Recommended higher surplus transfers to the government.After its recommendations, surplus transfer as a percentage of RBI’s gross income (less expenditure) rose significantly—from 53.40% in 2012-13 to 99.99% in 2013-14. Earlier, surplus was partly retained in: Contingency Fund (CF): For unforeseen financial emergencies. Asset Development Fund (ADF): For internal capital expenditure and investments in subsidiaries. These reserves were meant to maintain RBI’s financial resilience and credibility in times of crisis. Differences Between RBI and Government The Government of India has at times argued that the RBI holds excess reserves compared to global benchmarks and has suggested that the surplus could be used for purposes like recapitalising public sector banks. The RBI, on the other hand, has emphasized the need for large reserves to: Ensure financial stability Maintain market confidence Safeguard against macroeconomic and financial risks RBI views higher reserves as a critical element of its institutional independence. Despite these occasional differences, both sides usually reach a negotiated settlement, as noted by former RBI Governor Duvvuri Subbarao. How Do Other Central Banks Handle Surplus Transfers? United Kingdom and United States: The central bank and the government mutually decide the quantum of surplus transfer. Japan: The government unilaterally decides the amount of surplus transfer. On average, surplus transfers by central banks globally amount to around 0.5% of GDP, though this can vary by country and context. Decreased oxygen-carrying capacity of RBCs. Increased fragility and cell stiffness. Vascular blockage, causing pain and organ injury. Increased susceptibility to infections, anemia, and stroke. Past Illegal Allotments Invalid

1991 K. Veeraswami judgment in news

UPSC CURRENT AFFAIRS – 21th May 2025 Home / 1991 K. Veeraswami judgment in news Why in News? Vice President Jagdeep Dhankar has called for revisiting the 1991 K. Veeraswami vs Union of India judgment, citing it as the origin of judicial corruption and a hurdle to registering FIRs against High Court and Supreme Court judges. Key Highlights of the Case: Who was K. Veeraswami? Former Chief Justice of Madras High Court (1969–1976). FIR registered by the CBI in 1976 for possessing disproportionate assets under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.   Timeline of Legal Proceedings: 1976–1977: CBI filed FIR and chargesheet. 1978: Veeraswami challenged the prosecution in Madras High Court. 1979: Full Bench of Madras HC (2:1) rejected the plea. 1991: Supreme Court upheld the prosecution in a 4:1 majority decision.   Supreme Court Judgment (1991): Judges of High Courts and the Supreme Court are covered under the definition of ‘public servant’ under the PC Act. Sanction required for prosecution of sitting judges. Consultation with the Chief Justice of India (CJI) is mandatory before: Filing an FIR. Granting sanction for prosecution. If CJI is accused, consult other senior judges of the SC. Dissenting Opinion (Justice J.S. Verma): Judges of higher judiciary should be excluded from the PC Act. Called for a new law for corruption cases involving constitutional authorities. Important Points: Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (now replaced by PC Act, 1988): A central anti-corruption law. Requires sanction to prosecute public servants. Public Servant under PC Act: Includes judges, making them liable for prosecution with procedural safeguards. Sanctioning Authority: The President of India is the authority, acting in consultation with the CJI. Judicial Immunity vs Accountability: The case raised critical questions about balancing judicial independence with legal accountability. Current Relevance (2025): The Delhi cash-on-fire case at the residence of Justice Yashwant Varma has reignited concerns over procedural hurdles in prosecuting judges. Issues & Challenges Identified in Implementing the Veeraswami Judgment Ambiguity in Sanctioning Authority The judgment designates the President as the competent authority to grant sanction for prosecution, but the President acts on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers. This creates uncertainty and potential executive influence in matters concerning judicial accountability. Delay in FIR Registration The mandatory requirement to consult the Chief Justice of India (CJI) before even registering an FIR against a sitting judge leads to procedural delays. This may obstruct timely investigation and undermine public trust in judicial impartiality. Threat to Separation of Powers Involving the executive (through the President) in sanctioning prosecutions against judges risks interference with judicial independence, violating the doctrine of separation of powers. Lack of an Independent Oversight Mechanism India lacks a dedicated, independent body to examine corruption or misconduct complaints against judges of higher judiciary. The internal ‘in-house mechanism’ of the judiciary is non-statutory, opaque, and not subject to public scrutiny or external audit. Way Forward: Revisit 1991 Guidelines: As suggested by the Vice President, to ensure transparency and accountability without compromising judicial independence. New Legislation: May be needed for dealing with misconduct at the highest levels of the judiciary. Strengthen Internal Judicial Mechanisms: To handle corruption allegations without delay. Decreased oxygen-carrying capacity of RBCs. Increased fragility and cell stiffness. Vascular blockage, causing pain and organ injury. Increased susceptibility to infections, anemia, and stroke. Past Illegal Allotments Invalid

IMF Sets 11 New Conditions for Pakistan

UPSC CURRENT AFFAIRS – 19th May 2025 Home / IMF Sets 11 New Conditions for Pakistan Why in News? The IMF has imposed 11 new conditions on Pakistan, raising the total to 50, linking further bailout disbursal to fiscal reforms, energy tariff hikes, and governance improvements amidst rising India-Pakistan tensions. Background Pakistan is currently under an IMF bailout programme due to its severe balance of payments crisis, low foreign exchange reserves, and unsustainable debt burden.  The IMF provides financial support in tranches, but in return, it imposes strict conditions to ensure reforms that stabilize the economy and ensure debt repayment capacity. Recently, the IMF has imposed 11 new conditions, increasing the total to 50 conditions, as a requirement for the release of the next tranche of the bailout fund. IMF – Key Facts The International Monetary Fund (IMF) was established in 1944 at the Bretton Woods Conference to promote global monetary cooperation and financial stability. The IMF is headquartered in Washington, D.C., USA, and currently has 190 member countries (as of 2024), including India. India is a founding member of the IMF, having joined it in 1945. IMF provides short- to medium-term financial assistance to countries facing balance of payments crises, with conditional policy reform measures. IMF voting power is quota-based, and a country’s quota is determined using a formula that includes GDP, openness, economic variability, and foreign exchange reserves. Quotas determine three things: a country’s voting power, access to IMF resources, and allocation of Special Drawing Rights (SDRs). Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) are the IMF’s international reserve asset and unit of account, valued based on a basket of five major currencies (USD, EUR, CNY, JPY, GBP). India holds about 2.75% of total IMF voting power, ranking among the top 10 countries. The IMF conducts regular economic surveillance and publishes reports like the World Economic Outlook (WEO) and Global Financial Stability Report (GFSR). In India, the Department of Economic Affairs (Ministry of Finance) handles IMF relations. IMF reforms and quota realignment are ongoing demands from emerging economies like India to reflect current global economic realities. Unlike the World Bank, the IMF does not fund infrastructure projects; it focuses on macroeconomic stability and liquidity support. Key IMF Conditions Imposed on Pakistan Here is a breakdown of the 11 new IMF conditions: Parliamentary Approval of Budget (FY 2026) Pakistan must pass a ₹17.6 trillion federal budget in parliament. This includes ₹1.07 trillion for development spending. The budget must align with IMF programme targets by the end of June 2025. Increase in Electricity Surcharge The government must remove the cap of ₹3.21 per unit on the debt servicing surcharge on electricity bills. This means consumers may face higher electricity bills to compensate for inefficiencies in the power sector. The legislation for this must be passed by the end of June 2025. Import Policy Change – Used Cars The IMF wants Pakistan to lift the restriction on the import of used cars that are more than three years old. The government must allow commercial import of used vehicles up to five years old. All relevant legislation must be submitted to Parliament by the end of July 2025. Agriculture Income Tax by Provinces The four provinces must implement new Agriculture Income Tax laws through: An operational platform for processing returns Taxpayer identification and registration systems Public awareness campaign Compliance improvement measures Deadline: June 2025. Governance Action Plan The government must publish a governance reform plan based on the IMF’s Governance Diagnostic Assessment. The objective is to address weaknesses in public financial management and accountability. Financial Sector Strategy Post-2027 A new plan must be developed and published outlining the financial sector framework from 2028 onward, including: Regulatory environment Institutional arrangements Long-term reform goals Electricity Tariff Rebasing Government must issue notifications for annual rebasing of electricity tariffs by July 1, 2025. This ensures that energy prices reflect actual costs, discouraging losses in the sector. Gas Tariff Adjustment A semi-annual gas tariff adjustment must be implemented by February 15, 2026 to align tariffs with cost recovery. Captive Power Levy Legislation Parliament must pass legislation to make the captive power levy (currently imposed through ordinance) permanent by the end of May 2025. This measure pushes industries to shift from private generation to the national electricity grid. Removal of Industrial Zone Incentives The IMF has required Pakistan to phase out all tax and policy incentives for Special Technology Zones and Industrial Parks by 2035. A detailed plan for this must be prepared by the end of 2025. External Risk Warning – India-Pakistan Tensions The IMF report notes that rising tensions with India, especially following Operation Sindoor and missile exchanges, threaten the success of the IMF programme. Tensions could derail fiscal targets, external stability, and reform implementation. Defence Spending Context The IMF report lists Pakistan’s defence budget for the next fiscal year as ₹2.414 trillion (12% higher than previous year). However, government estimates show it could exceed ₹2.5 trillion (an 18% increase), especially after recent hostilities with India. Conclusion The IMF is pushing Pakistan for deep structural reforms, better governance, transparency, and fiscal discipline.  However, the rising geopolitical tensions with India and the increased defence spending pose risks to the successful implementation of these reforms.  The conditions also place heavy socio-economic burdens on the Pakistani public, especially in the energy and taxation sectors. Decreased oxygen-carrying capacity of RBCs. Increased fragility and cell stiffness. Vascular blockage, causing pain and organ injury. Increased susceptibility to infections, anemia, and stroke. Past Illegal Allotments Invalid

What is a Presidential reference?

UPSC CURRENT AFFAIRS – 20th May 2025 Home / What is a Presidential reference? Why in News? President Droupadi Murmu has referred constitutional questions to the Supreme Court under Article 143 regarding the powers and timelines for Presidential and Gubernatorial assent to State Bills. Historical Context of Article 143 The advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 143 is rooted in colonial-era constitutional law: Government of India Act, 1935: It allowed the Governor-General to refer questions of law to the Federal Court for its opinion. This was intended to provide legal clarity on matters of governance and public interest.   Adopted in Indian Constitution: Post-Independence, Article 143 was included to provide a non-binding advisory role to the Supreme Court on matters of law or fact of public importance, as advised by the Council of Ministers.   Comparative Perspectives: Canada: Similar provision exists in the Canadian Constitution. The Supreme Court of Canada can give advisory opinions on legal questions referred by federal or provincial governments.   USA: The U.S. Supreme Court does not entertain advisory opinions, respecting the doctrine of strict separation of powers. Only actual “cases and controversies” are adjudicated. Provisions under Article 143 Article 143 – Advisory Jurisdiction        It has two clauses: Article 143(1): The President may refer to the Supreme Court any question of law or fact of public importance for its opinion. Article 143(2): Specifically applies to disputes arising out of pre-constitutional treaties or agreements, mostly obsolete now. Article 145: Prescribes that a minimum five-judge bench hears such a reference. Nature of the Opinion: The opinion is not binding on the President or the executive. It does not create precedent for future cases, unlike judgments under Articles 32 or 136. However, it has high persuasive value and is generally respected and followed by both the executive and judiciary. Past Instances of Presidential References Since 1950, about 15 Presidential references have been made. Some important ones include: Case Year Significance Delhi Laws Act Case 1951 Laid down principles of delegated legislation. Kerala Education Bill 1958 Balanced Fundamental Rights vs Directive Principles; clarified minority rights under Article 30. Berubari Case 1960 Held that cession of territory requires constitutional amendment under Article 368. Keshav Singh Case 1965 Explained powers and privileges of State legislatures. Presidential Poll Reference 1974 Stated that elections can continue despite vacancies in State Assemblies. Special Courts Bill 1978 Established that the Court may decline vague references and must respect separation of powers. Cauvery Water Dispute 1992 Held that SC cannot sit in appeal over earlier judgments in advisory capacity. Third Judges Case 1998 Explained collegium system; laid down procedure for appointment of judges. Ram Janmabhoomi Reference 1993 Only instance where the Supreme Court declined to answer, citing lack of clarity and political sensitivity. The Current Reference (2024-25) Trigger for the Reference: The Supreme Court, in a recent judgment, set timelines for: The President and Governors to act on Bills passed by State legislatures. Held that their actions are justiciable and can be subject to judicial review. Government’s Concerns:​ The President, acting on the advice of the Union Cabinet, has referred 14 legal questions to the Supreme Court.These include: Can the court prescribe timelines for the President or Governors where the Constitution is silent? Is the President’s/Governor’s decision on a Bill justiciable before it becomes law? To what extent can the Supreme Court exercise powers under Article 142 (complete justice)? Whether the executive action during a pending Bill can be reviewed? Context of the Conflict:​ Increasing friction between the Union Government and Opposition-ruled State governments. Some Governors have delayed action on State Bills. SC criticized delays and adopted Home Ministry’s Office Memorandum to set a time limit. Objective of the Reference: To seek constitutional clarity on: The scope of judicial review over the President/Governor’s discretion. Whether courts can mandate timelines when none exist in the Constitution. Federal balance and coordination in a constitutional democracy. Importance of the Current Reference Clarification will determine: The boundaries of judicial intervention in executive discretion. The federal character of Indian polity. The principle of constitutional governance and accountability.   The issue touches upon fundamental principles of: Separation of powers Democratic decision-making Judicial activism vs restraint Decreased oxygen-carrying capacity of RBCs. Increased fragility and cell stiffness. Vascular blockage, causing pain and organ injury. Increased susceptibility to infections, anemia, and stroke. Past Illegal Allotments Invalid

PM inaugurates 103 Amrit Bharat railway stations

UPSC CURRENT AFFAIRS – 23th May 2025 Home / PM inaugurates 103 Amrit Bharat railway stations Why in News? Prime Minister Narendra Modi inaugurated 103 Amrit Bharat railway stations across 18 States/UTs to promote modern infrastructure and regional heritage under the Amrit Bharat Station Scheme (ABSS). Background 103 Amrit Bharat railway stations located in 86 districts across 18 States and Union Territories, have been redeveloped at a cost of over ₹1,100 crore under the Amrit Bharat Station Scheme (ABSS), aimed at transforming Indian Railways’ station infrastructure to enhance passenger experience. Key Highlights Amrit Bharat Station Scheme (ABSS): Part of Indian Railways’ long-term vision to modernise over 1,300 stations. Emphasises blending modern infrastructure with local heritage and art.           Examples: Mandalgarh (Rajasthan): Showcases Rajput architectural traditions. Thawe (Bihar): Displays Madhubani art and devotion to Maa Thawewali. Orchha (Madhya Pradesh): Embodies the divinity of Lord Ram. Srirangam (Tamil Nadu): Inspired by Dravidian temple architecture. Dakor (Gujarat): Reflects reverence to Ranchhodrai ji. Tiruvannamalai (Tamil Nadu) and Begumpet (Telangana): Highlight regional architectural heritage. Railway Development in Rajasthan: PM Modi inaugurated projects worth ₹26,000 crore in Rajasthan and flagged off a new train service from Bikaner to Mumbai. The Central government plans to invest nearly ₹10,000 crore in Rajasthan’s railway development in FY 2025–26, a 15-fold increase over pre-2014 levels. Employment and Tourism Boost: Redeveloped stations serve as catalysts for tourism and employment generation, especially in heritage-rich locations. The PM urged citizens to ensure cleanliness and safety at the newly upgraded stations. Broader Railway Modernisation Efforts Vande Bharat, Amrit Bharat & Namo Bharat Trains: Introduction of modern, semi-high-speed trains to enhance rail travel quality and regional connectivity. 70 Vande Bharat routes are currently operational, connecting remote areas with faster, efficient transport. Infrastructure Achievements (2014–2025): Over 34,000 km of new railway tracks were laid. Unmanned level crossings on broad gauge lines eliminated. Construction of hundreds of road overbridges and underbridges for improved safety and mobility. Dedicated Freight Corridors (DFCs) under development for seamless cargo movement. Ongoing work on India’s first bullet train project between Mumbai and Ahmedabad. Significance and Implications Modernisation of railway stations under the Amrit Bharat Station Scheme (ABSS) is a key step toward building world-class infrastructure in India. Reflects a shift from routine maintenance to comprehensive redevelopment, improving functionality, aesthetics, and efficiency. Boost to Local Economies and Tourism- Stations are designed to reflect local art, architecture, and culture, creating regional identity and attracting tourists. Enhances the potential of heritage tourism Redevelopment projects are labour-intensive, providing short-term employment during construction and long-term jobs in hospitality, tourism, and maintenance sectors. Upgraded stations will offer better amenities such as clean waiting areas, improved lighting, digital displays, and enhanced safety features. Facilities will cater to the elderly, differently-abled, and women, improving inclusivity in public infrastructure. Conclusion The inauguration of Amrit Bharat stations and related railway development projects signify a paradigm shift in Indian Railways—from transport utility to economic catalyst and cultural symbol. These projects reflect India’s vision of building a modern, inclusive, and sustainable railway ecosystem that supports economic growth, social mobility, and national integration.

Why India needs stable urban forests

UPSC CURRENT AFFAIRS – 23th May 2025 Home / Why India needs stable urban forests Why in News? The Supreme Court intervened to protect Hyderabad’s Kancha Gachibowli urban forest, highlighting the critical role of urban forests in sustainable city development and environmental governance. Introduction Urban forests, often the last bastions of green cover in rapidly growing Indian cities, are facing an existential crisis.  The recent case of Kancha Gachibowli in Hyderabad, where 400 acres were earmarked for industrial development, exemplifies the growing conflict between environmental conservation and urban expansion. The Supreme Court’s intervention, following the felling of 100 acres of trees, brought national attention to the importance of preserving urban forests amidst development pressures. Significance of Urban Forests Urban forests — such as Aarey in Mumbai, Turahalli in Bengaluru, Neela Hauz and the Delhi Ridge, and Dol Ka Baadh in Jaipur — play a pivotal role in sustaining urban ecosystems and enhancing the quality of urban life. They serve multiple environmental, health, and social functions: Environmental Protection: They reduce the urban heat island effect, mitigate climate change, absorb pollutants, and control stormwater runoff, erosion, and flooding. Air Quality Management: With urban AQI levels soaring — Delhi reported an AQI of 494 in November 2024 — green spaces act as natural air filters. As per a 2006 USDA study, one hectare of trees can remove up to one ton of air pollutants annually. Biodiversity Conservation: Urban forests provide crucial habitats for endangered flora and fauna, ensuring ecological balance within city limits. Cultural and Social Value: These forests offer spaces for recreation, relaxation, and community engagement, fostering a nature-sensitive urban culture. The Role of Judicial Interventions India’s judicial system has played a vital role in safeguarding urban forests: Godavarman Case (1996): Expanded the legal definition of forests, enabling protection of urban green spaces. Supreme Court Orders (2004): Directed all States to identify and map forested areas. Delhi Ridge Protection (2015): The Delhi High Court ordered notification and protection of the ecologically sensitive Aravalli wildlife corridor. Save Aarey Movement (2020): The apex court stayed tree felling in Mumbai following public outcry. Baran, Rajasthan (2024): The Rajasthan High Court took suo motu cognisance of illegal tree felling in biodiversity-rich areas. These rulings reinforce the constitutional provisions: Article 21: Right to life includes the right to a healthy environment. Article 48A: Mandates the State to protect and improve the environment. Article 51A(g): Places a fundamental duty on citizens to protect the natural environment. The Way Forward India’s urbanisation must not come at the cost of environmental degradation. The threat to urban forests signifies a larger crisis affecting our biomedical, social, and cultural well-being. Citizens, civil society, judiciary, and the State must work collaboratively to: Ensure legal protection of all identified urban forests. Integrate green cover targets in urban development plans. Promote public awareness and community stewardship. Strengthen implementation of environmental laws and urban forestry programmes.