News & Editorial Analysis 14 January 2023

News & Editorial Analysis 14 January 2023

The Hindu News Analysis

1.The ‘One Sun, One World, One Grid’ Initiative

GS III Topic Conservation related issues:


India has been looking to expand the scope of the ‘One Sun, One World, One Grid’ Initiative. A meeting was held recently for the same.

About the program:

The plan brings together the International Solar Alliance and the UK green grid system and is in line with India’s focus on solar energy use.

The grid will be established in the next few years by the International Solar Alliance (ISA), another Indian-approved initiative, to carry forward solar power initiatives to various countries.

The vision behind OSOWOG is ‘The Sun Does Not Rise’ and is always present, worldwide, at any time.


The Ministerial Steering Group will work to accelerate the construction of large solar power stations and wind farms in the best of locations, connected together by continental grids across national borders.

The Ministerial Steering Group comprises France, India, the United Kingdom and the United States, and will consist of representatives from Africa, the Gulf, Latin America, and Southeast Asia.

Benefits of the program:

With one global grid, we can access clean energy in all areas.

The need to conserve energy will decrease, and the efficiency of solar projects will increase.

India will generate 40% of energy from non-fossil fuels by 2030 and has demanded that the solar power supply be linked to the borders that provide the mantra of ‘One World One Sun One Grid’.

The proposed merger will result in a reduction in project costs, higher efficiency and increased asset utilization for all participating organizations.

This plan will only require additional investment as it will not require compatible grid infrastructure due to working with existing grids.

It will assist all stakeholders in attracting investment in renewable energy sources and the utilization of skills, technology and finance.

The effects of economic benefits can have a positive impact on poverty alleviation and support in reducing water, sanitation, food and other socio-economic challenges.

It will allow India’s national renewable energy management to grow as regional and international administrative institutions.

2.The Anticipatory Bail

GS II Topic Constitutional Provisions:

Why in News:

The Supreme Court held that a superior court could set aside the expected bail order if there was sufficient evidence to suggest that matters such as the size and role of the defendants in the case were not considered by the lower court.

About the Anticipatory Bail:

The granting of the anticipatory bail under Section 438 was introduced when the CrPC was amended in 1973.

Contrary to the usual bail, granted to an arrested person, on pending bail, a person is ordered to be released on bail even before arrest under the Anticipatory Bail.

Time frame:

High Court (SC) in the case of Sushila Aggarwal v. The State of NCT of Delhi (2020) has issued a landmark decision, declaring that no time limit may be set for the expected bail application and may continue until the end of the case.

It is issued only by the Sessions Court and the High Court.


The reason for the inclusion of Section 438 in the Act was the adoption by parliament of the fundamental principle of human liberty in a free and democratic country.

Parliament wishes to promote respect for personal freedom and allow for a higher position in the basic law of criminal justice, so that everyone is considered innocent until proven guilty.

Recent observations made by the Supreme Court on its use:

HCs and SCs are empowered to grant the accused the anticipatory bail due to the mandate that the Constitution places on the right to freedom guaranteed under Article 21.

The granting or refusal of an application under the CrPC directly affects the right to life and liberty of the individual.

Therefore, the provision needs to be read openly, and considered in its beneficial nature.

Courts should not read about the restrictions that the legislature did not give explicitly.

In doing so, the Supreme Court may exercise its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution to pass that order.

The need for such protection:

The respondent, without being a suspect, may also be the primary caregiver or sole breadwinner.
His imprisonment could leave his loved ones in a state of famine and neglect.

In the 1980 case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs State of Punjab, a five-judge panel of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice YV Chandrachud ruled that 438 (1) should be interpreted in accordance with Article 21 of the Constitution (protection of health and personal freedom).

3.Jal Jeevan Mission

GS III Topic Conservation related issues:

About the Jal Jeevan Mission:

JJM envisages supply of 55 litres of water per person per day to every rural household through Functional Household Tap Connections (FHTC) by 2024.

It is under the Ministry of Jal Shakti.

It was launched in 2019.

The mission ensures:

Functionality of existing water supply systems and water connections.

Water quality monitoring and testing as well as sustainable agriculture.

Conjunctive use of conserved water.Drinking water source augmentation.

Drinking water supply system, grey water treatment and its reuse.

It also encompasses:

Prioritizing provision of FHTCs in quality affected areas, villages in drought prone and desert areas, Sansad Adarsh Gram Yojana (SAGY) villages, etc.

Providing functional tap connection to Schools, Anganwadi centres, Gram Panchayat buildings, Health centres, wellness centres and community buildings.

Technological interventions for removal of contaminants where water quality is an issue.


The Mission is based on a community approach to water and includes extensive Information, Education and Communication as a key component of the mission

JJM looks to create a jan andolan for water, thereby making it everyone’s priority

The fund sharing pattern between the Centre and states is 90:10 for Himalayan and North-Eastern States, 50:50 for other states, and 100% for Union Territories.

Performance of the scheme:

As on date, tap water supply has been provided in 772,000 (76 per cent) schools and 748,000 (67.5 per cent) anganwadi centres.

Prelims Hot-Link:

Mission goal.


Fund allocation

4.Central Zoo Authority

Prelims Specific Topic:

Why in the News:

The central zoo authority held a meeting recently to take steps for better conservation of wildlifes in the zoos of India.

About the Central Zoo Authority (CZA):

It is the official body that controls zoos in India.

It was founded in 1992.

The main objective of the Authority is to complement and strengthen national efforts to conserve the country’s rich ecosystem, especially wildlife, in line with the 1998 Zoo policy.

Key activities:

It enforces the minimum standards and practices for the protecting and caring of animals.

Every zoo in the country needs to get CZA recognition for its set-up and functioning.

#One_Sun_One_World_One_Grid #Initiative #GSIII #Conservation #Related #Issues #Program #Implementation #Benefits #Anticipatory #Bail #GSII #Constitutional #Provisions #Time_Frame #Significance #Recent #Observations #Supreme #Court #Use #Need #Protection #Jal_Jeevan_Mission #Conservation #Issues #Water_Per_Person_Per_Day #Every #Rural #Household #Functional_Household_Tap_Connections #FHTC #Ministry #Jal_Shakti #Mission #Ensures #Encompasses #Performance #Prelims #Hot_Link #Central_Zoo_Authority #CZA #Specific #Key #Activities #India #World #Daily #The_Hindu_Analysis #IAS #UPSC #Stact_PSC #Prelims #Mains #GeoIAS

The Hindu Editorial Analysis

More Than Just An Address


Due to differences about the speech’s content, Tamil Nadu’s governor R N Ravi recently left the state legislature during his inaugural speech.

About the address:

At the beginning of each year’s first session of Parliament, the President is required by Article 87 of the Indian Constitution to make a special speech to both Houses that are in session. The President must inform the Parliament of the purpose for the request for the meeting.

Similar to this, Article 176 requires that the Governor give a special statement to both Houses at the beginning of each State Legislative Assembly every year whenever the State also has a Legislative Council. The language of these clauses was directly copied from the House of Commons’ rules.

Jawaharlal Nehru asserted in the Lok Sabha in 1960 that the President’s address is nothing more than a statement of the government’s agenda. “If there is something wrong or unpleasant in the President’s address, it is the government that is to fault, not the President,” he added, adding that “honourable Members are free to criticise or denounce government because there is some such statement in it that they disapprove of.”

The Calcutta High Court ruled in the Syed Abdul Mansur Habibullah case (1966) that the special address is more than just a ceremonial politeness. It updates the members on the legislative and executive agendas of the State government. The High Court added that the absence of the special address hinders parliamentary debates and budgetary objections.

About the Address of Governor in India:

Both the United Kingdom and India have a long-standing constitutional tradition that the speech or special address that announces the policies that an elected administration proposes to pursue to the nation or the State must be read precisely by the King, the President, or the Governor. There has never been an instance in the United Kingdom where the monarch changed the content of his address.

The Governor of Tamil Nadu, R.N. Ravi, made constitutional history in the State by omitting some lines and departing from the official text of his special address during the opening of the Legislative Assembly of Tamil Nadu for 2023.

It’s interesting that during the discussions in the Constituent Assembly, Professor K.T. Shah proposed amending Article 87 to allow the President to address “other particular policy concerns he considers acceptable for such address” as well. This amendment was rejected due to B.R. Ambedkar’s contention that in order for the President to address either or both Houses of Parliament at the same time under Article 86, Parliament must be in session.

The Governor was given comparable power under Article 175 of the Constitution. Therefore, when an independent power is constituted pursuant to Article 175 of the Constitution, it would be extremely wrong for any Governor (or even the President) to omit significant paragraphs from the address made by the existing administration.

The guiding principles of the Constitution have been deemed by the Supreme Court to be just as significant as its text. Furthermore, it is commonly acknowledged that sustaining constitutional morality means abiding by both constitutional customs and the Constitution’s actual text. By filling in the gaps left by a written Constitution, these agreements encourage effective cooperation between the legislative, executive, and judicial arms of government.

Article 361 of the Constitution provides the governor with complete immunity from any legal action since our founding fathers intended for governors to meet the highest standards of decency and appropriateness. It is concerning that governors routinely flout crucial constitutional tenets in states where opposition parties are in power.

In Manipur and Goa, the single largest party was not invited to form a government; in Tamil Nadu, bills passed by the elected legislature were purposefully delayed; in Kerala, the Governor and the ruling party are still at odds; and in West Bengal, the Governor and the ruling party have previously clashed. These are just a few troubling examples that have gone uncriticized.

Governor’s accountability:

Important constitutional requirements, such as the Governor’s special address, are carried out with the support and advice of the Council of Ministers, which is chaired by the Chief Minister.

A senior statesman who provides gravitas to this high position, the Governor’s constitutional duty is to support, defend, and preserve the Constitution and the law. He is also required to do so by his oath.

Residents of Raj Bhavan should be above party politics and refrain from interfering with the work of a state administration that has been duly elected. Our Constitution’s strength is demonstrated by the fact that it has persisted for more than 70 years and continues to serve as the steel framework of India’s republican democracy.

This structure could, however, be undermined and destroyed by hasty constitutional amendments and blatant constitutional infractions. The hazard is considerably greater because no one can predict when the tipping point will come.


Parliament should examine the function of governors and suggest necessary revisions to guarantee that state assemblies function effectively and that strong federal linkages are maintained. The Governor’s office has undergone various changes as a result of the Sarkaria and Punchhi commissions. These could be used and examined.

#More #Than #Just #An_Address #Governor #Accountability #India #World #Daily #The_Hindu_Editorial_Analysis #IAS #UPSC #Stact_PSC #Prelims #Mains #GeoIAS

The Indian Express Editorial Analysis

Centre VS Delhi Government On Control Over Services

Present circumstances:

A five-judge Supreme Court Constitution Bench is hearing a recent dispute between the Delhi government and the Center regarding service control.

Nearly five years ago, a similar issue led to a ruling in favour of the state government led by the Aam Aadmi Party.

The present situation:

In response to the Center’s argument, a three-judge bench led by former CJI N V Ramana had referred this issue to a larger Bench on May 20, 2022. The three-judge Bench had determined that the matter of control over administrative services required “further examination.” A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) D Y Chandrachud has been established to hear the dispute between the Centre and the Delhi government regarding issues pertaining to control over the transfers and the overall operation of administrative services in the National Capital Territory (NCT) of Delhi.

Article 239AA(3) (a):

In response to the recommendations of the S Balakrishnan Committee, which was constituted in 1987 to look into Delhi’s statehood claims, the 69th Amendment Act, 1991 inserted Article 239 AA to the Constitution and gave Delhi Special Status.

The NCT of Delhi will have an Administrator in addition to a Legislative Assembly, according to this Article.

With the exception of laws governing land, public order, and police, the Legislative Assembly “shall have the power to make laws for the whole or any part of the NCT with respect to any of the matters in the State List or Concurrent List in so far as any such matter is applicable to Union territories,” subject to the provisions of the Constitution.

The following constitutional provisions apply to the current situation:

The Center asked for a referral to a larger Bench on April 27, 2022, saying that as Delhi is the capital and “face of the nation,” it needs permission to transfer and post staff there.

The court came to the conclusion that, in accordance with Article 145(3) of the Constitution, a Constitution Bench would need to render a firm decision on the particular issue of the range of the legislative and executive functions of the Center and NCT of Delhi with regard to the term “services.”

The Constitution’s Article 239 AA(3)(a), which deals with unique rules for the NCT of Delhi, was the key point of contention, according to the court.

According to the court’s judgement dated May 6, the Constitution Bench of this Court did not have an opportunity to carefully analyse the consequences of the phrasing of Article 239AA(3)(a) with regard to Entry 41 in the State List (State public services; State Public Service Commission).

In line with Article 145(3), a Constitution Bench comprised of at least five judges must be created “for the purpose of considering any issue presenting a substantial point of law as to the interpretation” of the Constitution.

After a two-judge bench split on the subject of services, the case was previously handled by a three-judge panel.

Earlier rulings on this case:

Following the 2019 split ruling, the case was listed before the CJI so that it could be heard once again. Split choices are rare, although they do happen occasionally. The matter is reheard by a larger Bench that the CJI has convened where there is a split decision.

Justice Sikri disagreed, saying that while “for other levels, including DANICS (Delhi, Andaman and Nicobar Islands Civil Service) officers, the files can be submitted to the Lieutenant Governor through the DANICS,” “transfers and postings of Secretaries, HODs and other officers in the scale of Joint Secretary to the Government of India and above can be done by the Lieutenant Governor and the file submitted to him directly” (Delhi, Andaman and Nicobar Islands Civil Service)

The 2019 ruling also addressed five other issues regarding the Delhi government’s Anti-Corruption Branch’s ability to investigate corruption charges involving federal government workers and name commissions of inquiry. The power struggle gave rise to these problems.

2018’s ruling:

A five-judge bench that includes then-CJI Dipak Misra and Justices Sikri, Bhushan, A. M. Khanwilkar, and (now CJI) Chandrachud interpreted Article 239AA of the Constitution in 2018, which has particular provisions for the national capital.

The court created broad limits for Delhi’s administration, ruling that while the city cannot become a state, the LG’s power can be restricted because he lacks “independent decision-making ability” and must operate under the support and direction of the elected government.

The Constitution Bench further concurred that, save from situations in which he is permitted to exercise his own discretion, the Lieutenant Governor must always act in accordance with the advice and recommendations of the Council of Ministers.

The LG is only allowed to make decisions about land, law enforcement, and public order, according to the court, who further stipulated that he must seek the council of ministers’ advice and help when making decisions regarding any other topics.

#Centre #VS #Delhi #Government #Control #Over #Services #Present #Circumstances #Present #Situation #Article_239AA_3_a #Constitutional #Provisions #Apply #Current #Situation #Earlier #Rulings #Case #2018 #Ruling #India #World #Daily #The_Indian_Express_Editorial_Analysis #IAS #UPSC #Stact_PSC #Prelims #Mains #GeoIAS

WEBSITE                                     :

FACEBOOK                                   :

INSTAGRAM                                 :

TWITTER                                      :

EMAIL ID                                      :

TELEGRAM                                    :

MOBILE APP                                 :

YOUTUBE                                      :

FORONLINE/OFFLINE CLASSES   :      +91  9477560001,  9477560002

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *