Content Judicial Removal (Impeachment of Judges) in India Water Bankruptcy & the Case for Water Accounting Judicial Removal (Impeachment of Judges) in India Context Trigger Renewed debate following failed / stalled removal attempts against higher judiciary judges despite serious allegations . Recent References Parliamentary discussions and legal commentary highlighting procedural roadblocks under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. Rising concerns about accountability deficit in higher judiciary. Raises tension between judicial independence vs accountability. Relevance   GS II – Polity & Governance Judicial accountability vs judicial independence Constitutional mechanisms for removal of judges Separation of powers & checks and balances Role of Parliament and Presiding Officers Institutional reforms in judiciary Practice Question “The impeachment mechanism for judges in India prioritises independence over accountability.”Critically examine the statement in the light of constitutional provisions and recent debates.(250 Words) Conceptual & Static Foundation Core Concept Judicial Removal : A constitutional mechanism to remove a judge of the Supreme Court or High Court on grounds of: Proved misbehaviour Incapacity Constitutional Basis Article 124(4) – Supreme Court judges Article 217(1)(b) – High Court judges Statutory Framework Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 + Judges (Inquiry) Rules, 1969 Historical Evolution Constituent Assembly Intentionally made removal difficult to protect judicial independence. Post-1950Justice Soumitra Sen (2011) – resigned before final removal. Trend Shift from moral authority of judiciary → demand for institutional accountability. Constitutional & Legal Dimensions Key Articles Article 124(4): Removal by Parliament with special majority. Article 124(5): Parliament empowered to regulate procedure. Procedure Motion signed by: 100 MPs (Lok Sabha) or 50 MPs (Rajya Sabha) Admission by Speaker / Chairman 3-member Inquiry Committee: SC judge HC Chief Justice Distinguished jurist Supreme Court Interpretation C. Ravichandran Iyer v. Justice A.M. Bhattacharjee (1995): High ethical standards expected; impeachment is not sole accountability mechanism. Separation of Powers Issue Presiding officer’s discretionary power creates a constitutional grey zone. Governance & Administrative Dimensions Institutional Actors Parliament (political threshold) Presiding Officers (Speaker / Vice-President) Inquiry Committee (quasi-judicial) Key Governance Gap No obligation on Speaker/Chairman to: Admit motion Provide reasons for rejection Coordination Issue Judiciary investigates itself → perception of bias. Result Accountability becomes procedurally hostage to political discretion. Economic Dimensions Indirect Economic Impact Weak judicial accountability: Undermines investor confidence Affects contract enforcement Increases litigation uncertainty World Bank (Rule of Law Index logic) Judicial credibility directly correlates with ease of doing business and economic growth. Social, Ethical & Equity Dimensions Ethical Concerns Judges exercising power over citizens without effective removal threat. Impact on Vulnerable Groups Victims of judicial misconduct (women, litigants) face: No external redress Closed institutional processes Constitutional Values Article 14 (Equality before law) Article 21 (Due process, dignity) SDG Link SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions Security / Technology Dimensions Security Angle Loss of public faith can fuel: Institutional distrust Democratic erosion Technology Absence of transparent digital disclosure mechanisms for complaints. Data & Evidence Zero judges removed through full impeachment since 1950. Over 5 impeachment motions moved; most failed at admission stage. Special Majority Requirement: Majority of total membership + 2/3rd of members present & voting. Judicial Vacancies: Over 25–30% vacancies in High Courts (Law Ministry data), amplifying institutional stress. Challenges, Gaps & Criticisms Structural / Institutional Issues Over-concentration of power in Speaker/Chairman. Judiciary effectively judging its own members. Implementation & Design Issues No time-limit for: Admission of motion Completion of inquiry Extremely high political threshold discourages MPs. Expert / Committee Criticism ARC (2nd ARC, Ethics in Governance): Recommended independent judicial oversight mechanism. Legal Scholars Impeachment is a “dead letter”—symbolic, not functional. Way Forward  Procedural Reforms Speaker/Chairman should record written reasons for admission/rejection. Statutory time-bound stages for inquiry. Institutional Reform Establish Judicial Complaints Commission (revive NJAC-like accountability without compromising independence). Transparency Annual public report on judicial complaints (anonymised). Ethical Safeguards Strong in-house mechanisms with external oversight. Constitutional Balance Accountability without executive dominance. Prelims Pointers  Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 governs impeachment procedure. Special majority required in both Houses. Presiding officer not constitutionally bound to admit motion. “Proved misbehaviour” is not defined in the Constitution. No impeachment possible after judge’s resignation. Water Bankruptcy & the Case for Water Accounting Context Trigger Editorial discourse on “Water bankruptcy” highlighting unsustainable water extraction amid climate shocks. Context India facing simultaneous floods, droughts, groundwater depletion, and water quality collapse. Climate change amplifying hydrological extremes. Relevance GS I – Geography Water resources Climate change and hydrological extremes Human–environment interaction GS III – Environment & Economy Water security and food security Agricultural sustainability Climate adaptation Natural resource management Practice Question What is meant by “water bankruptcy”? Explain how climate change and governance failures are accelerating water stress in India.(250 Words) Conceptual & Static Foundation Core Concept Water Bankruptcy A structural condition where water withdrawals exceed natural recharge, leading to: Irreversible depletion Ecological damage Declining water quality Long-term economic & human security risks Core Idea Treats water as natural capital, not an infinite public good. International Reference UN-Water: Warns of a global demand–supply gap of ~40% by 2030. Historical Evolution Traditional Phase Community-based systems (tanks, stepwells, johads) ensured local recharge–use balance. Post-Green Revolution Shift to: Tube wells Free/subsidised electricity Water-intensive crops Current Phase Climate-driven hydrological instability + governance failure → water bankruptcy. Constitutional & Legal Dimensions Constitutional Position Water is a State subject – Entry 17, State List. Union Role Entry 56, Union List: Inter-state rivers. Article 262: Inter-state river disputes. Key Laws / Policies National Water Policy (2012) – non-binding Model Groundwater Bill – limited state adoption Judicial Interventions Supreme Court: Right to clean water implicit under Article 21. Federal Challenge Fragmented authority with weak enforcement capacity. Governance & Administrative Dimensions Institutional Landscape Ministry of Jal Shakti Central Ground Water Board (CGWB) State water resource departments Governance Gap No mandatory water accounting at basin/state/farm level. Centre–State Issues Data asymmetry Politicisation of river disputes Implementation Deficit Schemes focus on supply augmentation, not demand management. Economic Dimensions Macroeconomic Impact Agriculture (~80% of freshwater use) most vulnerable. Water stress threatens food security & rural livelihoods. Productivity Loss Over-irrigation → soil salinity, declining yields. Economic Survey Insight Efficient irrigation can significantly improve water-use productivity. Global Evidence World Bank links water scarcity to GDP loss of up to 6% in water-stressed economies. Social, Ethical & Equity Dimensions Equity Concerns Rich farmers access groundwater; poor depend on failing surface sources. Gender Dimension Women bear disproportionate burden of water scarcity. Ethical Issue Inter-generational injustice: current extraction mortgaging future needs. DPSP & SDG Link Article 39(b): Equitable distribution of material resources. SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation. Environmental / Climate Dimensions Climate Linkages Himalayan snow decline Erratic monsoon Intense rainfall + long dry spells Ecological Impact Wetland loss River baseflow reduction Biodiversity stress Pollution Nexus Lower flows → higher concentration of pollutants. Data & Evidence India extracts ~250 billion cubic metres of groundwater annually – highest globally. ~10.8% of India’s groundwater units are over-exploited or critical (CGWB-2025). Per capita water availability declined from ~5,000 m³ (1950) to ~1,486 m³ today. Agriculture uses ~80% of freshwater. UN projects 40% global water deficit by 2030. Challenges, Gaps & Criticisms Structural / Institutional Issues Absence of basin-level water governance. Weak groundwater regulation. Implementation & Design Issues Free power incentives distort farmer behaviour. Lack of real-time data on withdrawals and recharge. Poor adoption of micro-irrigation beyond subsidies. Expert / Committee Criticism NITI Aayog (CWMI): Warns of severe water stress threatening India’s growth trajectory. CAG Reports Highlight inefficiencies in irrigation projects and command area development. Way Forward Water Accounting Mandatory basin-level and aquifer-level water budgeting. Demand Management Crop diversification away from water-intensive crops. Rationalisation of electricity subsidies. Institutional Reform Strengthen CGWB with regulatory powers. Technology Remote sensing + AI for real-time water monitoring. Community Approach Revive traditional water harvesting systems. Policy Alignment Update National Water Policy with legal backing. Prelims Pointers Water is a State subject, not Union. Groundwater is not explicitly regulated by a central law. India is the largest groundwater extractor globally. National Water Policy is non-binding. CWMI is released by NITI Aayog, not Ministry of Jal Shakti. Water scarcity ≠ drought; scarcity can exist even in high rainfall areas.

Content India–AI Impact Summit 2026 Sukanya Samriddhi Yojana (SSY) India–AI Impact Summit 2026 Background and Context The India–AI Impact Summit 2026, marks India’s effort to position Artificial Intelligence as a development enabler rather than a purely commercial or military technology. Scheduled from 16–20 February 2026 at Bharat Mandapam, New Delhi, the Summit will be the first global AI summit hosted in the Global South, reflecting India’s leadership in inclusive digital governance. Relevance : GS Paper 3 Science and technology, economy, and security: AI as a driver of productivity, digital public infrastructure, innovation ecosystems, startup growth, AI compute infrastructure, and strategic technological self-reliance. Key Features of the Summit Scale and Structure The Summit is designed as a five-day multi-stakeholder programme covering policy dialogue, research collaboration, industry engagement, innovation showcases, and public outreach across AI governance and deployment domains. The India AI Impact Expo 2026 is expected to host 300+ exhibitors from 30 countries across 10+ thematic pavilions, showcasing AI transition from pilots to large-scale deployment. Foundational Vision: The Three Sutras People The “People” Sutra emphasises citizen-centric AI, focusing on healthcare access, personalised education, financial inclusion, and multilingual digital services aligned with India’s demographic and social diversity. Planet The “Planet” Sutra positions AI as a sustainability enabler through precision agriculture, climate monitoring, efficient resource utilisation, and environmentally responsible technology adoption supporting India’s climate and SDG commitments. Progress The “Progress” Sutra highlights AI-driven productivity gains, governance efficiency, digital public infrastructure strengthening, and innovation-led economic growth, supporting India’s vision of Viksit Bharat by 2047. Sectoral Applications Highlighted AI in Healthcare AI-enabled telemedicine, remote diagnostics, and medical image analysis improve healthcare access in rural areas, supporting early detection of TB, cancer, and chronic diseases while reducing travel and diagnostic delays. AI in Agriculture and Rural Economy AI-based weather prediction, pest forecasting, drone monitoring, and satellite imagery enhance farm productivity, reduce input waste, and support farmer incomes through tools like Kisan E-Mitra and regional-language advisories. AI in Education and Learning Adaptive learning platforms, AI tutors, and real-time language translation enable personalised education, reduce learning gaps, and improve accessibility through national platforms such as DIKSHA. AI in Finance and Commerce AI strengthens financial inclusion through real-time fraud detection, alternative credit scoring for unbanked populations, and 24/7 banking chatbots improving efficiency and consumer trust in digital financial systems. AI in Governance and Public Services AI-assisted translation of court judgments, smart city optimisation, faster scheme processing, and AI-enabled case management improve transparency, access to justice, and efficiency of government service delivery. Seven Chakras: Framework for Global Cooperation Human Capital Focuses on equitable AI skilling and reskilling ecosystems to prepare India’s workforce for AI-driven economic transitions while aligning talent development with national demographic advantages. Inclusion for Social Empowerment Promotes scalable AI solutions for last-mile service delivery, enabling marginalised communities to access governance, welfare schemes, and digital services efficiently. Safe and Trusted AI Seeks to operationalise responsible AI principles into interoperable governance frameworks, strengthening data protection, algorithmic transparency, and public trust without stifling innovation. Resilience, Innovation and Efficiency Addresses environmental and resource challenges posed by large-scale AI systems, ensuring sustainable adoption while preventing widening digital and technological divides. Science Leverages AI to accelerate scientific discovery, especially in health, agriculture, and climate research, while addressing inequities in access to data, compute, and research infrastructure. Democratising AI Resources Aims to ensure equitable access to AI compute, datasets, and foundational tools for startups, researchers, and public institutions, supporting fair participation in global AI value chains. AI for Economic Growth and Social Good Identifies high-impact AI use cases that simultaneously drive productivity and address social challenges, positioning AI as an engine for inclusive and sustainable development. AI Impact Events and Knowledge Outputs Pre-Summit and Regional Engagements Eight Regional AI Conferences (Oct 2025–Jan 2026) across Indian states identify region-specific AI use cases, capacity gaps, and policy inputs feeding into Summit deliberations. Main Summit and AI Compendium The Main Summit, structured around the seven Chakras, received 700+ global proposals, while the AI Compendium (17 February 2026) documents real-world AI applications across priority sectors. Flagship Challenges and Capacity Building AI for ALL, AI by HER, and YUVAi Global Youth Challenge promote scalable AI solutions, women-led innovation, and youth participation, offering awards up to ₹5 crore and ₹85 lakh respectively. India AI Tinkerpreneur bootcamp builds AI and entrepreneurial skills among school students (Classes 6–12), fostering early innovation and problem-solving capabilities. Institutional Framework Supporting the Summit MeitY provides policy direction and inter-ministerial coordination, anchoring AI within national digital governance and trusted technology frameworks. IndiaAI Mission shapes Summit themes around compute infrastructure, datasets, indigenous models, skilling, and startups, advancing inclusive and responsible AI adoption. STPI supports startups and MSMEs through incubation, infrastructure, and global linkages, enabling broad-based participation in India’s AI innovation ecosystem. Digital India ensures AI solutions align with citizen-centric governance, accessibility, transparency, and scalable digital public infrastructure. Expected Outcomes The Summit is expected to strengthen AI governance frameworks, assess regional preparedness, support workforce transition, and foster sustained partnerships across government, academia, startups, and industry. Conclusion The India–AI Impact Summit 2026 positions AI as a strategic development enabler, integrating governance, innovation, and inclusion while reinforcing Digital India and advancing national self-reliance in AI capabilities. Sukanya Samriddhi Yojana (SSY) Background and Context Sukanya Samriddhi Yojana was launched on 22 January 2015 under the Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao campaign to promote long-term financial security, education, and empowerment of the girl child. As SSY completes 11 years in January 2026, it has evolved from a savings instrument into a nationwide social-financial intervention reinforcing gender equality and future-oriented family planning. Relevance : GS Paper 1 Women empowerment and social change: Gender equality, girl-child education, delayed marriage, demographic dividend, and transformation of patriarchal social norms through financial inclusion. GS Paper 2 Welfare schemes and governance: Design, implementation, federal outreach, financial inclusion, convergence with Beti Bachao Beti Padhao, and role of the State in social protection. Key Features and Scale of the Scheme Coverage and Reach Since inception, over 4.53 crore SSY accounts have been opened, with cumulative deposits exceeding ₹33 lakh crore as of December 2025, indicating wide public trust and adoption. Interest Rate and Safety SSY currently offers an 2% annual interest rate, among the highest government-backed small savings rates, with full sovereign guarantee on principal and interest, ensuring low-risk long-term wealth creation. Objectives and Vision of SSY SSY aims to encourage early financial planning for daughters’ education and marriage, linking household savings behaviour with broader goals of women’s empowerment, human capital formation, and intergenerational social mobility. By integrating financial security with social transformation, SSY reinforces the idea that investing in girls strengthens families, communities, and national development outcomes. Eligibility and Account Structure Who Can Open an Account ? Parents or legal guardians can open one SSY account for an Indian girl child from birth till 10 years of age at post offices or authorised public and private sector banks. Account Limits and Management Only one account per girl child is allowed, with a maximum of two accounts per family, except in cases of twins or triplets, subject to documentary proof. The account is operated by the guardian until the girl attains 18 years, after which she assumes control, reinforcing financial autonomy and responsibility. Deposit Rules and Interest Calculation Deposit Requirements The minimum annual deposit is ₹250, while the maximum permissible contribution is ₹5 lakh per financial year, with deposits allowed for 15 years from account opening. Interest Accrual Mechanism Interest is calculated on a monthly basis and credited annually at the end of the financial year, ensuring uninterrupted compounding even if the account is transferred geographically. Withdrawal and Maturity Provisions Partial Withdrawal for Education Up to 50% of the balance at the end of the preceding financial year can be withdrawn for education once the account holder attains 18 years or passes Class 10. Withdrawals may be taken as a lump sum or in installments, limited to one withdrawal per year for five years, strictly linked to actual educational expenses. Maturity and Premature Closure The account matures after 21 years from opening, with early closure permitted only in cases of marriage after age 18 or death of the account holder. Premature closure is not allowed within the first five years, safeguarding long-term savings discipline and scheme integrity. Financial and Tax Benefits Deposits under SSY qualify for tax deduction under Section 80C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, offering an Exempt–Exempt–Exempt (EEE) style benefit. Even after maturity, if the account is not closed, it continues to earn interest at the Post Office Savings Account rate, preventing erosion of accumulated savings. Economic and Social Significance SSY functions as both a financial inclusion tool and a social empowerment mechanism, encouraging households to prioritise girls’ education, delayed marriage, and economic independence. By strengthening women’s human capital, SSY contributes indirectly to workforce participation, productivity enhancement, and the long-term vision of an Atmanirbhar Bharat. Governance and Administrative Design The scheme is implemented through India Post and authorised banks, ensuring last-mile accessibility, portability across India, and integration with Aadhaar-based identification systems. Regular interest rate notifications by the Ministry of Finance align SSY returns with macroeconomic conditions while maintaining its attractiveness among small savings instruments. Challenges and Limitations Awareness gaps in remote and socio-economically backward regions limit optimal coverage, despite high aggregate account numbers. Inflation-adjusted real returns may fluctuate over long durations, making complementary investments and financial literacy essential for maximising long-term benefits. Way Forward Strengthening financial literacy campaigns, especially in rural and aspirational districts, can improve informed participation and timely deposits. Integrating SSY with digital platforms, school enrolment drives, and women-centric welfare schemes can enhance convergence and developmental impact. Conclusion Sukanya Samriddhi Yojana represents a strategic blend of financial prudence and social reform, transforming household savings into a powerful instrument for gender equality and inclusive national development.

Content Prior Sanction for Corruption Charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Citizen-Centric Healthcare Delivery and Use of Technology Accelerating Subsidence of India’s River Deltas Governor’s Address to the State Legislature Japan’s Post-Fukushima Nuclear Restart Urban Traffic Congestion in Indian Cities: Bengaluru and Pune Prior Sanction for Corruption Charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Why in News ? Trigger Supreme Court’s split verdict on the constitutional validity of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA), 1988, which mandates prior government sanction before initiating inquiry/investigation against public servants. Context PIL challenging Section 17A as: Shielding corruption Diluting investigative autonomy Government’s defence: protection of honest decision-making. Relevance GS Paper II Anti-corruption framework Accountability vs administrative discretion Role of executive in investigations Rule of Law and separation of powers GS Paper IV Ethics in public administration Accountability of public servants Public office as public trust Conceptual & Static Foundation Core Concept – Prior Sanction Prior Sanction A statutory requirement mandating approval from the competent authority before: Prosecuting (Section 19, PCA) Investigating decisions taken by public servants (Section 17A, PCA). Purpose Prevent vexatious, politically motivated or frivolous prosecution. Legal Background – Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Enacted to consolidate laws relating to corruption among public servants. Covers: Bribery Criminal misconduct Abuse of official position 2018 Amendment Inserted Section 17A. Section 17A – What Does It Mandate? Provision No police officer shall conduct any enquiry, inquiry or investigation into: Any offence alleged to have been committed by a public servant In discharge of official functions Without prior approval of the competent authority. Scope Applies to decision-making acts, not necessarily bribe-taking in every case. Exception Does not apply where: Person is caught red-handed accepting bribe. Constitutional & Legal Dimensions Arguments Supporting Section 17A Protects bona fide administrative decision-making. Prevents policy paralysis and “fear psychosis”. Executive has the right to regulate prosecution of its officials. Comparable to Section 197 CrPC (sanction for prosecution). Arguments Against Section 17A Violates Article 14 (arbitrariness; unequal protection). Undermines: Rule of Law Independent investigation Converts sanctioning authority into a judge of its own cause. Prior sanction before investigation (not just prosecution) is excessive. Supreme Court Jurisprudence Vineet Narain v. Union of India (1998) Struck down executive interference in corruption probes. Emphasised institutional independence of CBI. Subramanian Swamy v. Manmohan Singh (2012) Sanction must be granted or denied within reasonable time. Current Split Verdict (2024–25) One judge: Section 17A unconstitutional (violates equality, investigative autonomy). Other judge: Section 17A valid; sufficient safeguards already exist. Status Matter referred to a larger constitutional bench. Governance & Administrative Dimensions Institutional Impact Investigating agencies (CBI, State ACBs) face procedural delays. Key Governance Concern Executive control over initiation of corruption probes. Centre–Agency Tension Dilutes operational autonomy promised post–Vineet Narain reforms. Outcome Shift from deterrence-based anti-corruption to permission-based enforcement. Economic Dimensions Weak anti-corruption enforcement: Increases cost of governance Discourages investment Affects ease of doing business World Bank Governance Indicators Corruption control directly linked to economic efficiency and growth. Social, Ethical & Equity Dimensions Ethical Dilemma Protection of honest officers vs accountability of corrupt officials. Equity Issue Citizens face barriers to justice due to: Delayed investigations Institutional shielding Ethical Framework (GS IV) Public office as a public trust Accountability as core value of ethical governance. SDG Link SDG 16: Effective, accountable institutions. Data & Evidence PCA amended in 2018 to insert Section 17A. Sanction requirement applies to decision-related acts, not trap cases. India’s ranking in global corruption perception indices consistently highlights governance concerns. Multiple corruption cases delayed due to sanction-related bottlenecks (Parliamentary Standing Committee observations). Challenges, Gaps & Criticisms Structural / Institutional Issues Executive dominance over anti-corruption machinery. Conflict of interest: Government decides on investigation of its own officials. Implementation & Design Issues No statutory time-limit for granting sanction under Section 17A. Scope of “decision taken in official capacity” is ambiguous. Prior sanction at pre-investigation stage is globally unusual. Expert / Committee Criticism Second ARC (Ethics in Governance) Stressed need for independent anti-corruption institutions. Legal scholars: Section 17A risks becoming a protective shield, not a procedural safeguard. Way Forward Procedural Safeguards Sanction decision should be: Time-bound Reasoned Balanced Approach Limit prior sanction to: Policy decisions Not routine administrative or financial acts. Institutional Reform Independent sanctioning authority (outside executive control). Judicial Oversight Allow courts to override sanction denial in exceptional cases. Legislative Clarity Clearly define “official decision” vs corrupt act. Prelims Pointers  Section 17A inserted by 2018 amendment to PCA. Sanction under Section 17A is before investigation, not prosecution. Section 19 PCA deals with sanction for prosecution, not inquiry. Vineet Narain case relates to CBI independence, not PCA directly. Citizen-Centric Healthcare Delivery & Use of Technology  Contextual Background Trigger Lancet Commission (2025–26) report calling for a citizen-centric, publicly financed, and technology-enabled healthcare system in India. Context Persistent gaps in: Access Quality Financial protection in India’s healthcare. Post-COVID recognition of: Health as a public good Need for system-wide reform, not scheme-based fixes. Relevance GS Paper II Health as a public good Welfare state and social sector governance Centre–State relations in healt GS Paper III Human capital development Technology in service delivery Conceptual & Static Foundation Core Concept – Citizen-Centric Healthcare Citizen-Centric Healthcare A system where: Citizens, not diseases or insurance packages, are at the centre. Emphasis on continuity of care, not episodic treatment. Key Principles Universality Equity Public financing Accountability Lancet’s Core Assertion Health systems should be publicly financed and publicly provided, with technology as an enabler—not a substitute. Historical Evolution of Health Policy in India Post-Independence Focus on public health infrastructure (PHCs, CHCs). 1990s–2000s Gradual shift towards: Privatisation Out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE). Recent Phase Insurance-led approach (e.g., PM-JAY). Emerging Shift From insurance-centric → care-centric health systems. Constitutional & Legal Dimensions Constitutional Basis Article 21: Right to life interpreted to include right to health. Article 47 (DPSP): Duty of the State to improve public health. Legal Reality Health is a State subject (Entry 6, State List). Judicial Interpretation Supreme Court: Access to healthcare integral to dignity. Constitutional Gap No enforceable right to healthcare yet. Federal Implication Need for strong Centre–State coordination without encroachment. Governance & Administrative Dimensions Lancet Commission’s Diagnosis Fragmented health system: Preventive, promotive, curative care poorly integrated. Institutional Recommendations Strengthen: Primary healthcare as the foundation. Referral-based, integrated care pathways. Governance Reform Shift from: Disease-specific vertical programmes To people-centred, life-cycle-based care. Centre–State Issues Uneven capacity Fiscal asymmetry Accountability Citizens should have voice and grievance redressal in health systems. Economic Dimensions Public Health Spending India spends ~2.1% of GDP on health (Economic Survey). Out-of-Pocket Expenditure Still ~45–50% of total health expenditure. Lancet’s Economic Argument Preventive and primary care reduce: Long-term costs Hospitalisation burden. Macroeconomic Link Poor health outcomes reduce: Labour productivity Human capital formation. Global Evidence Publicly funded health systems are more cost-effective and equitable. Social, Ethical & Equity Dimensions Equity Concerns Poor, women, elderly disproportionately affected by: OOPE Fragmented care. Ethical Lens Healthcare as: Right Public trust Moral obligation of the State. Dignity & Consent Citizen-centric care emphasises: Patient dignity Informed consent Continuity of care. SDG Link SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities. Technology Dimensions Role of Technology (Lancet View) AI, digital platforms, health data systems should: Support clinicians Improve diagnostics Enable continuity of care. Indian Context Digital Health Mission Electronic Health Records (EHRs). Risks Tech-first approach may: Exclude digitally marginalised Undermine doctor–patient relationship. Principle Technology should augment, not replace, human care. Data & Evidence Nearly 30 experts contributed to the Lancet Commission. India’s OOPE ~45–50% of total health expenditure. Public health spending ~2.1% of GDP. Primary healthcare prevents up to 70% of avoidable hospitalisations (global estimates). India faces a dual burden of communicable and non-communicable diseases. Challenges, Gaps & Criticisms Structural / Institutional Issues Over-reliance on private sector. Weak primary healthcare in many States. Fragmented service delivery. Implementation & Design Issues Insurance schemes prioritise: Hospital care over prevention. Human resource shortages: Doctors, nurses, allied health workers. Poor integration of digital health platforms. Expert / Committee Criticism Lancet Commission Warns against: Insurance-only solutions Market-driven healthcare. Public Health Experts Emphasise need to rebuild public provisioning capacity. Way Forward Policy Shift Move from insurance-centric to care-centric health policy. Financing Increase public health spending to ≥3% of GDP. Primary Care Strengthen Health and Wellness Centres as first point of contact. Technology Use AI, digital records for: Preventive care Chronic disease management. Equity Focus Design systems for: Poor Elderly Rural and tribal populations. Governance Institutionalise citizen feedback and accountability mechanisms. Prelims Pointers  Health is a State subject, not Union. Right to health is judicially derived, not explicit. Lancet Commission favours public financing, not privatisation. Technology is an enabler, not a substitute. OOPE remains high despite insurance expansion. Accelerating Subsidence of India’s River Deltas Contextual Background Trigger An international research study published in Nature (January 14, 2026) revealing systemic land subsidence across major river deltas, including six in India. Key Finding In several Indian deltas, land subsidence exceeds the rate of sea-level rise, magnifying coastal risk. Motivation of Study Global lack of high-resolution subsidence data for river deltas despite supporting ~340 million people worldwide Relevance GS Paper I Geomorphology: river deltas Human–environment interaction GS Paper III Climate change impacts Disaster risk reduction Environmental degradation Conceptual & Static Foundation Core Concept – Delta Subsidence Subsidence Gradual sinking of land elevation due to: Natural sediment compaction Isostatic and tectonic processes. Human-Accelerated Subsidence Excessive groundwater extraction Reduced sediment supply Urban load and infrastructure pressure. Key Insight Human actions have transformed a slow geological process into an urgent environmental crisis. Scientific & Technical Basis of the Study Data Source ESA Sentinel-1 satellite (2014–2023). Methodology Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR). Spatial resolution: 75 metres. Analytical Tool Random Forest Machine Learning model. Stressors Analysed Groundwater storage (NASA–German GRACE satellites). Sediment flux. Urban expansion. Key Findings – Indian River Deltas Deltas Identified Six Indian Deltas Studied Ganges–Brahmaputra Brahmani Mahanadi Godavari Cauvery Kabani. Magnitude & Pattern of Subsidence Extent 90% of Ganges–Brahmaputra, Brahmani, Mahanadi deltas affected.   Rate Average subsidence exceeds regional sea-level rise in: Ganges Brahmani Mahanadi Godavari Kabani. Critical Threshold 77% of Brahmani and 69% of Mahanadi sinking at >5 mm/year. Urban Hotspot Kolkata: Subsidence accelerated by: Urban load Resource over-extraction. Environmental & Climate Dimensions Climate Interaction Subsidence + sea-level rise = compound coastal hazard. Impacts Increased coastal and river flooding. Permanent land loss. Saltwater intrusion contaminating: Freshwater aquifers Agricultural soils. Ecosystem Stress Wetland degradation. Mangrove vulnerability. Climate Risk Framing Ganges–Brahmaputra delta shifted from: “Latent threat” (20th century) To “Unprepared diver” (21st century). Economic Dimensions Livelihood Impact Agriculture and fisheries affected by salinisation. Infrastructure Risk Damage to: Ports Transport networks Urban assets. Migration Pressure Environmental degradation → distress migration. Macro Risk Coastal economic hubs face long-term viability threats. Social, Ethical & Equity Dimensions Vulnerable Populations Delta regions house: High population density Poor adaptive capacity. Equity Concern Those contributing least to climate change bear disproportionate costs. Resource Conflict Freshwater scarcity may intensify: Inter-sectoral Inter-regional conflicts. SDG Link SDG 13 (Climate Action) SDG 14 (Life below Water) SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities). Governance & Administrative Dimensions Institutional Capacity Gap Risk increasing faster than governance response. Policy Blind Spot Coastal planning often ignores vertical land movement. Centre–State Coordination Fragmented responsibility for: Water extraction Urban planning Coastal regulation. Regulatory Gaps Weak enforcement of groundwater regulation. Inadequate sediment management in river basins. Data & Evidence 40 global deltas studied; 6 in India. Spatial resolution: 75 m (high-resolution). >340 million people depend on global deltas. >90% area affected in three major Indian deltas. Subsidence rates exceed sea-level rise in most Indian deltas studied. Study period: 2014–2023. Published in Nature, January 14, 2026. Challenges, Gaps & Limitations Structural / Data Limitations GRACE groundwater data less accurate for small deltas. Sediment flux data not fully updated. 40 deltas not fully globally representative. Policy & Implementation Gaps Absence of: Delta-specific adaptation plans. Integrated river basin–delta governance. Urban expansion unchecked in vulnerable zones. Way Forward Integrated Delta Management Basin-to-delta planning integrating sediment flow. Groundwater Regulation Enforce sustainable extraction limits. Urban Planning Restrict high-load infrastructure in subsiding zones. Nature-Based Solutions Mangrove restoration as natural buffers. Technology Use Institutionalise satellite-based subsidence monitoring. Governance Capacity Shift deltas from “unprepared divers” to climate-resilient systems. Policy Alignment Mainstream subsidence into: Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Disaster management planning. Prelims Pointers Subsidence ≠ sea-level rise; both compound risk. Sentinel-1 is operated by ESA, not NASA. GRACE measures groundwater storage, not surface water. Urbanisation can accelerate subsidence even without tectonic activity. Delta sinking can exceed sea-level rise → higher flood risk. Subsidence is partly natural, but now human-amplified. Governor’s Address to the State Legislature Contextual Background Trigger Karnataka Governor–State Government face-off over deletion of portions of the Governor’s address to the State Legislature, particularly references critical of the Union government (e.g., MNREGA fund delays). Context Similar confrontations recently witnessed in Tamil Nadu and Kerala, indicating a patterned Centre–State–Governor tension. Relevance GS Paper II Role of Governor Constitutional conventions Centre–State relations Federalism GS Paper IV Constitutional morality Neutrality of constitutional offices Conceptual & Static Foundation Governor’s Address – Constitutional Concept Governor’s Address A constitutional formality where the Governor addresses the Legislature at: First session after general elections First session of each year. Nature Not personal views of the Governor. Reflects the policies and programmes of the elected State government. Constitutional & Legal Dimensions  Relevant Constitutional Provisions Article 176 Governor shall address the Legislative Assembly/Council. Article 163 Governor to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, except in limited discretionary areas. Article 168 Defines the State Legislature. Article 175(2) Governor may send messages to the House(s), again on aid and advice. Supreme Court Interpretation Shamsher Singh v. State of Punjab (1974) Governor is a constitutional head, not an independent authority. Nabam Rebia v. Deputy Speaker (2016) Governor cannot act contrary to or without ministerial advice except where Constitution explicitly allows. Key Principle Governor has no veto over content of the address. Governance & Federal Dimensions Core Issue Whether a Governor can: Refuse to read the address. Unilaterally delete or modify portions approved by the Cabinet. Constitutional Position Governor cannot alter substance of the address. At best, may: Suggest changes Seek clarifications. Federal Concern Governor acting as: Neutral constitutional umpire vs De facto agent of the Union. Trend Increasing politicisation of gubernatorial office undermines cooperative federalism. Democratic & Ethical Dimensions Democratic Principle Governor’s address represents the mandate of the electorate, not Raj Bhavan’s discretion. Ethical Issue Unelected authority diluting or blocking: Legislative debate Executive accountability. Institutional Morality Respect for: Popular sovereignty Cabinet responsibility. Challenges, Gaps & Criticisms Structural Issues Ambiguity in conventions vs codified rules. No explicit constitutional remedy for: Refusal to read address Selective omission. Institutional Criticism Punchhi Commission Warned against misuse of Governor’s office for partisan ends. Sarkaria Commission Governor should be a bridge, not a barrier, between Centre and State. Way Forward Codify Conventions Parliamentary/legislative rules clarifying: Mandatory reading of Cabinet-approved address. Judicial Clarification Clear ruling on consequences of Governor’s refusal. Governor’s Conduct Adherence to: Constitutional morality Political neutrality. Structural Reform Implement commission recommendations on: Appointment Tenure security Removal norms for Governors. Federal Ethos Reinforce cooperative, not confrontational, federalism. Prelims Pointers Governor’s address is under Article 176, not Article 174. Content belongs to Council of Ministers, not Governor. Governor has no discretionary power over address content. Refusal to read address ≠ constitutional veto. SC judgments consistently uphold aid and advice principle. Japan Restarts Nuclear Power Plant Post-Fukushima Contextual Background Trigger Japan restarted the Kashiwazaki–Kariwa nuclear power plant, the world’s largest nuclear power facility, marking the first restart since the 2011 Fukushima disaster. Source International news reports (January 2026). Context Restart occurred despite: Strong public opposition Persistent concerns over earthquake and tsunami risks. Relevance GS Paper III Nuclear energy Energy security Disaster management Conceptual & Static Foundation Nuclear Power in Japan – Core Context Japan is a seismically active country with high exposure to: Earthquakes Tsunamis. Fukushima Daiichi Disaster (2011) Triggered by a tsunami following a major earthquake. Led to: Shutdown of all nuclear reactors Long-term evacuation Loss of public confidence in nuclear energy. Rationale Behind Restart Energy Security Dimension Japan is: Resource-poor Highly dependent on imported fossil fuels. Nuclear restart aimed at: Reducing energy import bill Ensuring stable baseload power Supporting industrial competitiveness. Climate & Emissions Dimension Nuclear energy viewed as: Low-carbon baseload energy Essential for Japan’s net-zero commitments. Restart aligns with: Decarbonisation goals Reduced reliance on coal and LNG. Safety, Environmental & Disaster Dimensions Location Risk Kashiwazaki–Kariwa located near: Seismically active coastal zones. Concerns Raised Risk of: Nuclear accident Radiation leakage Long-term ecological damage. Public Opposition Protests by residents and activists citing: Fukushima precedent Inadequate disaster preparedness. Government Response Assurance of: Enhanced safety checks Strict regulatory oversight. Governance & Regulatory Dimensions Regulatory Changes Post-Fukushima Establishment of stricter nuclear safety norms. Enhanced role of independent nuclear regulators. Trust Deficit Restart despite opposition highlights: Gap between expert assessment and public perception. Key Governance Question Can technological safeguards substitute for public consent? Economic Dimensions Cost Considerations Nuclear restarts reduce: High LNG and oil import costs. Industrial Impact Stable electricity crucial for: Manufacturing High-tech industries. Risk Cost Potential nuclear accident would impose: Massive economic Social Environmental costs. Data & Evidence   Kashiwazaki–Kariwa is the world’s largest nuclear power plant. Restart is the first major nuclear reactivation in Japan since 2011. Fukushima disaster caused: Mass evacuations Long-term radiation concerns. Japan imports a major share of its energy requirements. Challenges, Gaps & Criticisms Structural Issues Nuclear plants in high-risk seismic zones. Long-term waste disposal unresolved. Governance Gaps Limited public participation in decision-making. Over-reliance on expert-driven risk assessment. Ethical Criticism Normalisation of nuclear risk post-Fukushima. Potential erosion of precautionary principle. Way Forward Risk-Based Decision Making Nuclear expansion must integrate: Disaster risk assessments Climate resilience. Public Engagement Transparency and consent crucial. Technological Safeguards Continuous upgrades, independent audits. Diversified Energy Mix Balance nuclear with renewables. Indian Context Lessons for: Coastal nuclear plants (Kudankulam) Disaster preparedness and evacuation planning. Prelims Pointers  Fukushima disaster occurred in 2011, not 2004. Kashiwazaki–Kariwa ≠ Fukushima Daiichi. Nuclear power is low-carbon, but not risk-free. Energy security ≠ energy safety. Seismic risk is a critical factor in nuclear siting. Urban Traffic Congestion in Indian Cities – Bengaluru & Pune in Global Rankings Contextual Background Trigger TomTom Traffic Index 2025 ranked Bengaluru as the 2nd most congested city globally and Pune as 5th. Context Raises concerns amid State narratives projecting Bengaluru as a “future-ready/global tech city”. Relevance GS Paper I Urbanisation and migration GS Paper II Urban governance Municipal capacity GS Paper III Infrastructure Sustainable transport Productivity losses Conceptual & Static Foundation Core Concept – Urban Traffic Congestion Traffic Congestion A condition where travel demand exceeds road network capacity, leading to: Reduced speeds Longer travel times Higher fuel consumption and emissions. Measurement (TomTom Methodology) Average speeds during peak hours Time lost due to congestion Extra travel time compared to free-flow conditions. Key Findings (2025 Index Highlights) Bengaluru Average peak-hour speed: ~13.9 kmph. Congestion level: ~74.4% (year-on-year increase). Time to travel 10 km: ~36 minutes. Annual time lost during rush hours: ~168 hours. Pune Ranked 5th globally for congestion. Comparative Mumbai ranked 18th; performs better on average speed than Bengaluru. Governance & Administrative Dimensions Urban Planning Deficits Road-centric expansion without proportional public transport growth. Fragmented land-use and transport planning. Institutional Issues Weak coordination among: Municipal corporations Traffic police Urban development authorities. Policy Mismatch Global branding vs ground-level service delivery. Data & Evidence Bengaluru: 2nd most congested city globally (2025). Pune: 5th globally. Average peak speed in Bengaluru: ~13.9 kmph. Annual time lost in congestion (Bengaluru): ~168 hours. Congestion level increased year-on-year. Way Forward  Public Transport First Accelerate metro, suburban rail, and bus rapid transit. Integrated Urban Planning Transit-oriented development (TOD). Demand Management Congestion pricing in core zones. Staggered office timings, remote work incentives. Technology Intelligent traffic management systems (AI-enabled signals). Institutional Reform Unified metropolitan transport authorities. Sustainability Promote non-motorised transport (walking, cycling). Prelims Pointers  TomTom Traffic Index is a global, not Indian, report. Congestion ranking ≠ population size ranking. High GDP cities can still have poor mobility outcomes. Average speed during peak hours is a key congestion metric. Flyovers alone do not solve congestion structurally.