Content YUVA AI for ALL National Water Awards YUVA AI for ALL Why in News? MeitY launched ‘YUVA AI for ALL’ under the IndiaAI Mission. Aims to empower 1 crore citizens with foundational AI skills through a free, 4.5-hour national course. Available on FutureSkills Prime, iGOT Karmayogi, and other ed-tech platforms with official GoI certification. Relevance GS2 (Governance) Advances digital skilling under MeitY & IndiaAI Mission. Strengthens inclusive access to government-led digital learning platforms. GS2 (Policy & Social Sector) Implements national AI and digital literacy strategies (IndiaAI Mission, PMGDISHA, NDLM). Reduces digital divide through mass-scale AI awareness. GS3 (Science & Technology) Builds foundational AI literacy and responsible AI practices. Supports India’s AI ecosystem and alignment with global AI ethics norms. What is YUVA AI for ALL? A free, introductory AI literacy course for all Indians—students, professionals, and beginners. Duration: 4.5 hours, self-paced, modular structure (6 modules). Developed by Jaspreet Bindra, AI expert and author. Focus: ethical, responsible, inclusive AI aligned with India’s socio-digital context. Core Features Open to all: No prerequisites, 100% free, multilingual potential. Certification: Government of India certificate on completion. Platform availability: FutureSkills Prime, iGOT Karmayogi, other ed-tech portals. Practical orientation: Real-world Indian examples, simple explanations. Course Structure – Key Learning Outcomes Foundations of AI: Meaning, technologies, how AI works. AI in daily life: Education, creativity, workplace transformation. Responsible AI: Ethical use, safety, biases, data practices. Use cases from India: Agriculture, healthcare, governance, fintech, climate. Future opportunities: Skills, jobs, emerging AI ecosystems. Strategic Significance 1. Digital Inclusion Bridges AI awareness gap across urban–rural, socioeconomic, and generational lines. Helps democratize access to emerging technologies. 2. Workforce Preparedness Supports India’s skilling targets under IndiaAI Mission, Skill India, and Digital India. Aligns with global trends where basic AI literacy is a workplace essential. 3. Ethical AI Ecosystem Strengthens India’s push for trusted, responsible AI in line with global norms (UNESCO AI Ethics, OECD AI principles). 4. AI Nation-Building Fits into India’s strategic roadmap to become an AI-powered economy. Supports development of a base-level AI-fluent population, essential for innovation and digital governance. Policy & Governance Context Linked to IndiaAI Mission (₹10,300 crore) focused on compute infrastructure, datasets, innovation, skilling. Complements NDLM, PMGDISHA, and digital literacy initiatives targeting mass skilling. Helps operationalize National Strategy for AI (NITI Aayog) recommendations: awareness, skilling, responsible AI. Impact Pathways Education: Institutions can integrate course into curriculums. Employability: Basic AI literacy enhances job-readiness across sectors. Industry partnerships: Ed-tech, academia, and corporates can co-brand and scale the course. Public sector: Supports capacity-building under the National Programme for Civil Services Capacity Building (Mission Karmayogi). Comparative Note Similar to Finland’s “Elements of AI” mass literacy program but tailored with India-specific use cases. Addresses India’s unique scale challenges—1.4B population, digital divide, multilingual needs. Prelims Pointers Initiative under MeitY and IndiaAI Mission. Duration: 4.5 hours, 6 modules, free certification. Target: 1 crore AI-literate citizens. Platforms: FutureSkills Prime, iGOT Karmayogi. Focus: ethical, responsible, inclusive AI. National Water Awards Why in News? PIB  announced the 6th National Water Awards (NWA) and 1st Jal Sanchay Jan Bhagidari (JSJB) Awards. 46 winners across 10 categories honoured for water conservation excellence (NWA 2024 cycle). Maharashtra ranked 1st among states in NWA; Telangana ranked 1st in JSJB Awards. Highlights India’s shift toward community-driven, decentralized, and sustainable water management. Relevance GS1 (Geography) Directly linked to water scarcity, groundwater depletion, watershed restoration. GS2 (Governance) Strengthens participatory water governance and cooperative federalism. Highlights best practices under Jal Shakti Abhiyan, PMKSY, Atal Bhujal Yojana. GS2 (Social Justice) Enhances equitable access to water and promotes community involvement. What Are the National Water Awards? Instituted: 2018 by the Department of Water Resources, Ministry of Jal Shakti. Purpose: Recognize excellence in water conservation, water management, innovation, and community participation. Frequency: Annual. Stakeholders: Individuals, NGOs, institutions, industry, rural/urban local bodies, states. Objectives of the NWA Promote water-use efficiency, sustainable practices, and awareness building. Encourage behavioural change towards conservation at individual and institutional levels. Strengthen national vision of Jal Samridh Bharat (water-secure India). Create replicable best practices and foster cross-learning among states and communities. 6th National Water Awards (2024 Cycle) 751 applications received; 46 winners chosen across 10 categories. Best State Category Rankings: 1st: Maharashtra 2nd: Gujarat 3rd: Haryana Categories include: Best State, Best District, Best NGO, Best Industry, Best Water User Association, Best Urban Local Body, Best Institution, Best Researcher, etc. Winner selection reflects emphasis on innovation, scalability, community participation, sustainable water practice. Significance of the Awards 1. Strengthen National Water Governance Complements initiatives like Jal Shakti Abhiyan, PMKSY, Jal Jeevan Mission, Atal Bhujal Yojana. Reinforces multi-stakeholder engagement in water management. 2. Public Awareness & Behaviour Change Encourages citizens to view water as a shared resource, not an infinite commodity. Generates momentum around rainwater harvesting, groundwater recharge, efficient irrigation, urban water sustainability. 3. Recognition of Local Innovations Spotlights grassroots solutions, indigenous knowledge, and local community leadership. Supports mainstreaming of scalable models. 4. Encourages Data-Driven Water Management Promotes GIS, IoT, community monitoring, water budgeting, and efficient water accounting. Jal Sanchay Jan Bhagidari (JSJB) Awards – Basics Launched: 2024 under Jal Shakti Abhiyan: Catch the Rain (JSA: CTR). Purpose: Honour community-driven water conservation and groundwater recharge efforts. Scale: 100 awards across states, districts, municipal bodies, NGOs, industry, philanthropists, and officials. Achievement: Construction of 35 lakh groundwater recharge structures, exceeding targets. JSJB Best Performing State/UT (2025) 1st: Telangana 2nd: Chhattisgarh 3rd: Rajasthan Key National Water Conservation Initiatives  1. Jal Shakti Abhiyan: Catch the Rain (2021– ) Motto: “Catch the Rain, Where it Falls, When it Falls.” Focus: Rainwater harvesting, desilting, water-body rejuvenation, afforestation, check dams, recharge pits. Strong community participation model. 2. Atal Bhujal Yojana (2019– ) Community-led groundwater management in 8203 Gram Panchayats across 7 states. 81,000 structures constructed/renovated; 9 lakh hectares brought under efficient practices. One of India’s largest WB-supported groundwater programs. 3. Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana (PMKSY) Aim: Har Khet Ko Pani, More Crop Per Drop. Promotes: Micro-irrigation, integrated water-source management, watershed development. Reduces agricultural water stress. 4. AMRUT 2.0 Targets universal tap-water coverage in all statutory towns. 3568 water-supply projects, worth ₹1.14 lakh crore, sanctioned. 181 lakh new tap connections approved. Urban focus on sustainability, sewage, septage, and smart water systems. 5. Jal Jeevan Mission (2019– ) Rural tap-water mission; 12.50 crore households connected. Focus on eco-friendly water solutions: greywater management, rainwater harvesting, groundwater recharge. Strategic Importance for India Addresses water scarcity, climate vulnerability, groundwater depletion, and urban water stress. Ensures water security for agriculture (80% water use), rural households, and urban centres. Supports SDGs: SDG 6 (Clean Water), SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities), SDG 13 (Climate Action). Strengthens India’s long-term hydro-resilience and climate adaptation strategy. Analytical Note Awards reflect shift from top-down to community-centric water governance. Reinforces a model based on Jan Bhagidari + Technology + Local innovation. Pushes states to compete and collaborate on sustainable water futures. Acts as a policy nudging tool promoting best practices and accountability.

Content Unpacking the global ‘happiness’ rankings Excessive dependence Language of security needs upgrade, beyond OTP  Unpacking the global ‘happiness’ rankings  Why in News? World Happiness Report (WHR) 2025 places Finland at Rank 1 for the 8th consecutive year. India ranks 118 (score: 4.389/10) and averages 124 over the years. Pakistan ranks 109, despite economic instability and repeated IMF bailouts. Raises questions on the nature, validity and perception-driven basis of “happiness”. Relevance GS1 (Society) Links to social cohesion, community bonds, family structures, loneliness, and wellbeing. Explains shifts in Indian social capital due to urbanisation and digital lifestyles. GS2 (Governance & Social Justice) Highlights governance quality, institutional trust, welfare states, corruption perception. Shows role of public service delivery in influencing subjective wellbeing. Practice Question “India’s low ranking in global happiness indices reflects a deficit of trust, not a deficit of wellbeing.” Discuss.(250 Words) What is the World Happiness Report? Published by Wellbeing Research Centre, Oxford University. Uses Gallup World Poll’s Cantril Ladder: People rate their lives on a scale of 0 (worst) to 10 (best). Combines six variables: GDP per capita Social support Healthy life expectancy Freedom to make life choices Generosity Perception of corruption Strong emphasis on perceptions, not objective indicators. Why Nordic Countries Lead Consistently ? High institutional trust; lost-wallet-return probability is high. Low corruption, strong welfare states, universal healthcare, social equality. High social cohesion + reliable public services → stable well-being. Low inequality of opportunity; egalitarian norms. High taxes convert into visible public goods; trust-tax feedback loop strengthens satisfaction. Why India Scores Low Despite High Growth ? 1. Aspiration–Satisfaction Paradox Rising incomes → rising expectations; dissatisfaction reflects ambition, not misery. Democracies with vibrant media amplify public criticism → lower perceived satisfaction. Similar trend in the U.S., which fell to Rank 24 despite wealth. 2. Perception-Based Metrics Subjective impressions of freedom, corruption and trust can lower national score. Frequent public debates on governance, pollution, inequality → higher negative perceptions. 3. Structural Social Changes Shrinking joint families, urban isolation, digital addiction → weakening social capital. Migration and gig work reduce community bonds that earlier provided emotional buffers. 4. WEIRD Bias in Methodology Report reflects Western norms: Individualistic societies emphasise institutional trust. India’s strength—family/community trust—undervalued and unmeasured. India’s Fluctuating Rank (2012–2025) Best phase (2022): Post-COVID recovery, PM-GKY, welfare expansions. Worst phase (2012): Corruption scandals, growth slowdown. Data shows little correlation between fiscal growth and happiness scores. Core Issue for India: Social Trust Deficit Institutional Trust Uneven governance, bureaucratic delays, service quality inconsistencies reduce trust. Transparent, predictable public services (ration cards, ticketing, pensions) remain patchy. Informal Trust Families and villages act as safety nets. COVID-19 migration showed strong community cohesion. But these networks are invisible to global indices. Psychological and Behavioural Overview Report admits: belief in community kindness predicts happiness more than income. Nearly 19% of young adults globally report “no one to rely on”. India faces similar relational deficits due to urbanisation + digital lifestyles. Political and Methodological Concerns Many global indices (including WHR) criticised for transparency and Western biases. 2022 study (Sanjeev Sanyal & Aakanksha Arora) highlighted: Reliance on small pools of Western experts. Penalising democracies for openness; rewarding states with suppressed dissent. Happiness rankings risk mistaking conformity for contentment. India’s Evolving Approach to Wellbeing Mental health becoming a governance priority. Initiatives: Tele-MANAS (national mental health helpline). Workplace wellness programmes. Inclusion and emotional resilience campaigns. Signals shift toward human-centric development. What India Needs to Do ? 1. Rebuild Social Capital Community spaces, libraries, shared meals, cultural events. Promote inter-generational bonding; reduce loneliness. Larger household size and community kindness strongly correlate with happiness. 2. Strengthen Institutional Trust Simplified, digital-first citizen–state interactions. Transparent service delivery: PDS, healthcare, railways, grievance redress. Consistency in rules → predictability → trust. 3. Make Mental Health an Economic Priority WHO: $1 investment in mental health → $4 productivity return. Integrate counselling in schools, workplaces and primary health centres. Recognise psychological wellbeing as economic infrastructure. Conclusion India’s low rank reflects restlessness, not unhappiness. High aspirations, accountability, and demands for better services are signs of a maturing democracy. “Unfinished, ambitious, striving” India may appear less satisfied—but is progressing toward a deeper idea of happiness. Excessive dependence Why in News? India recorded a historic goods trade deficit in October 2025: $41.68 billion, rising from $32.15 billion in September. Triggered by U.S. tariff shock (50% levy since August) + a surge in gold and silver imports. Raises concerns over overdependence on the U.S. and a possible structural shift in India’s trade portfolio. Relevance GS2 (Governance & International Relations) India–U.S. trade architecture, tariff vulnerabilities, strategic balancing with Russia. Dependence on single markets as a structural governance challenge. GS3 (Economy – External Sector) Trade deficit, BoP stress, rupee depreciation, import–export dynamics. Bullion imports, intermediate goods dependence, manufacturing depth issues. Practice Question   “India’s October 2025 trade deficit is a warning against single-market dependence. Analyse the structural vulnerabilities it exposes.”(250 Words) What is Goods Trade Deficit? Occurs when imports > exports (merchandise only; excludes services). Persistent deficits → pressure on forex reserves, currency depreciation, external vulnerability. India typically covers merchandise deficit through: Strong services exports (IT, BPM). Remittances. Foreign capital flows. Key Data Highlights Exports: Fell 11.8% YoY → $34.38 bn (from $38.98 bn, Oct 2024). Imports: Surged sharply due to bullion inflows and intermediate goods demand. Gold imports: Nearly tripled (vs Oct 2024). Silver imports: Rose 5x. Rupee: Depreciated from ₹85.6/$ (April) → ₹88.4/$ (October). U.S. market: Exports to U.S. fell 9% YoY. Labour-intensive sectors worst hit. Why the Deficit Rose So Sharply? U.S. Tariff Shock (50% duty) Imposed in Aug 2025; U.S. is India’s largest single export market since 2018–19. Hit sectors like: Engineering goods (↓16.71%) RMG and apparel (↓12.88%) Man-made yarn (↓11.75%) Cotton yarn/handlooms (↓13.31%) Bullion Surge as Hedge Gold and silver inflows indicate: Hedging against global + domestic uncertainty. Rupee depreciation encouraging bullion buying. FPI outflow in September deepened anxiety. Higher Use of Imported Intermediates Firms sourcing cheaper imported inputs to remain export-competitive. Points to weak domestic manufacturing depth. HS-wise breakdown (once released) will confirm the shift. Impact on India–U.S. Trade Dynamics Heavy dependence on U.S. → amplified vulnerability. India shifting: Russian imports ↓27.73% (oil correction, geopolitical balancing). U.S. imports ↑13.89% (signalling alignment + reducing trade imbalance concerns). Pressure increasing for: Early India–U.S. Bilateral Trade Agreement. Rollback of tariffs. Government & RBI Response Export Promotion Scheme: ₹25,060 crore over 6 years. RBI relief measures: liquidity, procedural relaxations, credit support for exporters. Aim: cushion tariff impact + restore competitiveness. Is This a Structural Shift or a Temporary Shock ? Arguments for a Temporary Shock U.S. tariffs are a one-off external event. Bullion imports may normalize once uncertainty eases. Re-routing exports and supply chain realignments take time; cannot be labelled structural yet. Arguments for a Structural Shift India is consciously reducing Russian crude share. Increasing U.S. imports to stabilise strategic relations. Export stagnation in labour-intensive sectors indicates deeper competitiveness issues. Reliance on imported intermediates signals systemic domestic production gaps. Why Heavy Dependence on the U.S. is Risky ? U.S. accounts for nearly 20% of India’s total exports. Exposure to: Protectionist tariffs Geopolitical pressures Currency volatility Supply-chain disruptions “Single-market reliance” = economic + diplomatic vulnerability. Long-Term Consequences if Dependence Continues Persistent trade deficits. Employment hit in labour-heavy sectors (textiles, leather, gems). Rupee depreciation pressure. Declining manufacturing self-sufficiency. Reduced bargaining power in trade negotiations. What India Must Do ? 1. Diversify Export Markets Target Latin America, Africa, Middle East, ASEAN+3. Reduce concentration risk: broaden beyond U.S. & EU. 2. Deepen Manufacturing Ecosystems Strengthen domestic intermediates production. Accelerate PLI 2.0, logistics reform, SEZ modernization. 3. Build Tariff-Resilient Sectors Promote advanced engineering, electronics, green tech, medical devices. Modernise textiles: MMF focus, technical textiles, design competitiveness. 4. Stabilise India–U.S. Trade Architecture Conclude bilateral trade agreement. Seek tariff rollbacks linked to wider strategic cooperation. Conclusion The October 2025 deficit is partly a shock, partly a signal. The key lesson: India’s overdependence on the U.S. has converted a single tariff action into a national trade crisis. A structural shift in India’s trade portfolio—towards market diversification, domestic manufacturing depth, and balanced import sources—is not only inevitable but strategically overdue. Language of security needs upgrade, beyond OTP  Why in News? Article highlights the rising ineffectiveness of OTP-based authentication amid soaring digital fraud cases in India. Points to need for new security terminology (e.g., “FTP — Financial Transaction Password”) to reduce fraud by improving user psychology and behavioural responses. Relevance GS2 (Governance) Citizen–state digital interface; RBI/CERT-In regulations; secure digital payments. Trust in public digital infrastructure (UPI, Aadhaar-enabled services). GS3 (Science & Technology – Cybersecurity) Digital fraud, OTP-fatigue, behavioural vulnerabilities. Need for human-centric security design and terminology innovation (FTP). Practice Question “Technological solutions alone cannot address India’s digital fraud epidemic. Behavioural and linguistic redesign is equally critical.” Explain.(250 Words) What Is OTP and Why It Was Created? OTP (One-Time Password) = temporary authentication code for online verification. Initially added as a second-factor security layer to reduce unauthorized access. Used for Aadhaar authentication, bank payments, tax filings, UPI, card-not-present transactions. Why OTP Has Lost Psychological Meaning? OTP is used for almost every digital action, making people desensitised. Users routinely share OTPs for deliveries, subscriptions, device logins → weakens security discipline. Perception: OTP feels like “a simple code handed by a service provider”, not a serious safeguard. Fraud data: 200%+ rise in digital fraud cases year-on-year. ₹22,845 crore reported losses to citizens. Overuse = security fatigue + rising scams such as phishing, vishing, remote-access tricks. Core Argument of the Article 1. Security Failures Are Linguistic and Behavioural, Not Just Technological People share OTPs not due to ignorance but due to habitual desensitisation. Research in behavioural economics: Small linguistic modifications change user response significantly. Word choice affects perception → affects caution levels. 2. Proposed Shift: Replace OTP with “FTP” FTP = Financial Transaction Password. Reserved only for actual money-transfer transactions, not for general logins, couriers, apps. Separates financial risk events from routine authentication. Raises seriousness, caution, and psychological barrier. How FTP Improves Behavioural Security? Clarifies that FTP = money movement. Deters sharing since the term communicates risk + financial consequences. Makes users more alert in UPI, NEFT/IMPS, and debit-card operations. Similar to the way “ATM PIN” creates strong caution vs. ordinary passwords. Why India Needs This Shift? UPI Dominance 13+ billion monthly transactions. Small lapses create massive aggregate risk. Widespread Digital Fraud Remote app scams Fake UPI collect pulls Phishing links Social engineering High-speed digitisation demands high-speed behavioural adaptation Tech alone insufficient. Requires “language of security” to evolve. Low-cost intervention Changing terminology = inexpensive but high psychological impact. Systemic Solutions Recommended 1. Upgrade Security Terminology Introduce FTP for financial transactions. Restrict OTP to non-financial actions only. 2. Banking Interface Overhaul Payment apps, netbanking, UPI should: Use distinct FTP screens. Provide warning prompts on financial authorisations. 3. Regulators & Financial Institutions Conduct mass awareness campaigns. Promote FTP like ATM PIN standards. Integrate FTP into UPI 3.0 / 4.0 ecosystem as optional or mandatory. 4. Policy-Level Action Aligns with India’s cybersecurity strategy, CERT-In advisories, RBI’s digital payment security initiatives. Helps reduce losses borne by banks and insurers. Strategic Significance Behavioural Economics Overview Humans make security errors due to framing, cognition, and expectations, not only due to lack of knowledge. Language shifts can reduce fraud without heavy tech upgrades. Trust & Digital Governance Essential for India’s aspiration of becoming a trillion-dollar digital economy. Enhances confidence in UPI, Aadhaar-enabled payments, and public digital infrastructure. Broader Implications India’s digital expansion → high risk of cybercrime at scale. Without behavioural security design, technological innovation becomes counterproductive. FTP-like segmentation = global best practice in human-centric cybersecurity. Prelims Pointers OTP = widely used authentication mechanism, vulnerable due to user habituation. FTP (proposed): restricted to financial transactions; improves behavioural caution. Major fraud losses: ₹22,845 crore reported. India: one of the world’s fastest digitising economies → rising digital fraud risk.

Content SC Recalls Verdict on Retrospective Green Clearances What Can Local Bodies Expect from the 16th Finance Commission? What Changes Are Planned for the Plant Variety Act? DPDP Rules 2025 — Separate Section for Persons with Disabilities The Rare Ginkgo-Toothed Beaked Whale Glass vs PET: Alcobev Sector Rethinks Packaging Strategy SC recalls verdict on retrospective green clearances  Why is it in News? A three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court has recalled its May 16, 2025 judgment that had declared retrospective/ex-post facto environmental clearances as “gross illegality”. Majority (CJI B.R. Gavai & Justice K. Vinod Chandran) held that allowing the earlier judgment to operate would have devastating economic consequences. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan dissented, warning the Court is “backtracking on sound environmental jurisprudence”. Relevance : GS 3: Environment & Ecology (EIA, environmental governance, precautionary principle) GS 2: Judiciary & Governance (judicial review, balance between environment–economy, Article 21) GS 3: Infrastructure & Industry (impact on projects, regulatory compliance) What are Environmental Clearances (ECs)? Statutory requirement under Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 & EIA Notification 2006. Mandates prior environmental approval before construction, expansion, or operation of certain projects. Ensures: Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Public consultation Mitigation measures Compliance monitoring. What are Ex Post Facto ECs? ECs granted after a project has already started/been completed, violating the “prior approval” principle. Considered legally questionable because: Violates the precautionary principle. Undermines sustainable development norms. Rewards non-compliance. The May 16, 2024 Judgment (Now Recalled) Bench of Justice A.S. Oka & Justice Ujjal Bhuyan. Held that: Ex post facto ECs are an “anathema” and “gross illegality”. Violates Article 21 (right to clean environment). Projects constructed without EC must face strict consequences. Would have impacted: Large real estate, infrastructure, industrial projects. Thousands of crores of investment. The November 2025 Review Judgment (Recall Order) Majority View (CJI Gavai + Justice Chandran) Allowing the May 16 ruling to stand would cause “devastating economic impact”. Thousands of crores of investment would be wasted; projects would become illegal overnight. Review allowed primarily on economic & practical grounds, not on legal reinterpretation. Stressed need to balance environmental protection with economic stability. Suggests that procedural lapses should not destroy completed projects if rectification is possible. Minority View (Justice Ujjal Bhuyan) Strong dissent; called the recall “pained backtracking on environmental jurisprudence”. Argues: Precautionary principle, polluter-pays, inter-generational equity are being diluted. Granting ex post facto ECs rewards violators and encourages non-compliance. The judiciary’s role is to protect environmental rule of law, not facilitate retrospective regularisation. Points to Delhi smog as a daily reminder of environmental degradation. Says the majority is overlooking “fundamentals of environmental law”. Key Issues Raised by the Case 1. Precautionary Principle vs. Economic Considerations Precautionary principle requires prior approval; retrospective permission undermines it. Majority prioritised economic stability. Minority prioritised environmental sanctity. 2. Separation of Powers Whether courts can effectively validate retrospective permissions that dilute statutory requirements. 3. Environmental Rule of Law Recall signals a potential softening of strict judicial scrutiny of environmental compliance. 4. Governance Implications Encourages laxity by developers expecting post-facto regularisation. Raises concerns about regulatory capture and weak enforcement. Implications Short-Term Relief for construction/real estate/industrial sectors. Prevents mass demolition or halting of ongoing commercial activity. Long-Term Weakens deterrence against environmental violations. Could reduce the effectiveness of the EIA regime. Raises doubts about India’s commitment to sustainable development jurisprudence. Conclusion The case is a classic environment vs. economy conflict. Reflects movement from strong judicial environmentalism (Oka–Bhuyan approach) to pragmatic judicial balancing (Gavai–Chandran approach). Highlights the institutional tension between environmental rule of law and economic governance. What can local bodies expect from the 16th FC?  Why is it in News? On November 17, the 16th Finance Commission submitted its report to the President of India. Key expectations: Vertical devolution (share of Union taxes to States) and Horizontal distribution formula across States (Article 280). Important focus: recommendations for panchayat & municipal finances (Art. 280(3)(bb) & (c)). Relevance GS 2: Polity & Governance (73rd/74th Amendments, fiscal decentralisation, local government) GS 3: Economy (fiscal federalism, vertical–horizontal devolution, public finance) GS 2: Centre–State Relations (role of Union FC vs SFCs) Constitutional Framework for Finance Commissions Union Finance Commission (UFC) – Article 280 Constituted every 5 years. Mandate includes: Vertical & horizontal tax devolution. Measures to strengthen State finances. Augment the Consolidated Fund of States for panchayats & municipalities. State Finance Commissions (SFCs) – 73rd & 74th Amendments Each State must set up an SFC every 5 years. Recommends: Local share in State taxes. Assignment of revenue handles. Conditional/unconditional grants. Devolution of functions & functionaries. Local Governments: Functional & Fiscal Architecture Functions Assigned through the 11th Schedule (29 subjects) for panchayats & 12th Schedule (18 subjects) for municipalities. However: These lists are illustrative, not mandatory. States decide actual functional assignments → wide inter-State variation. Revenue Powers Local bodies collect: Property tax Advertisement tax Market fee, tolls, user charges, etc. But large mismatch exists between: Revenue capacity Expenditure responsibilities (water, sanitation, public health, rural roads, asset maintenance). Impact States often assign functions without funds & staff → Operational inefficiency Dependence on higher-level transfers Weak service delivery Fiscal deficits at local levels. Role & Challenges of SFCs Over 100 SFC reports submitted across States. Major issues: Delays in constitution & report submission. Poor record of acceptance by State legislatures. Recommendations often ignored or partially implemented. Result: local bodies must rely heavily on Union FC transfers, not States. What Previous Union Finance Commissions Did Key Pattern Six UFCs have issued local government recommendations so far. Persistent issues: Could not quantify actual resource needs of 2.7 lakh panchayats & 5,000 municipalities. Relied on ad hoc lump-sum grants. 13th FC (Turned Point) Introduced formula-based transfers: Grant as a percentage of the divisible pool. Rationale: Inflation neutrality Buoyancy with Union tax revenues Consulted legal experts; pushed for predictable growth-linked transfers. 14th & 15th FCs (Reversal of 13th FC Approach) Returned to lump-sum grants. Introduced conditionalities: “Basic” (unconditional) “Performance-based” (conditional) Problem: Each FC changed reform conditions, creating discontinuity. 13th FC: 6 conditions (mostly unmet by States). 14th FC: new and unrelated set of conditions. 15th FC: different conditions again. Core Issues in Local Government Fiscal Federalism 1. Vertical–Horizontal Imbalance Local governments do not have predictable, adequate revenue streams. Functional responsibilities grow but revenue handles remain restricted. 2. Assignment Problem No dedicated constitutional list for: Local functions Local revenue sources States exercise wide discretion → fiscal asymmetry. 3. Overdependence on Union FC Weak SFC implementation forces panchayats/municipalities to rely on central transfers. 4. Conditionality Instability Reform-linked grants change every 5 years → No continuity No long-term incentive alignment. What Is Expected from the 16th Finance Commission? Move beyond ad hoc or lump-sum grants. Assess actual resource requirements of 2.7 lakh panchayats & 5,000 municipalities. Provide stable, formula-driven, buoyancy-linked transfers. Standardise performance conditions instead of frequent redesign. Strengthen local bodies as institutions of: Economic development Social justice Comprehensive Significance Strengthens decentralised governance, core to the 73rd & 74th Amendments. Potentially creates India’s first consistent, long-term local fiscal framework. Aligns local governance with national goals: Drinking water Sanitation Public health Rural/urban infrastructure. What changes are planned for the plant variety Act?  Why is it in News? Union Agriculture Minister announced that the Centre will amend the PPV&FRA Act, 2001. A committee headed by R.S. Paroda (appointed by the PPVFR Authority) has begun stakeholder consultations. Aim: update the 20-year-old Act in light of technological changes, trade dynamics, and evolving farmers’ needs. Relevance GS 3: Agriculture (seed systems, breeders’ rights, farmers’ rights) GS 3: IPR in Agriculture (PPV&FRA, UPOV pressures, TRIPS compliance) GS 2: Governance (regulatory institutions, stakeholder concerns) What Is the PPV&FRA Act, 2001? India’s sui generis law under TRIPS to protect plant varieties and recognise farmers’ rights. Ensures: Breeders’ rights Farmers’ rights to save, use, sow, resow, exchange, share or sell farm seeds (but not branded varieties) Benefit sharing Protection of traditional varieties Establishes the Protection of Plant Varieties & Farmers’ Rights Authority (PPVFRA). Why Amend the Act Now? Two decades of scientific & technological change: Tissue culture Synthetic seeds Hybrids and genotype combinations New trade realities, IPR pressures, and global norms. Need to address deficiencies, ambiguities, and implementation gaps. What the Paroda Committee Is Examining ? Definitions & Scope Redefining “variety” to include “combination of genotypes” (align with Seeds Bill 2019). Expanding the definition of “seed” to include: Seedlings Tubers, bulbs, rhizomes Roots, tissue culture plantlets Synthetic seeds Vegetatively propagated materials Defining “institution” under “breeder” to include public & private entities. DUS Test (Distinctness, Uniformity, Stability) Considering inclusion of trait-based criteria in DUS guidelines. Review of procedural integrity due to allegations of improper DUS testing in some cases (e.g., njavara paddy variety). Abusive Acts Proposal to legally define and criminalise “abusiveacts” such as: Producing/selling varieties with identical denominations Marketing/importing/exporting deceptive varieties Aim: prevent fraud, confusion, and misappropriation. Concerns Raised by Farmer Groups 1. Protection of Community-Developed Seeds Demand for mandatory registration of all community-developed seeds. Warning: varieties passing DUS tests should not be registered under an individual or private company, to prevent monopolisation. 2. Fear of Misuse of DUS Process Allegations of improper DUS evaluation (e.g., njavara). Concern: weak oversight may enable private appropriation of farmers’ varieties. 3. Small Peasantry & IPR Fit Many small farmers see seeds as shared biocultural commons, not IPR objects. Fear: amendments may tilt law towards exclusive economic rights, incompatible with farmer traditions. 4. Global IPR Pressure Civil society warns about attempts to align Indian law closer to UPOV norms. Risk: erosion of India’s farmer-friendly sui generis architecture. 5. Incomplete Compensation Mechanisms Although the original Act provides for compensation when IP-protected seeds fail, Rules do not detail criteria or enforcement, leaving farmers unprotected. Comprehensive Overview A. Legal & Policy Significance PPV&FRA is globally applauded for balancing breeders’ rights and farmers’ rights. Amendments risk shifting equilibrium towards industry interests if not carefully designed. Defining “abusive acts” is critical for seed market integrity. B. Technological Imperatives Modern breeding technologies require updated definitions to avoid grey zones. Inclusion of tissue culture and synthetic seeds expands the law’s coverage. C. Farmers’ Rights Concerns Community stewardship is central to India’s seed culture. Registration of community varieties under private names can create biopiracy risks. D. Governance & Regulatory Gaps DUS testing lacks transparency; uniformity needed across centres. Lack of clear compensation mechanisms reduces accountability of seed companies. E. International Context Many countries are experimenting with open-source seed systems to keep local varieties outside restrictive IPR regimes. India may need hybrid models to protect diversity while encouraging innovation. Way Forward Transparent, participatory amendments with strong farmer representation. Strengthen DUS protocols and grievance mechanisms. Ensure open-source / commons-based protection for traditional varieties. Clearly define compensation criteria for seed failure. Maintain India’s sui generis character, resisting pressure to mimic UPOV. DPDP Rules 2025 — Separate Section for  Persons with Disabilities Why in News ? Disability rights groups objected to the draft DPDP Rules that clubbed persons with disabilities (PwDs) with children for guardian-based consent. Ministry of Electronics & IT revised the final Rules (2025), creating a separate section for PwDs, removing them from child-specific restrictions. Relevance : GS 2: Governance (data protection, rights-based policymaking, digital consent) GS 2: Vulnerable Sections (PwD rights, RPWD Act 2016, UNCRPD) GS 2: Social Justice (disability autonomy, preventing structural discrimination) Basics DPDP Act, 2023: Governs digital personal data processing based on consent and purpose limitation. Draft Rules: Initially treated PwDs and children similarly regarding online consent. Issue: PwDs are a diverse group; many can independently manage digital interactions. What Has Changed ? PwDs no longer fall under child-specific restrictions such as: Mandatory parental consent for online activities. Restrictions on behavioural monitoring or targeted advertising. Separate consent framework created specifically for PwDs. Why the Change Matters ? Recognises autonomy and adult legal status of PwDs. Avoids structural discrimination caused by equating disability with legal incapacity. Aligns with the RPWD Act, 2016 and UNCRPD principles. Key Issues Still Unresolved No Illustrations Provided: Unlike the children’s section, the PwD section lacks examples for: Situations requiring guardian consent. Situations where independent consent is valid. How platforms should assess capacity in digital environments. Ambiguity in Guardianship Law: The rules do not clarify whether: NT Act, 1999 (based on “decision-making incapacity”), or RPWD Act, 2016 (supports autonomy) should guide guardianship decisions. Incomplete Operational Guidance: No clarity on: Verification of guardianship status. Dispute resolution if a platform doubts the guardian’s legitimacy. Treatment of persons with psychosocial disabilities with fluctuating capacity. Concerns from Activists and Civil Society Treating PwDs as a vulnerable group without safeguards risks paternalism. Lack of illustrations leaves service providers uncertain, leading to over-cautious blocking of PwDs’ access. Many small and marginalised PwD communities may not understand techno-legal implications. Fear that outdated NT Act provisions may be used to override autonomy. Positive Outcomes of the Revision Restores rights to personalised services such as: Assistive technologies relying on behavioural patterns. Targeted content for screen-reader or accessibility purposes. Eliminates unnecessary parental/guardian gatekeeping for adult PwDs. Indicates a consultative, responsive government policy process. Way Forward Provide detailed guidelines/illustrations for: Consent for different disability categories. Supported decision-making mechanisms. Online guardian verification. Amend the DPDP Act wording itself, which still groups children and PwDs together. Harmonise guardianship standards: Prioritise RPWD Act (2016) over NT Act (1999) to comply with UNCRPD. The Rare Ginkgo-Toothed Beaked Whale  Why in news? Scientists recorded the first-ever sighting in the wild of the ginkgo-toothed beaked whale (Mesoplodon ginkgodens) off Baja California, Mexico. Findings published in Marine Mammal Science. Species previously known almost entirely from rare stranding records. Relevance : GS 3: Environment & Biodiversity (marine species, deep-sea ecology, conservation challenges) GS 3: Science & Tech – Ecology Research (species discovery, behavioural ecology) Basics Species: Mesoplodon ginkgodens. Family: Ziphiidae (beaked whales). Group significance: Beaked whales are the second-most diverse group of cetaceans after dolphins. Habitat: Deep ocean; extremely elusive; surface only briefly. Key features of ginkgo-toothed beaked whale Name origin: Teeth shaped like ginkgo leaves. Size: Up to 17.3 ft (both sexes). Body characteristics: Robust build. Less heavily scarred than other beaked whales → suggests less male–male aggression or tooth-related external impacts. Rarity: Extremely difficult to observe alive; known mostly from sparse stranding data. Behavioural & ecological significance Deepest-diving mammals: Dive thousands of metres. Stay underwater for very long durations. Surface only briefly. Shy species → avoid boats, difficult to study. Importance for deep-sea ecosystem studies: Indicators of deep-ocean health. Crucial for understanding cetacean evolution and diving physiology. Scientific importance of the sighting First high-quality field documentation of the species. Enhances understanding of: Distribution. Behaviour. Morphological variation. Conservation needs. Helps fill major data gaps in Mesoplodon genus biology. Threats & conservation context Vulnerabilities: Bycatch. Marine noise pollution (sonar). Prospective deep-sea mining. Climate-linked habitat shifts. Conservation challenge: Extremely limited population data due to cryptic behaviour. Glass vs PET: Alcobev Sector Rethinks Packaging Strategy  Why in news ? Alcobev industry shifting toward PET and aseptic packaging due to glass price volatility, furnace shutdowns, and supply disruptions. Supreme Court objected to pocket-sized liquor packs, calling them deceptive and dangerous. Relevance GS 3: Economy (industrial supply chains, cost pressures, market shifts) GS 3: Environment (recyclability, waste management, circular economy) GS 3: Science & Tech (packaging materials, rPET technology) Packaging types Glass: Premium image, inert, recyclable. High cost, breakage risk, volatile supply. PET: Lower cost, lightweight, easier logistics. Environmental concerns; weaker premium perception. Aseptic / multilayered board packs: Used in low-end segments; harder to counterfeit. Under Supreme Court scrutiny for safety/deception concerns. rPET: Recycled PET; costlier than virgin PET currently. Improves supply stability; strengthens circular economy. Market context Mass-market in Karnataka uses ~80% multilayered board due to dominance of low-end segments. UP and Karnataka widely use aseptic packs; Kerala, AP, Maharashtra, Telangana use PET. Some states lack excise provisions for formats like rPET. Economic drivers Glass pricing volatility: Furnace shutdowns → cross-regional sourcing → higher freight (e.g., United Spirits). Capacity > demand (e.g., Radico Khaitan) but utilisation remains uneven. Prices stable now but historically unpredictable → margin risks. Cost pressures: Rising packaging costs push companies toward alternatives. PET lowers logistics cost and breakage losses. rPET offers long-term stability but not yet margin-improving. Industry adjustments Long-term vendor contracts and alternative sourcing to manage inflationary pressures. Migration to PET for low-end brands to preserve wafer-thin margins. Premium and mid-segment brands retain glass for brand positioning and consumer preference. Regulatory angle Supreme Court concern: Pocket-sized liquor packs resemble juice boxes → misleading and unsafe. Anti-counterfeit considerations: Multilayered packs reduce revenue leakages. State-level divergence on PET acceptance due to environmental considerations. Environmental perspectives Glass: Infinitely recyclable but suffers from poor collection and reprocessing in India. PET/rPET: Lower transport emissions; potential circularity; pollution risks persist. rPET expected to become cost-competitive as ecosystem scales. Structural vs cyclical changes Packaging shift considered structural, not tied to temporary glass price volatility. Drivers: Supply stability, logistics optimisation, anti-counterfeit needs, and predictable long-term costs.