Content

1. Primary Amoebic Meningoencephalitis (PAM)
2. Nominated Members in Legislatures
3. Toll Collection Practices in India
4. Ethanol Blending in Petrol
5. Creamy Layer in OBC Reservation
6. Nationalists in Ireland, India: How a Future Indian President was Inspired

---

The Disease: Primary Amoebic Meningoencephalitis (PAM)

---

• Causative Agent:
  • Caused by Naegleria fowleri (a free-living, thermophilic amoeba).
  • Commonly found in warm freshwater (ponds, lakes, poorly maintained swimming pools, stagnant water).
• Mode of Transmission:
  • Amoeba enters the human body through the nose while swimming, bathing, or diving in contaminated water.
  • Reaches the brain through the olfactory nerve (cribriform plate).
  • Not transmitted person-to-person.
• Pathophysiology:
  • Amoeba invades the central nervous system → acute inflammation of brain and meninges.
  • Causes Primary Amoebic Meningoencephalitis (PAM) → often fatal.

Relevance : GS 2(Health), GS 3(Science and Technology)

 

Symptoms & Clinical Course

• Incubation period: 5–10 days after exposure.
• Early Symptoms:
  • Severe headache, fever, nausea, vomiting.
  • Stiff neck, photophobia (light sensitivity).
  • Children: refusal to eat, irritability, lethargy.
• Progressive Symptoms:
  • Confusion, altered behavior.
  • Seizures, epilepsy.
  • Memory loss, fainting.
  • Coma → death (usually within 1–2 weeks of symptom onset).
• Mortality: Extremely high (95–99%), with very few survivors globally.

Risk Factors

• Swimming or bathing in stagnant or warm freshwater (especially during summer).
• Children at higher risk (due to thinner cribriform plate → easier entry to brain).
• Ear/nose surgeries or injuries may increase susceptibility.
• No risk from drinking contaminated water (infection occurs only through nose).

Recent Outbreak in Kerala

• Kozhikode (2024): 3 cases detected, 1 death reported.
• Previous local outbreaks in Kerala had led to warning boards near ponds to alert public.
• Current alert: Issued by Kerala Health Department to raise awareness and encourage precaution.

Preventive Measures

• Avoid swimming or bathing in stagnant/unclean ponds, lakes, and warm water bodies.
• Use nose clips while swimming to prevent water entry.
• Ensure chlorination and cleaning of public water sources and swimming pools.
• People with nasal/ear surgeries should avoid exposure to stagnant water.
• Public awareness campaigns: leaflets, boards near ponds, media outreach.

Treatment Challenges

• No single guaranteed cure.
• Drugs used (in combinations):
  • Amphotericin B, Miltefosine, Azoles (Fluconazole, Ketoconazole).
  • Treatment effective only if started very early.
• Supportive care (ICU, ventilator support) often required.

Broader Public Health Concerns

• Rarity but Deadliness: Cases are rare, but nearly always fatal → high fear factor.
• Climate Change Link: Rising temperatures and water stagnation may increase risk.
• Surveillance & Rapid Diagnosis:
  • Need early identification at hospitals.
  • Train health workers to recognize neurological symptoms after water exposure.

Bottom Line:

• PAM is a rare but almost always fatal brain infection caused by Naegleria fowleri.
• Kerala’s alert in Kozhikode is precautionary due to recent cases and a death.
• Preventive steps (avoiding stagnant water, using nose clips, awareness campaigns) are critical, as treatment options are limited and survival rates are very low.

---

Nominated Members in Legislatures

---

Constitutional Provisions:

• Parliament: 12 nominated members in Rajya Sabha (by President on aid & advice of Union Council of Ministers).
  • State Assemblies: Earlier, Governors nominated one Anglo-Indian MLA (now abolished in 2020).
  • Legislative Councils: Nearly 1/6th of members are nominated by Governors (on advice of State Council of Ministers).
• Principle:
  • Nomination exists to bring in experts, minority/community representation, or to supplement elected members.
  • But always on aid & advice of elected executive, ensuring accountability.

Relevance : GS 2(Polity and Constitution)

Union Territories with Assemblies

• Delhi (GNCTD Act, 1991):
  • 70 elected MLAs, no nominated members.
• Puducherry (Government of UT Act, 1963):
  • 30 elected MLAs + up to 3 nominated by Union government.
  • Controversy: Union govt nominates directly, bypassing UT Council of Ministers.
• J&K (J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019, amended 2023):
  • 90 elected seats.
  • LG may nominate up to 5 members:
    • 2 women,
    • 2 Kashmiri migrants,
    • 1 displaced person from Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.

Case Law & Judicial Rulings

• Puducherry (K. Lakshminarayanan v. Union of India, 2018 – Madras HC):
  • Held: Union govt can nominate 3 MLAs to Puducherry Assembly without UT Cabinet advice.
  • Recommended statutory clarity, but Supreme Court later set aside these recommendations.
• Delhi (GNCTD v. Union of India, 2023 – SC Constitution Bench):
  • Introduced “Triple Chain of Command” principle:
    • Civil servants accountable to Ministers.
    • Ministers accountable to Legislature.
    • Legislature accountable to People.
  • Ensures democratic accountability → LG bound by aid & advice of Council of Ministers (except in subjects outside Delhi Assembly’s legislative domain).
  • Though about services, rationale extends to nominations: LG should act with Cabinet’s advice to maintain democratic chain.

Current Controversy: J&K

• Union Home Ministry’s stand (2024 affidavit):
  • LG can nominate 5 members without aid & advice of J&K Council of Ministers.
• Democratic Concerns:
  • Risks undermining popular mandate, especially in a small Assembly (90 elected).
  • Nominated MLAs can swing majority/minority balance → undemocratic if done by Union govt/ LG alone.

Why It Matters

• Federal Balance:
  • UTs with Assemblies (Delhi, Puducherry, J&K) are hybrid — not full States, but with elected governments.
  • Direct Union control via LG nominations risks weakening local democracy.
• Political Neutrality:
  • When ruling party at Centre ≠ ruling party in UT, nomination power can be weaponised to influence Assembly outcomes.
• J&K’s Special Case:
  • Was a State till 2019, with even greater autonomy.
  • SC upheld reorganisation, but Govt assured early restoration of statehood.
  • Therefore, democratic principles must be safeguarded → LG should nominate only on Cabinet advice.

Way Forward: How Should Nominations Be Done?

• For J&K Assembly:
  • LG should exercise power only on aid & advice of UT Council of Ministers (once elected).
  • Aligns with SC’s triple chain of command principle.
  • Prevents manipulation of Assembly arithmetic.
• For Puducherry Assembly (Govt of UT Act, 1963):
  • Parliament should amend law to mandate that Union govt/ LG act on UT Cabinet’s advice.
  • Brings practice in line with democratic accountability.
• For All UTs with Assemblies:
  • Clear statutory framework on:
    • Who nominates,
    • On whose advice,
    • Criteria for nomination (minorities, women, expertise).
  • Prevents arbitrary use of nomination powers.

Bottom Line:

• Who decides nominations? → Constitutionally, nominations are made by President/Governors/LGs, but always on aid & advice of elected governments (except where law explicitly allows Centre’s discretion).
• J&K Assembly nominations should be by LG on advice of Council of Ministers, to preserve democracy.
• Puducherry (1963 Act) allows Union govt direct nomination (problematic).
• SC’s 2023 “Triple Chain of Command” principle reinforces that unelected authorities (LG, Union govt) should not bypass elected executives in democratic functioning.

---

Toll collection practices in India

---

Basics of Toll Collection

• Legal Basis:
  • National Highways Act, 1956 → empowers GoI to levy fees (Section 7) and make rules (Section 9).
  • Current framework: National Highways Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Rules, 2008.
• Models of Collection:
  • Publicly funded highways → toll collected by GoI/NHAI.
  • Build Operate Transfer (BoT) → concessionaire collects till investment recovered + concession period.
  • Toll-Operate-Transfer (ToT) / InvIT models → private players operate & collect toll.
• Fee Structure:
  • Base rates fixed in 2008.
  • Escalation: +3% annually + 40% of WPI increase.
  • Not linked to actual cost recovery or quality of service.
• Revenue Trend:
  • ₹1,046 crore (2005–06) → ₹55,000 crore (2023–24).
  • Of this, ~₹25,000 crore goes to Consolidated Fund of India, balance to concessionaires.
  • Toll is now seen as a perpetual revenue stream, not just cost-recovery.

Relevance : GS 2(Governance)

Problems in Current Tolling Regime

• Perpetual Tolling:
  • Even after capital costs are recovered, tolling continues indefinitely (due to 2008 amendment).
  • Creates “double taxation” feeling since users also pay high road/cess on fuel.
• Transparency Issues:
  • No independent authority to evaluate if toll rates are justified.
  • Annual hikes are automatic, not linked to road quality, maintenance, or service delivery.
• Equity Concerns:
  • Toll is a regressive tax: affects poorer daily commuters disproportionately.
  • No concessions during road expansion/construction phases, despite reduced usability.
• Operational Inefficiencies:
  • FASTag rollout improved things, but queues persist due to:
    • faulty scanners,
    • insufficient lanes,
    • inadequate top-up/recharge facilities on site.
• Trust Deficit:
  • Users perceive toll as a permanent government rent rather than a genuine cost-recovery mechanism.

Key PAC Recommendations

• End Perpetual Tolling:
  • Toll should end once project cost + O&M costs are recovered.
  • Any extension must be justified and approved by a new independent regulator.
• Independent Regulatory Authority:
  • Oversee toll determination, collection, and escalation.
  • Ensure fair pricing, transparency, and accountability.
• Reimburse Users During Construction:
  • If widening/repair work disrupts traffic, commuters should get reduced or refunded toll.
• Reform Escalation Formula:
  • Move beyond flat +3% + partial WPI indexation.
  • Link hikes to actual O&M costs, road quality benchmarks, and vehicle operating costs.
• Improve FASTag Functionality:
  • On-location services at plazas for recharge/replacement.
  • Address scanner and connectivity issues to reduce congestion.

Global Comparisons

• Developed Economies:
  • US, EU → tolls are typically project-specific, end after debt recovery, or replaced by road-use taxation.
  • Transparent public audits of toll revenues.
• China:
  • Heavily tolled network; clear sunset clauses after debt recovery, though extension common in practice.
• Brazil & Mexico:
  • Mixed concession models but linked to service guarantees (lane availability, safety, emergency services).

India’s perpetual tolling model is more revenue-driven than service-driven.

Science & Economics of Tolling

• Economic Rationale:
  • User-pays principle → those who benefit should pay.
  • Efficient in theory but inequitable in practice if poorly regulated.
• Issues with Perpetual Tolling:
  • Becomes a hidden tax beyond cost recovery.
  • Erodes public trust → leads to evasion, protests, and resistance.
• Technology Solutions:
  • GPS-based tolling (already piloted in EU, Singapore): pay-per-km, avoids bottlenecks, fairer distribution.
  • Dynamic pricing based on congestion and road quality.

Way Forward: Suggested Reforms

• Policy Reforms:
  • Roll back perpetual tolling amendment.
  • Legally mandate sunset clauses post cost-recovery.
  • Mandate value-for-money audits of highways.
• Institutional Reform:
  • Independent toll regulator under NHAI/NITI Aayog.
  • Public reporting of toll revenue, O&M expenditure, debt repayment.
• Technological Reform:
  • GPS-based tolling to replace physical plazas (reduces leakage & congestion).
  • Full FASTag integration with seamless top-up, auto-deductions, digital complaint redressal.
• Equity Safeguards:
  • Discounts for frequent commuters, public transport, and local residents.
  • Temporary toll suspension or reduction during construction phases.

---

Ethanol Blending in Petrol

---

Context and Policy Goals

• Govt. target: 20% ethanol blending (E20) by 2025.
• Objectives:
  • Energy security → reduce crude oil imports (India imports ~85% of crude needs).
  • Carbon emission reduction → lower GHGs.
  • Rural income boost → new market for sugarcane, maize, rice, and agricultural residues.
  • Waste utilisation → use of damaged food grains and crop residues.

Relevance : GS 3(Environment and Ecology , Science and Technology)

Scientific Basis of Ethanol

• Nature: Ethanol (C₂H₅OH) – an oxygenated biofuel.
• Production:
  • From sugarcane/molasses via yeast fermentation.
  • From food grains (maize, rice, broken grains).
  • From lignocellulosic biomass (non-food crop residues – cellulose, hemicellulose, lignin).
• Process:
  • Sugars → glucose (invertase) → ethanol + CO₂ (zymase).
• Key property: Hygroscopic (absorbs water), influencing corrosion and storage.

Energy Efficiency of Ethanol vs Petrol

• Calorific Value (CV):
  • Petrol: ~43 MJ/kg.
  • Ethanol: ~27 MJ/kg (≈35% lower).
  • Implication → lower mileage per litre.
• Octane Number (ON):
  • Petrol: 87–91.
  • Ethanol: ~108.
  • Higher ON → better resistance to knocking, smoother combustion.
• Net Result:
  • Slight mileage drop at E20 (~2–4%).
  • Noticeable only at E100 (100% ethanol).

Vehicle Impact – Scientific Concerns

• Hygroscopic Effect:
  • Water absorption → rusting of tanks, clogging of fuel lines, reduced efficiency.
• Material Compatibility:
  • Ethanol corrodes rubber and plastic components in older vehicles (fuel pipes, gaskets, injectors).
• Stoichiometric Ratio (Air–Fuel mix):
  • Ethanol adds oxygen → alters combustion chemistry.
  • Requires recalibration of spark timing and ECU (Electronic Control Unit).
• Engine Types:
  • Modern BS-IV & BS-VI vehicles (post-2020): ECU-controlled → can adapt to E20.
  • Older carbureted vehicles (pre-2020): No ECU → cannot be retrofitted easily.

Environmental & Emission Effects

• Positives:
  • Reduced CO, NOx, and particulate emissions due to oxygen-enriched combustion.
  • Lower lifecycle CO₂ if biomass sustainably sourced.
• Negatives:
  • Land-use shift → possible diversion of food crops to fuel.
  • High water footprint of sugarcane → aggravates groundwater depletion.
  • Possible indirect emissions from fertilisers, transport, and processing.

Maintenance and Cost Concerns

• Govt. claim: Only one-time replacement of rubber components needed.
• Experts’ warning:
  • Corrosion more severe in cold regions (moisture condenses).
  • Regular servicing and higher maintenance costs inevitable for older vehicles.
• Recalibration of engines → increases manufacturing cost for auto industry.

International Experience

• Brazil:
  • Started in 1970s (Proálcool programme).
  • Currently runs on E27 + widespread use of flex-fuel vehicles.
  • Transition was gradual, with subsidies, infrastructure, and farmer-industry linkages.
• USA:
  • Large-scale corn ethanol production, but criticized for food vs fuel conflict.
• India’s challenge: Compressed timeline (2021 → 2025), unlike Brazil’s decades-long transition.

Science-Driven Challenges for India

• Agronomic:
  • Heavy reliance on sugarcane → water-intensive (3,000–5,000 litres water per litre ethanol).
  • Risk of food vs fuel diversion if maize/rice used extensively.
• Technological:
  • Lack of widespread flex-fuel engine technology.
  • Insufficient 2G ethanol production (from agri-waste).
• Infrastructure:
  • Ethanol blending needs separate pipelines/storage tanks (due to hygroscopic nature).
  • Higher transport costs for ethanol from rural production sites to refineries.
• Economic:
  • High production cost of ethanol vs subsidised petrol.
  • Fiscal burden of incentives/subsidies to sugar mills & distilleries.

Scientific Verdict

• Strengths:
  • Cleaner combustion (less CO, PM).
  • Energy diversification, import reduction.
  • Adds rural economic value, waste-to-fuel potential.
• Weaknesses:
  • Lower energy density → mileage drop.
  • Corrosion/moisture issues in older vehicles.
  • Water-intensive crops (sugarcane).
  • Limited readiness of Indian vehicles for E20.

Way Forward

• Diversify feedstock: Promote 2G ethanol (crop residues, agri-waste, bamboo).
• Technology adoption: Encourage flex-fuel vehicles (as in Brazil).
• Agricultural reforms: Shift away from water-guzzling sugarcane → maize, sorghum, cellulosic biomass.
• Infrastructure: Invest in ethanol storage, blending, distribution systems.
• Policy pacing: Gradual transition (E10 → E12 → E15 → E20) with simultaneous vehicle adaptation.
• R&D push: Develop corrosion-resistant materials and better engine calibration technologies.

---

Creamy Layer in OBC Reservation – Debate on “Equivalence”

---

Basic Concepts

• Reservation in India:
  • Based on Articles 15(4), 16(4), and 340 (Constitution) → for socially and educationally backward classes (SEBCs), SCs, and STs.
  • Aim: Correct historical injustices, ensure representation in education, employment, and politics.
• Creamy Layer (CL):
  • Concept introduced by Indra Sawhney Case (1992).
  • Ruling: Reservation benefits should not go to the “advanced sections” among OBCs, i.e., those with higher income, social capital, or government positions.
  • Purpose: Ensure benefits reach the most disadvantaged, not the relatively privileged within OBCs.

Relevance : GS 2(Governance ,Social Issues)

Indra Sawhney Judgment (1992)

• Upheld 27% OBC reservation as per Mandal Commission.
• Directed exclusion of “creamy layer”:
  • Children of high-ranking officials, professionals, industrialists, etc.
  • Applied only to OBCs, not SCs/STs.
• Set income/position-based tests for exclusion.

DoPT Guidelines (Post-1993)

• Income threshold set at ₹1 lakh annually (1993).
• Revised multiple times → now ₹8 lakh per year (since 2017).
• Categories excluded:
  • Children of Group A/All India Services officers.
  • Children of armed forces officers above Lt. Colonel.
  • Professionals/business owners with substantial income.
• Importantly: Wealth (property ownership) is not considered, only income/profession.

Issues in Implementation

• Anomalies:
  • Children of low-paid Group A officers automatically excluded (though not necessarily “affluent”).
  • Children of public sector employees treated differently from private-sector counterparts.
  • Lack of uniformity across state vs central services, teaching vs non-teaching posts.
• Certificates issued under old criteria sometimes still used, even after revisions.
• Court rulings in 2015 & 2023 highlighted confusion and inconsistencies.

Current Proposal: “Equivalence”

Aim → uniform criteria across ministries, PSUs, universities, and states.

• Key Features Proposed:
  • Equivalence of Pay Scales: Link OBC creamy layer exclusion to pay level (not just income).
    • Eg. Assistant Professors (entry-level university teachers) = Group A equivalent → counted in creamy layer.
  • Non-teaching staff in universities: Equated with state government non-teaching positions.
  • Executives in PSUs:
    • If income > ₹8 lakh, they fall under creamy layer.
    • But ceiling for private sector employees = ₹8 lakh income, irrespective of position.
  • Employees of government-funded institutions: Should follow same service rules/pay-scales as government employees.

Likely Beneficiaries

• Children of lower-rank Group A officers (earning just above ₹8 lakh but not wielding high social capital).
• Employees of state universities & aided institutions who previously faced unequal treatment.
• OBC candidates denied earlier due to lack of uniform application of creamy layer norms.

Broader Analysis

• Positive Aspects:
  • Creates fairness, removes anomalies.
  • Prevents arbitrary exclusion.
  • Ensures genuine backward classes continue benefiting.
• Concerns:
  • Income ceiling (₹8 lakh) may still be too high, letting affluent OBCs corner benefits.
  • Wealth/property ownership still ignored.
  • Equivalence across diverse institutions (state, PSU, universities) is administratively complex.
  • Risk of dilution of merit vs social justice balance.

Policy & Political Dimensions

• Creamy layer debate often resurfaces during elections → political sensitivity.
• Expanding creamy layer definition = balancing act between social justice and appeasing middle-class OBCs.
• Recommendations by NCBC, DoPT, and Social Justice Ministry under discussion.

Comparative Insights (Global)

• US: Affirmative action debates also face “class vs race” questions (should rich Black families get same benefit as poor?).
• South Africa: Similar debates on whether upper-class Black Africans should benefit from racial quotas.
• India’s creamy layer = unique model of mixing caste + class filters.

Way Forward

• Regular revision of income ceiling linked to inflation.
• Include wealth/property criteria, not just income.
• Separate criteria for rural vs urban OBCs.
• Improve data transparency in issuance of creamy layer certificates.
• Gradually shift towards socio-economic deprivation index (composite indicators).

---

Nationalists in Ireland, India: How a Future Indian President was Inspired

---

Basic Background

• Who: Varahagiri Venkata Giri (V.V. Giri) – 4th President of India (1969–1974).
• Where: Studied law in Dublin (1913–1917).
• Context: Ireland under British rule → parallel anti-colonial movements in Ireland and India.
• Link: Giri’s exposure to Irish labour movement, nationalist struggle, and student activism shaped his political ideology in India.

Relevance: GS 1(History )

Conditions in Ireland (Early 20th Century)

• Admission for Indians in English universities stricter → Ireland relatively more open.
• Racial prejudice less pronounced in Ireland compared to Britain.
• Dublin = hub of student, labour, and nationalist movements.
• Dublin Lockout (1913): workers’ strike against exploitation → Giri directly witnessed.

Giri’s Activism in Dublin

• Immersed in Irish Labour Movement → exposure to collective bargaining, trade unionism.
• Inspired by:
  • Irish Transport & General Workers’ Union.
  • Radical leaders like James Connolly (executed after Easter Rising 1916).
• Joined the Anarchical Society (propagating anti-imperialist methods).
• Worked with Indian Students’ Association in Dublin (published pamphlets against racism & British atrocities in South Africa).

Key Influences on Giri

• Labour Rights: Deep commitment to trade unions and worker emancipation in India later.
• Nationalism: Irish experience gave him “complete sense of identity with the Irish cause” → parallels with India’s struggle.
• Revolutionary Inspiration: Inspired by Easter Rising (1916), despite suppression by British.
• Personal Resolve: After seeing Irish sacrifices, resolved to return to India and work for independence.

Political Repercussions

• Marked as a political radical by British authorities.
• Closely watched, deported back to India in 1917.
• Continued activism in India:
  • Organised transport workers’ unions.
  • Advocated labour rights + independence.
  • Eventually became India’s President.

Indo-Irish Parallels

• Common struggle: Both nations under British imperialism.
• Labour movements: Key element in both nationalist struggles.
• Cross-learning: Indians drew from Irish revolutionary zeal; Irish saw India’s movement as sister-struggle.
• Shared leaders: Gandhi–South Africa (labour, non-violence) vs Connolly–Ireland (labour, armed resistance).

Broader Analysis

• Intellectual exchange: Globalisation of anti-colonial ideas even before independence.
• Labour as nationalism’s ally: National freedom tied to worker emancipation.
• Diaspora role: Students abroad became bridges for transnational solidarity.
• India’s labour politics: Shaped by this experience → Giri’s presidency symbolised merging of workers’ rights + democratic politics.

Contemporary Relevance

• Highlights importance of global solidarity in anti-colonial struggles.
• Lessons for today:
  • Transnational unity against oppression (climate justice, workers’ rights).
  • Role of student/youth movements in shaping politics.
• Reminder: Political empowerment must include economic emancipation of the working class (Giri’s lifelong message).

---