Verify it's really you

Please re-enter your password to continue with this action.

Published on Jan 22, 2026
Daily Editorials Analysis
Editorials/Opinions Analysis For UPSC 22 January 2026
Editorials/Opinions Analysis For UPSC 22 January 2026

Content

  1. Judicial Removal (Impeachment of Judges) in India
  2. 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 :
    • 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 judges 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
  • Humanenvironment 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
    • 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 demandsupply gap of ~40% by 2030.
Historical Evolution
  • Traditional Phase
    • Community-based systems (tanks, stepwells, johads) ensured local rechargeuse 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.
  • CentreState 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.