UPSC Mains 2025 General Studies (GS) Paper 2: Complete Question-wise Analysis and Synopsis

• Discuss the ‘corrupt practices’ for the purpose of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Analyze whether the increase in the assets of the legislators and/or their associates, disproportionate to their known sources of income, would constitute ‘undue influence’ and consequently a corrupt practice. (Answer in 150 words). (10 M) Comment on the need of administrative tribunals as compared to the court system. Assess the impact of the recent tribunal reforms through rationalization of tribunals made in 2021. (Answer in 150 words). (10 M) Compare and contrast the President’s power to pardon in India and in the USA. Are there any limits to it in both the countries? What are ‘preemptive pardons’? (Answer in 150 words) (10 M) Discuss the nature of Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly after the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019. Briefly describe the powers and functions of the Assembly of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir. (Answer in 150 words) (10 M) “The Attorney General of India plays a crucial role in guiding the legal framework of the Union Government and ensuring sound governance through legal counsel.” Discuss his responsibilities, rights and limitations in this regard. (Answer in 150 words) (10 M) Women’s social capital complements in advancing empowerment and gender equity. Explain. (Answer in 150 words) (10 M) e-governance projects have a built-in bias towards technology and back-end integration than user-centric designs. Examine. (Answer in 150 words) (10 M) Civil Society Organizations are often perceived as being anti-State actors than non-State actors. Do you agree? Justify. (Answer in 150 words) (10 M) India-Africa digital partnership is achieving mutual respect, co-development and long-term institutional partnerships. Elaborate. (Answer in 150 words) (10 M) “With the waning of globalization, post-Cold War world is becoming a site of sovereign nationalism.” Elucidate. (Answer in 150 words) (10 M) “Constitutional morality is the fulcrum which acts as an essential check upon the high functionaries and citizens alike…” In view of the above observation of the Supreme Court, explain the concept of constitutional morality and its application to ensure balance between judicial independence and judicial accountability in India. (Answer in 250 words) (15 M) Indian Constitution has conferred the amending power on the ordinary legislative institutions with a few procedural hurdles. In view of this statement, examine the procedural and substantive limitations on the amending power of the Parliament to change the Constitution. (Answer in 250 words) (15 M) Discuss the evolution of collegium system in India. Critically examine the advantages and disadvantages of the system of appointment of the Judges of the Supreme Court of India and that of the USA. (Answer in 250 words) (15 M) Examine the evolving pattern of Centre-State financial relations in the context of planned development in India. How far have the recent reforms impacted the fiscal federalism in India? (Answer in 250 words) (15 M) What are environmental pressure groups? Discuss their role in raising awareness, influencing policies and advocating for environmental protection in India. (Answer in 250 words) (15 M) Inequality in the ownership pattern of resources is one of the major causes of poverty. Discuss in the context of ‘paradox of poverty’. (Answer in 250 words) (15 M) “In contemporary development models, decision-making and problem-solving responsibilities are not located close to the source of information and execution defeating the objectives of development.” Critically evaluate. (Answer in 250 words) (15 M) The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights has to address the challenges faced by children in the digital era. Examine the existing policies and suggest measures the Commission can initiate to tackle the issue. (Answer in 250 words) (15 M) “Energy security constitutes the dominant kingpin of India’s foreign policy, and is linked with India’s overarching influence in Middle Eastern countries.” How would you integrate energy security with India’s foreign policy trajectories in the coming years? (Answer in 250 words) (15 M) “The reform process in the United Nations remains unresolved, because of the delicate imbalance of East and West and entanglement of the USA vs. Russo-Chinese alliance.” Examine and critically evaluate the East-West policy confrontations in this regard. (Answer in 250 words) (15 M)

• Comment on the need of administrative tribunals as compared to the court system. Assess the impact of the recent tribunal reforms through rationalization of tribunals made in 2021. (Answer in 150 words). (10 M)

• Compare and contrast the President’s power to pardon in India and in the USA. Are there any limits to it in both the countries? What are ‘preemptive pardons’? (Answer in 150 words) (10 M)

• Discuss the nature of Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly after the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019. Briefly describe the powers and functions of the Assembly of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir. (Answer in 150 words) (10 M)

• “The Attorney General of India plays a crucial role in guiding the legal framework of the Union Government and ensuring sound governance through legal counsel.” Discuss his responsibilities, rights and limitations in this regard. (Answer in 150 words) (10 M)

• Women’s social capital complements in advancing empowerment and gender equity. Explain. (Answer in 150 words) (10 M)

• e-governance projects have a built-in bias towards technology and back-end integration than user-centric designs. Examine. (Answer in 150 words) (10 M)

• Civil Society Organizations are often perceived as being anti-State actors than non-State actors. Do you agree? Justify. (Answer in 150 words) (10 M)

• India-Africa digital partnership is achieving mutual respect, co-development and long-term institutional partnerships. Elaborate. (Answer in 150 words) (10 M)

• “With the waning of globalization, post-Cold War world is becoming a site of sovereign nationalism.” Elucidate. (Answer in 150 words) (10 M)

• “Constitutional morality is the fulcrum which acts as an essential check upon the high functionaries and citizens alike…” In view of the above observation of the Supreme Court, explain the concept of constitutional morality and its application to ensure balance between judicial independence and judicial accountability in India. (Answer in 250 words) (15 M)

• Indian Constitution has conferred the amending power on the ordinary legislative institutions with a few procedural hurdles. In view of this statement, examine the procedural and substantive limitations on the amending power of the Parliament to change the Constitution. (Answer in 250 words) (15 M)

• Discuss the evolution of collegium system in India. Critically examine the advantages and disadvantages of the system of appointment of the Judges of the Supreme Court of India and that of the USA. (Answer in 250 words) (15 M)

• Examine the evolving pattern of Centre-State financial relations in the context of planned development in India. How far have the recent reforms impacted the fiscal federalism in India? (Answer in 250 words) (15 M)

• What are environmental pressure groups? Discuss their role in raising awareness, influencing policies and advocating for environmental protection in India. (Answer in 250 words) (15 M)

• Inequality in the ownership pattern of resources is one of the major causes of poverty. Discuss in the context of ‘paradox of poverty’. (Answer in 250 words) (15 M)

• “In contemporary development models, decision-making and problem-solving responsibilities are not located close to the source of information and execution defeating the objectives of development.” Critically evaluate. (Answer in 250 words) (15 M)

• The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights has to address the challenges faced by children in the digital era. Examine the existing policies and suggest measures the Commission can initiate to tackle the issue. (Answer in 250 words) (15 M)

• “Energy security constitutes the dominant kingpin of India’s foreign policy, and is linked with India’s overarching influence in Middle Eastern countries.” How would you integrate energy security with India’s foreign policy trajectories in the coming years? (Answer in 250 words) (15 M)

• “The reform process in the United Nations remains unresolved, because of the delicate imbalance of East and West and entanglement of the USA vs. Russo-Chinese alliance.” Examine and critically evaluate the East-West policy confrontations in this regard. (Answer in 250 words) (15 M)

Q1. Discuss the ‘corrupt practices’ for the purpose of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Analyze whether the increase in the assets of the legislators and/or their associates, disproportionate to their known sources of income, would constitute ‘undue influence’ and consequently a corrupt practice. (10 M)

The Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RPA) codifies what amounts to corrupt practices during elections, laying the foundation for free and fair democracy. These include bribery, undue influence, appeals to religion or caste, publication of false statements, and misuse of official machinery. The test remains whether such acts impair voter autonomy or distort electoral outcomes.

• Bribery: Bribery refers to offering gratification to voters to induce electoral support. It can be direct, such as cash or gifts, or indirect through promises of employment or welfare. The RPA criminalises even the offer of gratification, reflecting zero tolerance. E.g. In Rajendra Singh v. Usha Rani (1984), the Court held that distribution of money before elections amounted to corrupt practice. Undue influence: This covers any act of interference with the free exercise of electoral rights. It may include threats, social boycotts, misuse of authority, or spiritual coercion. The broad scope reflects the intent to preserve voter autonomy. E.g. In Jamuna Prasad v. Lachhi Ram (1954), undue influence was interpreted widely to include both coercion and subtle interference. Appeals on religious, caste or communal grounds: Soliciting votes in the name of religion, caste, or language constitutes corrupt practice. The Supreme Court in *Abhiram Singh v. C.D. Commachen (2017) expanded this to prohibit not only a candidate’s appeals but also those made by supporters or agents Publication of false statements: The RPA criminalises spreading falsehoods about the personal character, conduct, or withdrawal of a candidate, if done with the intent of influencing the election outcome. E.g. In Dr. Ramesh Yeshwant Prabhoo v. Prabhakar Kunte (1996), false communal appeals combined with misrepresentation were struck down. Misuse of official machinery: Using government vehicles, public funds, or official premises for campaigning is prohibited. The Election Commission frequently curtails such misuse through the Model Code of Conduct. E.g. In Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975), use of state resources for electioneering was held as corrupt practice leading to annulment of her election. Exceeding election expenditure limits: Concealing or underreporting election expenses beyond ECI ceilings amounts to corrupt practice. The law mandates strict accounting of campaign finance. E.g. Ashok Chavan’s “paid news” controversy highlighted concealment of actual expenses in media advertisements.*

• Undue influence: This covers any act of interference with the free exercise of electoral rights. It may include threats, social boycotts, misuse of authority, or spiritual coercion. The broad scope reflects the intent to preserve voter autonomy. E.g. In Jamuna Prasad v. Lachhi Ram (1954), undue influence was interpreted widely to include both coercion and subtle interference.

• Appeals on religious, caste or communal grounds: Soliciting votes in the name of religion, caste, or language constitutes corrupt practice. The Supreme Court in *Abhiram Singh v. C.D. Commachen (2017)* expanded this to prohibit not only a candidate’s appeals but also those made by supporters or agents

• Publication of false statements: The RPA criminalises spreading falsehoods about the personal character, conduct, or withdrawal of a candidate, if done with the intent of influencing the election outcome. E.g. In Dr. Ramesh Yeshwant Prabhoo v. Prabhakar Kunte (1996), false communal appeals combined with misrepresentation were struck down.

• Misuse of official machinery: Using government vehicles, public funds, or official premises for campaigning is prohibited. The Election Commission frequently curtails such misuse through the Model Code of Conduct. E.g. In Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975), use of state resources for electioneering was held as corrupt practice leading to annulment of her election.

• Exceeding election expenditure limits: Concealing or underreporting election expenses beyond ECI ceilings amounts to corrupt practice. The law mandates strict accounting of campaign finance. E.g. Ashok Chavan’s “paid news” controversy highlighted concealment of actual expenses in media advertisements.

• Assets vs. electoral autonomy: Disproportionate increase in assets by itself does not interfere with voter choice. RPA defines undue influence in terms of coercion or inducement of electors, not enrichment of candidates. Hence, such growth is outside Section 123 unless linked to voter manipulation. Corruption vs. electoral corruption: Disproportionate wealth may amount to corruption under the *Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988* or attract scrutiny by Income Tax authorities, but it is not automatically an electoral offence. The RPA is narrower, focusing only on practices that distort voting behaviour. Supreme Court’s jurisprudence: In *PUCL v. Union of India (2003)*, the Court mandated asset disclosure to strengthen informed voter choice. However, it stopped short of equating asset growth with corrupt practice, signalling that while transparency is mandatory, disproportionate assets require separate criminal prosecution. Potential nexus with undue influence: If such disproportionate assets are used to finance inducements—cash distribution, liquor supply, or mass gifting—then it may amount to bribery or undue influence. In practice, ECI’s large seizures of cash and gold during elections often indicate this nexus. Associates’ wealth accumulation: Asset rise in names of family or associates can point to benami channels for electoral bribery. Yet, without evidence of direct inducement to voters, it remains outside RPA’s strict definition. Thus, the link must be proved between enrichment and electoral malpractice.

• Corruption vs. electoral corruption: Disproportionate wealth may amount to corruption under the *Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988* or attract scrutiny by Income Tax authorities, but it is not automatically an electoral offence. The RPA is narrower, focusing only on practices that distort voting behaviour.

• Supreme Court’s jurisprudence: In *PUCL v. Union of India (2003)*, the Court mandated asset disclosure to strengthen informed voter choice. However, it stopped short of equating asset growth with corrupt practice, signalling that while transparency is mandatory, disproportionate assets require separate criminal prosecution.

• Potential nexus with undue influence: If such disproportionate assets are used to finance inducements—cash distribution, liquor supply, or mass gifting—then it may amount to bribery or undue influence. In practice, ECI’s large seizures of cash and gold during elections often indicate this nexus.

• Associates’ wealth accumulation: Asset rise in names of family or associates can point to benami channels for electoral bribery. Yet, without evidence of direct inducement to voters, it remains outside RPA’s strict definition. Thus, the link must be proved between enrichment and electoral malpractice.

The RPA, 1951 narrowly defines corrupt practices as those directly interfering with electoral choice. Disproportionate asset growth, while raising legitimate concerns of governance corruption, cannot by itself be treated as undue influence. Going forward, electoral reforms must integrate stricter asset scrutiny, better linkage between wealth rise and campaign finance, and greater ECI oversight, ensuring both clean politics and fair competition.

Q2. Comment on the need of administrative tribunals as compared to the court system. Assess the impact of the recent tribunal reforms through rationalization of tribunals made in 2021. (10 M)

• Speedy disposal of cases: Courts are burdened with pendency—over 5 million cases pending as of 2025. Tribunals with sectoral expertise provide faster resolution. E.g. Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) reduces burden on High Courts for service matters.

• Specialisation and technical expertise: Many disputes involve technical domains—taxation, telecom, competition law—that require subject expertise absent in conventional courts. E.g. CCI Appellate jurisdiction requires understanding of economics and market analysis.

• Reduced formalism: Tribunals are less rigid in procedure and evidence rules, ensuring accessibility. This promotes participatory justice especially for employees and small litigants.

• Decentralisation of justice: Tribunals, unlike Supreme Court/High Courts, have benches at multiple locations, improving reach. E.g. CAT has regional benches across states, unlike limited High Court benches.

• Relieving higher judiciary: By diverting service, tax, and corporate matters, tribunals allow High Courts and the Supreme Court to focus on constitutional issues. E.g. Green Tribunal handles environmental disputes, avoiding regular judicial backlog.

• Reduction in number of tribunals: The Act abolished nine tribunals such as Film Certification Appellate Tribunal, Airport Appellate Tribunal, and merged their functions with existing judicial bodies. Impact: Streamlined structure but concerns of loss of domain expertise.

• Centralisation of appeals in courts: Appeals from abolished tribunals now lie with High Courts or civil courts. This improves judicial uniformity but risks re-burdening already stressed courts. E.g. Film certification appeals shifted to High Courts increased pendency.

• Uniform service conditions: The Act fixed tenure (4 years), retirement age, and appointment process. Intended to bring transparency, but criticised for undermining independence. E.g. In Madras Bar Association v. Union of India (2021), SC struck down provisions on short tenure and executive dominance in appointments.

• Greater efficiency through rationalisation: Consolidation reduces multiplicity of forums and forum shopping, improving efficiency. Citizens now approach a limited set of bodies rather than scattered tribunals.

• Concerns of Judicial overload and access: Shifting cases back to High Courts increases caseload. Regional accessibility of tribunals is lost, especially in remote states. E.g. Environmental litigants in NE states now face longer travel and costs if NGT benches are limited.

• Executive control debate: By centralising appointments under the executive, reforms risk diluting the autonomy of tribunals. SC has repeatedly stressed that tribunals must be independent substitutes, not extensions of executive control.

Q3. Compare and contrast the President’s power to pardon in India and in the USA. Are there any limits to it in both the countries? What are ‘preemptive pardons’? (10 M)

• Scope of jurisdiction a. India: Article 72 empowers the President to grant pardon, reprieve, respite, or remission in cases of (a) court martial, (b) offences against Union law, and (c) death sentences. Governors have parallel powers under Article 161, but not over death sentences. b. USA: The President can pardon for federal offences only, not for state offences or impeachment. It covers full, partial, conditional, or commutations.

• Discretionary vs. aid & advice a. India: President acts on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers (Article 74). The power is formal, not personal. Maru Ram v. Union of India (1980) clarified this limitation. b. USA: The power is personal and absolute, not subject to cabinet or congressional advice. Courts cannot review a validly issued pardon.

• Limits of Judicial review a. India: Pardoning power can be judicially reviewed on grounds of mala fide, arbitrariness, or extraneous considerations. Epuru Sudhakar v. Govt. of A.P. (2006) allowed courts to strike down improper pardons. b. USA: Courts have no power to question pardons. In Ex parte Garland (1866), the Supreme Court held pardons are not reviewable.

• Nature of offences covered a. India: Power extends to offences under Union law, military courts, and death penalty. It does not extend to state laws or legislative impeachment. b. USA: Power extends to all federal offences, except impeachment. States retain their own clemency mechanisms.

• Checks and balances a. India: Political accountability acts as a check, since pardons are exercised by the Cabinet, and subject to judicial scrutiny. b. USA: The only check is political—Congress or public opinion. Presidents have used pardons controversially (e.g., Ford’s pardon of Nixon in 1974).

• A preemptive pardon is granted before formal charges or conviction are made, shielding an individual from prosecution. o USA: Constitutionally valid. Example: President Gerald Ford’s 1974 pardon of Richard Nixon “for all offences he may have committed” during Watergate. o India: No explicit precedent. Since pardon follows conviction or sentence, the idea of preemptive pardon is inconsistent with Indian jurisprudence.

Q4. Discuss the nature of Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly after the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019. Briefly describe the powers and functions of the Assembly of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir. (10 M)

• Union Territory with legislature: Unlike Ladakh, Jammu and Kashmir retained a legislative assembly. It functions under Article 239A, similar to Delhi and Puducherry, not under state provisions of Part VI of the Constitution.

• Limited autonomy: The Assembly cannot legislate on public order and police, which remain under the control of the Union Government through the Lieutenant Governor (LG).

• Unicameral structure: The Legislative Council (Upper House) was abolished. J&K now has a unicameral Assembly with seats increased from 107 to 114 (including nominated members), subject to delimitation.

• Executive headship: The LG acts as the constitutional head, but with greater discretionary powers compared to a state Governor. The Council of Ministers is collectively responsible to the Assembly, but subject to LG’s overriding authority in reserved matters.

• Judicial oversight: The High Court of J&K continues to function, but appeals now lie directly to the Supreme Court, as the state’s separate constitutional setup under Article 370 has been abrogated.

• Legislative powers: Can legislate on subjects in the State List and Concurrent List, except those reserved (public order, police). a. Union Parliament retains overriding power, and can legislate on any subject for J&K. E.g. Land laws were significantly amended by the Centre in 2020 despite Assembly absence.

• Financial powers: Assembly controls the Consolidated Fund of J&K. No tax or expenditure can be incurred without its approval. a. However, Union grants and centrally sponsored schemes form a large part of UT finances, reducing fiscal autonomy.

• Control over executive: The Council of Ministers, headed by a Chief Minister, is responsible to the Assembly. It can be removed by a no-confidence motion. a. LG, however, can override in matters where he is required to act in his discretion.

• Electoral role: Elected members form part of the Electoral College for the President of India (unlike Delhi and Puducherry, whose MLAs do not). They also elect Rajya Sabha members from J&K.

• Deliberative and representative functions: The Assembly represents the aspirations of J&K citizens, debates policies, and raises local issues. a. It acts as a forum for political expression, balancing regional concerns of Jammu, Kashmir, and minorities.

• Residual powers: Unlike states, residual legislative powers rest with Parliament, not the Assembly, under the new arrangement.

Q5. “The Attorney General of India plays a crucial role in guiding the legal framework of the Union Government and ensuring sound governance through legal counsel.” Discuss his responsibilities, rights and limitations in this regard. (10 M)

• Legal Advisor to the Union: The AGI advises the Union Government on constitutional and legal matters referred by the President. E.g. Opinion sought on abrogation of Article 370 in 2019.

• Representation in Courts: He represents the Union in the Supreme Court and High Courts in cases of national importance. E.g. Appeared in Kesavananda Bharati (1973), NJAC Case (2015).

• Defender of Union Legislation: The AGI defends central laws challenged for constitutional validity, thereby shaping jurisprudence. E.g. Defended Aadhaar Act in Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2018).

• Discharge of Functions Assigned by President: The AGI performs duties under Article 143 (Presidential references) and appears in international arbitrations involving India.

• Advisory Role in Policy Formulation: By clarifying the legal sustainability of executive policies, the AGI ensures that governance remains within the framework of the Constitution.

• Right of Audience in All Courts: The AGI has the right to appear in any court in India without needing prior approval.

• Right to Participate in Parliament: Under Article 88, he may speak and take part in proceedings of both Houses, and their committees, though without voting rights.

• Privileges and Immunities of MPs: The AGI enjoys the same privileges and immunities as Members of Parliament during proceedings, ensuring free expression of legal views.

• No Executive Authority: The AGI is not a Cabinet Minister and cannot participate in decision-making beyond advisory functions.

• Restrictions on Private Practice: By convention, the AGI cannot defend accused in criminal cases, represent against the government, or accept briefs involving conflict of interest.

• No Voting Power in Parliament: Despite participating in proceedings, the AGI cannot vote, limiting his influence on legislation.

• Tenure at President’s Pleasure: The AGI lacks a fixed tenure and serves at the pleasure of the President, creating scope for political vulnerability.

• Judicial Review of Opinions: His advice is not binding and can be challenged in courts if found unconstitutional, limiting the weight of his counsel.

Q6. Women’s social capital complements in advancing empowerment and gender equity. Explain. (10 M)

• Collective Bargaining Power: Women’s groups amplify voices against social injustices, ensuring better bargaining power in households, workplaces, and communities. E.g. Kudumbashree in Kerala enabled women to negotiate for higher wages and land rights.

• Access to Credit and Livelihoods: Social networks reduce information asymmetry and build trust, facilitating microfinance and entrepreneurship. E.g. SHGs under NRLM have mobilised over ₹5.8 lakh crore credit (MoRD, 2025).

• Information Sharing and Skill Development: Informal networks spread awareness on health, education, and legal rights, equipping women with capabilities. E.g. Women’s collectives in Rajasthan improved maternal health by sharing information on institutional deliveries.

• Emotional and Psychological Support: Social solidarity among women counters patriarchal isolation, boosts confidence, and nurtures leadership. E.g. Mahila Samakhya collectives created safe spaces for women survivors of violence.

• Political Participation and Leadership: Women’s community ties foster entry into Panchayati Raj Institutions and local governance. E.g. Bihar’s 50% reservation in PRIs saw women mobilising through SHGs to contest elections.

• Redistribution of Opportunities: Networks enable access to schemes, markets, and jobs otherwise denied due to gender biases. E.g. Digital platforms like “Mahila e-Haat” connect women entrepreneurs directly with consumers.

• Challenging Patriarchal Norms: Collective assertion alters cultural attitudes on education, marriage age, and mobility. E.g. Beti Bachao collectives in Haryana reduced child marriage incidence.

• Intersectional Inclusion: Social capital bridges divides of caste, class, and religion, enhancing solidarity. E.g. Dalit women’s collectives in Uttar Pradesh improved inter-caste cooperation through livelihood cooperatives.

• Policy Advocacy and Rights Realisation: Organised women’s groups lobby governments for gender-sensitive laws and budgets. E.g. SEWA union advocated maternity benefits for informal women workers, influencing policy design.

• Catalyst for Intergenerational Equity: Empowered mothers invest in daughters’ education and nutrition, breaking cycles of gender disadvantage. E.g. NFHS-5 shows higher school enrolment for girls in states with active SHG movements.

Q7. e-governance projects have a built-in bias towards technology and back-end integration than user-centric designs. Examine. (10 M)

• Infrastructure-centric approach: Priority is given to building IT platforms, databases, and backend networks rather than simplifying user interfaces. E.g. Aadhaar database became one of the largest biometric systems but initial service delivery gaps excluded many citizens due to authentication failures.

• Standardisation over local context: Projects emphasise uniform platforms instead of customised solutions for diverse users. E.g. Early versions of land record digitisation (Bhoomi in Karnataka) focused on backend entries but ignored farmers’ low digital literacy.

• Metrics of success: Success is often measured in terms of digitisation achieved (number of records digitised, portals created) rather than citizen satisfaction or ease of access. E.g. Many state websites rank high on NIC evaluations but remain difficult for rural citizens to navigate.

• Tech-Driven policy design: Emphasis is on building integrated databases and interdepartmental linkages, assuming citizens will adapt. This often neglects the digital divide in terms of literacy, language, and affordability.

• Weak feedback loops: Absence of citizen-centric monitoring tools means service design reflects administrative convenience more than user demand.

• Exclusion of the marginalised: Poor, rural, elderly, and digitally illiterate groups are disadvantaged. E.g. Pension beneficiaries denied benefits due to Aadhaar-based biometric mismatch.

• Low service uptake: Complex portals and poor grievance redress discourage citizens from using e-services, leading to persistence of intermediaries.

• Erosion of trust: Overemphasis on data collection without clear communication raises fears of surveillance and privacy breach.

• Limited transformation of governance: Projects end up replicating bureaucratic inefficiencies digitally instead of reimagining citizen–state relations. E.g. Many online portals still require multiple physical visits for verification.

• Design thinking approach: Policies must start from citizens’ needs and experiences, not backend capabilities. E.g. UMANG app integrates multiple services on a single, mobile-friendly interface.

• Inclusive and accessible systems: Multilingual, offline-enabled, voice-assisted portals are essential to bridge the digital divide. E.g. e-Choupal model showed how localised interfaces improve uptake.

• Participatory feedback mechanisms: Regular user audits, social audits, and grievance dashboards can align services with expectations.

• Capacity Building and digital literacy: Citizen empowerment through training and intermediaries like CSCs (Common Service Centres) makes platforms more usable.

• Outcome-based evaluation: Shift success metrics from records digitised to citizen satisfaction, grievance resolution, and inclusivity.

Q8. Civil Society Organizations are often perceived as being anti-State actors than non-State actors. Do you agree? Justify.(10 M)

• Watchdog and accountability role: CSOs scrutinize government policies and expose corruption or abuse of power, which can be viewed by the state as hostile. E.g. RTI activism exposed irregularities in Commonwealth Games (2010).

• Opposition to development projects: Many CSOs challenge state-led mega projects for displacing communities or damaging the environment. E.g. Narmada Bachao Andolan opposed Sardar Sarovar Dam for decades.

• Protest and mobilisation capacity: By organizing rallies, strikes, and online campaigns, CSOs often appear to undermine state legitimacy. E.g. Anti-CAA protests saw large NGO participation in mobilising civil resistance.

• Foreign funding concerns: Government suspicion increases when CSOs are funded through foreign contributions, raising questions of sovereignty. E.g. FCRA cancellations of Greenpeace India on grounds of “anti-development activities.”

• Internationalising domestic issues: Some CSOs lobby at UN forums or international media, embarrassing governments by portraying policy failures globally. E.g. Amnesty International’s reports on Kashmir human rights abuses led to strained relations with the state.

• Complementing state capacity in service delivery: CSOs often fill gaps in health, education, and rural development where the state is overstretched. E.g. SEWA provides healthcare and financial services to women in informal sectors.

• Strengthening democracy and participation: By representing marginalized voices, CSOs ensure that governance reflects constitutional morality and grassroots concerns. E.g. Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan pioneered social audits later institutionalised in MGNREGA.

• Policy implementation partnerships: Governments frequently partner with CSOs for awareness and last-mile delivery. E.g. NGOs have been crucial in Swachh Bharat Mission for behaviour change communication.

• Innovation and knowledge sharing: CSOs bring innovative community-driven solutions, which the state later scales up. E.g. Barefoot College’s solar electrification model inspired rural renewable energy schemes.

• Human rights and social justice advocacy: Far from being anti-State, CSOs strengthen constitutional governance by pushing for rights-based policies. E.g. Childline India works with government agencies to implement the Juvenile Justice Act.

Q9. India-Africa digital partnership is achieving mutual respect, co-development and long-term institutional partnerships. Elaborate. (10 M)

• Digital infrastructure building: India supports Africa in developing digital backbone infrastructure such as optic fibre networks, satellite connectivity, and e-governance platforms. E.g. Pan-African e-Network Project (2009) connects 48 African nations with Indian universities and hospitals.

• FinTech and digital payments cooperation: India’s UPI and RuPay models are being adapted in African contexts to promote financial inclusion. E.g. NPCI signed MoU with several African central banks to enable cross-border payments.

• Capacity building and skilling: Through ITEC scholarships and digital learning platforms, India is building Africa’s human capital for IT, AI, and cybersecurity. E.g. e-VidyaBharati and e-ArogyaBharati (e-VBAB) projects offer tele-education and telemedicine.

• E-Governance and public services: Indian platforms like Aadhaar, DigiLocker, and CoWIN are shared as open-source models for Africa’s digital governance needs. E.g. CoWIN model adopted by South Africa and other nations for vaccine delivery.

• Private sector and start-up collaboration: Indian IT companies (TCS, Infosys, Tech Mahindra) and African start-ups collaborate in fields like agritech, healthtech, and e-commerce. E.g. Airtel Africa provides digital mobile banking across 14 African countries.

• South–South cooperation principles: Unlike Western aid models, India emphasises partnership and mutual benefit, respecting African sovereignty and priorities.

• Shared developmental challenges: Both regions face issues of digital divide, rural connectivity, and low-cost innovation, enabling a co-learning process. E.g. Common platforms for mobile-based agricultural advisories.

• Institutional mechanisms for continuity: Regular India–Africa Forum Summits institutionalise commitments for long-term digital cooperation, beyond episodic projects.

• Human-centric digitalization: Focus is on inclusive digital public goods, not profit-driven extractive models. E.g. Open-source India Stack allows African nations to customise without licensing costs.

• Strategic global voice: Both India and Africa collaborate in global forums (G20, WTO, ITU) to demand digital sovereignty, fair taxation, and equitable data governance.

Q10. “With the waning of globalization, post-Cold War world is becoming a site of sovereign nationalism.” Elucidate.(10 M)

• Rise of protectionism and trade wars: States are increasingly abandoning free trade in favour of tariffs, subsidies, and reshoring industries. E.g. US–China trade war with tariffs on $360 billion worth of goods.

• Decline of multilateral institutions: WTO, UN, and IMF face credibility crises, as states prefer bilateral deals or regional blocs over global frameworks. E.g. WTO Appellate Body is dysfunctional since 2019 due to US blocking appointments.

• Retreat of economic interdependence: The idea that trade prevents conflict is under strain, as major powers weaponize supply chains and technology. E.g. US export restrictions on semiconductors to China, 2022.

• Backlash against liberal global order: Inequalities created by globalization have fueled populism and anti-immigration movements. E.g. Brexit (2016) reflected disillusionment with EU integration and migration policies.

• Pandemic and energy crises: COVID-19 exposed fragility of global supply chains and led to vaccine nationalism. Russia–Ukraine war deepened energy protectionism. E.g. EU scramble for alternative gas suppliers in 2022 after Russian supply cuts.

• Strategic Autonomy and Protection of Sovereignty: States assert policy independence, resisting external influence and safeguarding sovereignty. E.g. India’s refusal to join RCEP (2019) citing domestic economic concerns.

• Populism and Identity Politics: Nationalist leaders prioritize cultural identity and sovereignty over global norms. E.g. “America First” under Donald Trump; “Make in India” initiatives.

• Geopolitical Fragmentation: Multipolarity has replaced unipolar US dominance, with regional powers asserting spheres of influence. E.g. Russia’s Ukraine invasion (2022) framed as reclaiming lost sovereignty from NATO encroachment.

• Rise of Digital Sovereignty: States regulate data and digital platforms to assert control over cyberspace, rejecting a borderless internet. E.g. EU’s GDPR and India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.

• National Security over Free Markets: States are prioritizing defense, food, and energy sovereignty over global market logic. E.g. “Friend-shoring” and “China+1” supply chain strategies by US and allies.

Q11. “Constitutional morality is the fulcrum which acts as an essential check upon the high functionaries and citizens alike…” In view of the above observation of the Supreme Court, explain the concept of constitutional morality and its application to ensure balance between judicial independence and judicial accountability in India.(15 M)

• Beyond procedural legality: Constitutional morality demands that state authorities and citizens adhere not just to the letter of the Constitution but also to its spirit—justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity. For example, the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) emphasised the basic structure doctrine as a safeguard against misuse of amendment powers.

• Ensuring supremacy of rule of law: It underscores that no individual, institution, or authority, however high, is above constitutional limits. Even the judiciary must function within constitutional restraints to prevent arbitrariness.

• Tolerance and inclusivity in democracy: Constitutional morality protects minority rights and dignity even against majoritarian impulses. For instance, the SC in Navtej Johar struck down Section 377 despite widespread social conservatism.

• Institutional integrity and fairness: It expects public officials—including judges—to act with impartiality, fairness, and integrity. This sustains the legitimacy of institutions and strengthens public trust.

• Check on populism and authoritarianism: By requiring respect for constitutional values, it prevents majoritarian populism or excessive concentration of power. This makes it a safeguard against erosion of democratic ethos.

• Shield against executive and legislative interference: Independence of the judiciary is a basic feature of the Constitution. Constitutional morality ensures judicial appointments and transfers remain free from political influence. E.g. Second Judges’ case (1993) upheld judicial primacy in appointments.

• Security of tenure and removal procedure: Articles 124 and 217 safeguard judges’ tenure with impeachment as the only removal method. This independence in tenure reflects constitutional morality in shielding judges from arbitrary dismissal.

• Judicial review as a guardian mechanism: The courts’ ability to strike down unconstitutional laws depends on independence. Constitutional morality justifies strong judicial review to protect constitutional values. E.g. striking down of NJAC Act (2015) as violating judicial independence.

• Financial and administrative autonomy: Adequate autonomy over budgetary allocations and court administration ensures impartial functioning. Without this, judges could face indirect pressure from the executive.

• Delivering unpopular yet just verdicts: Constitutional morality allows judges to rule against prevailing sentiments when necessary. E.g. S. R. Bommai (1994) upheld secularism even though dismissal of state governments was politically controversial.

• Transparency in appointments and decisions: Constitutional morality requires that while judges remain independent, their appointments and decisions should be transparent to prevent arbitrariness. Calls for reform of the collegium are based on this principle.

• Subjecting judiciary to RTI: The SC in 2019 ruled that the office of the CJI is subject to RTI, ensuring accountability without undermining judicial independence.

• Ethical codes and in-house procedures: The Restatement of Judicial Values (1997) guides judges on propriety, impartiality, and avoidance of conflicts of interest. Such ethical frameworks embody constitutional morality.

• Impeachment as a constitutional safeguard: Though rarely used, the impeachment process under Article 124(4) ensures that misconduct has consequences. E.g. proceedings against Justice V. Ramaswami (1993) highlighted the accountability mechanism.

• Judicial restraint and respect for separation of powers: Constitutional morality expects courts to exercise self-restraint, avoiding policy-making or overreach, which preserves legitimacy. E.g. the Court in the Aadhaar case (2018) upheld the scheme but struck down provisions violating privacy, showing balance.

• Constitutional morality prevents both extremes: it restrains the executive from diluting independence while reminding the judiciary that independence cannot mean absence of accountability. o The collegium system protects independence, but constitutional morality requires that its functioning be transparent to maintain public trust. o The impeachment mechanism is deliberately stringent to preserve independence, but internal self-regulation through judicial codes ensures accountability. o Judicial review is upheld as a tool of independence, but constitutional morality demands restraint to avoid judicial overreach.

• Public confidence becomes the common ground: independence ensures freedom from control, while accountability ensures fidelity to fairness, reason and transparency.

Q12. Indian Constitution has conferred the amending power on the ordinary legislative institutions with a few procedural hurdles. In view of this statement, examine the procedural and substantive limitations on the amending power of the Parliament to change the Constitution.(15 M)

• Practicality and accessibility: Setting up a permanent constituent assembly was considered impractical. Giving amending power to Parliament ensures that the Constitution can adapt without creating new bodies. E.g. The 1st Constitutional Amendment (1951) on land reforms was passed by Parliament without requiring a new constituent body.

• Balance between rigidity and flexibility: Ordinary legislation is too flexible, while a rigid amendment process would paralyse governance. The Indian model provides a middle path. E.g. The 44th Amendment (1978) reversed authoritarian provisions of the 42nd, showing adaptability with safeguards.

• Parliament as representative of the people: Being directly elected, Parliament embodies the sovereign will of the people, hence entrusted with amending power. E.g. The Right to Education via the 86th Amendment (2002) reflected public demand for social justice.

• Need for adaptability in a diverse society: India’s size and pluralism demand periodic changes in constitutional provisions to address socio-political realities. E.g. 73rd and 74th amendments empowered local governance.

• Procedural hurdles as safeguards: To prevent abuse, amendments require special procedures that make constitutional changes deliberate and consensual, not hasty. E.g. The 98th Amendment (2012), on creating regional benches of High Courts, required deliberate consensus.

• Special majority requirement: Most constitutional amendments require a majority of the total membership of each House and a two-thirds majority of members present and voting. This prevents amendments by a simple majority. E.g. The GST Amendment (101st, 2016) needed this higher threshold.

• Bicameral approval: Both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha must pass an amendment separately. Unlike ordinary legislation, there is no provision for a joint sitting in case of disagreement. This gives the Upper House veto power. E.g. The Lokpal Amendment Bill had to be separately passed by both Houses.

• Ratification by states: Amendments affecting the federal structure—such as representation of states in Parliament or powers of the Union and states—require ratification by at least half of the state legislatures. E.g. The 73rd and 74th Amendments (1992) were ratified by states.

• President’s role: Although the President cannot refuse assent once an amendment is duly passed, he is bound to give assent, which makes the procedure constitutionally distinct from ordinary legislation. E.g. The 104th Amendment (2020) ending Anglo-Indian reservation received mandatory presidential assent.

• No constituent assembly mechanism: Unlike some constitutions which require a separate constituent body to amend fundamental provisions, India entrusts the task to Parliament itself with procedural hurdles acting as safeguards. E.g. Even fundamental changes like the 42nd Amendment (1976) were enacted by Parliament, not a special body.

• Basic structure doctrine: In Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), the Supreme Court held that while Parliament has wide powers under Article 368, it cannot alter or destroy the basic structure of the Constitution. E.g. Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) struck down the 39th Amendment as violating free and fair elections.

• Judicial review of amendments: The courts have the authority to review constitutional amendments to test their compatibility with the basic structure. E.g. Minerva Mills (1980) invalidated parts of the 42nd Amendment.

• Federal limitations: Amendments cannot convert India from a federation into a unitary state in essence. Principles like division of powers and role of states in governance form part of the federal basic structure. E.g. Any attempt to abolish state representation in Rajya Sabha would be unconstitutional.

• Republican and democratic form of government: Parliament cannot amend provisions in a way that abolishes the democratic or republican nature of the polity. E.g. Indira Nehru Gandhi case (1975) reaffirmed electoral democracy as part of basic structure.

• Judicial independence and rule of law: Any amendment that dilutes independence of the judiciary or subverts the rule of law would be unconstitutional. E.g. NJAC case (2015) struck down the 99th Amendment for compromising judicial independence.

Q13. Discuss the evolution of collegium system in India. Critically examine the advantages and disadvantages of the system of appointment of the Judges of the Supreme Court of India and that of the USA. (15 M)

• Constitutional provisions (1950) – Article 124(2) of the Constitution provided that Supreme Court judges shall be appointed by the President after consultation with the Chief Justice of India and such other judges as deemed necessary. Initially, this gave primacy to the executive. E.g. The supersession of senior judges in 1973, when Justice A. N. Ray was appointed Chief Justice, reflected executive dominance.

• First Judges Case (1981) – In S. P. Gupta v. Union of India, the Supreme Court held that “consultation” did not mean “concurrence”, thereby affirming executive primacy.

• Second Judges Case (1993) – In Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India, the Court reversed its earlier view, holding that “consultation” required the concurrence of the Chief Justice, and created the collegium system (CJI + 2 senior-most judges).

• Third Judges Case (1998) – In a Presidential Reference, the Court expanded the collegium to the Chief Justice and four senior-most judges, establishing the structure followed today.

• NJAC Case (2015) – The 99th Constitutional Amendment and NJAC Act sought to replace collegium with a National Judicial Appointments Commission, giving the executive and eminent persons a role. The Supreme Court struck it down as violating judicial independence, reaffirming the collegium.

• Safeguards judicial independence – By excluding direct executive dominance, the system ensures impartiality. E.g. The NJAC was struck down in 2015 to protect judicial independence as part of the basic structure.

• Peer evaluation of competence – Judges, being insiders to the profession, are best placed to assess legal ability and integrity. E.g. Justice Rohinton Nariman’s elevation directly from the Bar highlighted recognition of exceptional merit.

• Continuity and institutional stability – Since the collegium operates irrespective of political changes, it provides consistency in appointments.

• Insulation from populism – Appointments are not influenced by shifting electoral majorities or partisan ideology.

• Check on arbitrary executive action – The system prevents misuse of appointment power, as seen during the Emergency when pliant judges were elevated.

• Opacity and lack of transparency – Decisions are not fully explained, which affects public trust. E.g. Until 2017, collegium resolutions were not even published; even now, reasons for rejection are rarely shared.

• Allegations of nepotism – There are perceptions of favoritism and family connections in appointments, often referred to as the “uncle judge” syndrome.

• Poor diversity – Women, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and minorities remain underrepresented. E.g. The Supreme Court has had only a handful of women judges since independence.

• Executive–judiciary tensions – The government often delays appointments or returns collegium recommendations, causing judicial vacancies. E.g. Justice K. M. Joseph’s appointment was delayed despite repeated collegium reiterations in 2018.

• No external accountability – The system is entirely judge-led, resisting oversight from Parliament or the public.

• Democratic accountability – The President nominates and the Senate confirms, reflecting electoral legitimacy. E.g. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s appointment in 2022 reflected President Biden’s electoral promise to promote diversity.

• Transparency through public hearings – Senate confirmation hearings allow scrutiny of the candidate’s competence and philosophy. E.g. Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s 2009 hearing provided insights into her judicial outlook.

• Checks and balances – Sharing power between executive and legislature prevents concentration in one branch. E.g. Robert Bork’s nomination was rejected in 1987 after Senate hearings, showing legislative oversight.

• Enhanced diversity – Political salience helps accelerate representation of minorities and women. E.g. Thurgood Marshall became the first African-American justice in 1967.

• Clear constitutional procedure – Article II of the US Constitution explicitly provides the method, avoiding ambiguity.

• Politicisation of the judiciary – Appointments often reflect party ideology, undermining neutrality. E.g. Brett Kavanaugh’s 2018 confirmation was highly polarised.

• Ideological entrenchment – Presidents appoint justices aligned with their political philosophy, influencing jurisprudence for decades. E.g. The conservative majority in Dobbs v. Jackson (2022) overturned Roe v. Wade.

• Vacancy manipulation – The Senate may delay or fast-track nominees for political gain. E.g.: Merrick Garland’s 2016 nomination was denied a hearing.

• Lifetime tenure politicised – Presidents appoint younger judges to shape the Court ideologically for generations.

• Discourages qualified candidates – Highly adversarial and public hearings can deter capable but low-profile individuals.

Q14. Examine the evolving pattern of Centre-State financial relations in the context of planned development in India. How far have the recent reforms impacted the fiscal federalism in India?(15 M)

• Constitutional vertical imbalance – Union given elastic taxes (income tax, customs, excise), while states relied on narrow bases (sales tax, liquor excise). This dependence was intentional to preserve national integration.

• Planning Commission as centralising authority (1950–2014) – Controlled plan grants and project approvals, often bypassing Finance Commissions. E.g. Gadgil–Mukherjee formula for plan assistance allocations remained under central discretion.

• Rise of centrally sponsored schemes (CSS) – CSS became dominant instruments for social development but eroded state autonomy due to conditional funding. E.g. MGNREGA funding heavily conditional on central guidelines.

• Finance Commissions as counter-balance – Periodically increased states’ tax share to correct imbalances (29.5% in 10th FC → 32% in 12th FC).

• End of plan vs. non-plan distinction – With the abolition of the Planning Commission (2014), Finance Commissions became the sole constitutional mechanism for transfers.

• Greater fiscal space for states (14th FC) – Raised states’ share of divisible pool from 32% to 42%, giving them greater untied funds and flexibility in social spending. E.g. Kerala and Tamil Nadu reported higher autonomy in welfare allocations post-2015.

• Institutionalisation of cooperative federalism through GST Council – Provided a constitutional forum where Union and states decide taxation together, reducing tax fragmentation and promoting national common market. E.g. Recent GST rate rationalisation debated jointly.

• Rationalisation of plan transfers – Abolition of Planning Commission ended dual channels, strengthening Finance Commission’s primacy and reducing discretionary transfers. E.g. States received tied health grants for pandemic infrastructure.

• Performance-linked grants (15th FC) – Encouraged states to pursue reforms in health, power sector, and education by linking grants with outcomes.

• Erosion of tax autonomy under GST – States lost powers over major revenue sources (VAT, octroi, entry tax), making them reliant on GST compensation cess, which has been irregular. E.g. Compensation disputes post-COVID strained Centre–state trust, especially in Punjab and Kerala.

• Rise of cesses and surcharges – Union’s use of non-shareable revenues reduced the effective divisible pool; cesses form over 18% of gross tax revenue (CAG 2022).

• Conditional devolution and tied grants – 15th FC’s performance-based devolution risks undermining state discretion, reinforcing central control in welfare sectors.

• Borrowing constraints – States’ dependence on market borrowing is constrained by Union control under Article 293, limiting fiscal manoeuvrability during crises.

Q15. What are environmental pressure groups? Discuss their role in raising awareness, influencing policies and advocating for environmental protection in India.(15 M)

• Grassroots mobilisation – Movements like the Chipko Movement (1973) in Uttarakhand mobilised villagers, particularly women, to protect forests, embedding ecological values in rural society.

• Educational campaigns – NGOs like Kalpavriksh have integrated environmental education into schools, shaping the younger generation’s sensitivity towards sustainability.

• Scientific reports and publications – Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) produces State of India’s Environment reports that translate scientific data into public understanding.

• Use of media and outreach – Groups harness documentaries, social media, and street plays to raise awareness about issues like river pollution, waste segregation, and climate change.

• Citizen participation initiatives – Campaigns like Narmada Bachao Andolan encouraged ordinary citizens to question the ecological and human costs of mega-projects.

• Shaping environmental legislation – Mobilisations after the Bhopal Gas Tragedy (1984) pushed the government to pass the Environment Protection Act, 1986.

• Judicial interventions – Activists like M.C. Mehta filed PILs that led to Supreme Court rulings on vehicular emission control, Ganga cleaning, and the Taj Trapezium Zone.

• Halting ecologically harmful projects – The Silent Valley Movement in Kerala (1978–83) successfully pressured the state to abandon a hydroelectric project, leading to greater biodiversity protection.

• Reforms in urban planning – Campaigns in Delhi and Mumbai against air pollution and mangrove destruction influenced municipal laws on waste disposal and urban zoning.

• Impact on forest and tribal rights – Groups like Vanashakti and tribal activists shaped the discourse that led to the Forest Rights Act, 2006, ensuring livelihood-security-based conservation.

• Climate change advocacy – Pressure groups like Indian Youth Climate Network and Fridays for Future–India demand stronger action on emissions and renewable energy transitions.

• Campaigns against deforestation and mining – Save Western Ghats Movement and tribal-led resistance in Odisha and Jharkhand highlight ecological injustice in extractive projects.

• Public Interest Litigations (PILs) – NGOs routinely use courts to expand the ambit of Article 21 (Right to Life) to include the right to a clean environment.

• Community-based conservation – Advocacy has helped institutionalise joint forest management and eco-sensitive zone notifications.

• Linking environmental justice with social justice – Movements like Narmada Bachao Andolan stress that ecological sustainability cannot be separated from the rights of displaced communities.

Q16. Inequality in the ownership pattern of resources is one of the major causes of poverty. Discuss in the context of ‘paradox of poverty’.(15 M)

• Land concentration and agrarian poverty – A small minority owns large tracts of land while the majority are landless labourers. This leads to disguised unemployment and perpetuates rural poverty. E.g. NSSO data (2019) showed top 10% households own over 50% of rural land.

• Control of capital and industry – Wealth and productive assets are concentrated in a few corporate houses, limiting access to credit and entrepreneurial opportunities for small producers and workers. E.g. Reliance and Adani groups dominate telecom, energy, ports, limiting SMEs.

• Exclusion from natural resources – Tribal communities and forest dwellers face dispossession from forests and mining regions, creating resource-rich but income-poor populations. E.g. “resource curse” phenomenon in mineral-rich Jharkhand and Odisha.

• Financial exclusion – Unequal access to formal credit pushes the poor into debt traps with moneylenders, preventing capital formation. E.g. Vidarbha farmers’ indebtedness to moneylenders fuels agrarian suicides.

• Educational and skill divide – Ownership of human capital in the form of education and skills is skewed, locking marginalised groups into low-paying informal work. E.g. ASER (2024): rural children in MP/UP lack foundational skills, limiting mobility.

• Resource-rich but livelihood-poor regions – States like Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand have vast mineral wealth but some of the highest poverty rates due to inequitable extraction. E.g. Jharkhand has coal/iron ore, yet poverty higher than national average.

• Urban prosperity vs. slum poverty – Cities generate large GDP shares but millions live in slums with no access to basic amenities, reflecting unequal distribution of urban resources. E.g. Mumbai contributes ~6% to GDP, but Dharavi slum lacks sanitation.

• Agricultural plenty yet farmer distress – India is a leading producer of rice, wheat, and cotton, yet farmers face debt, low returns, and poverty due to unequal landholding and market access. E.g. Punjab grows wheat surplus, but farmers suffer debt.

• High growth with jobless inequality – The economy has grown rapidly since liberalisation, but growth has disproportionately benefited asset-owning classes, widening wealth gaps. E.g. Oxfam (2024) reported top 1% of Indians own 40% of wealth.

• Ecological resources misused – Forests, water, and minerals are diverted to industries without equitable community benefit, creating poverty amidst resource abundance. E.g. Growth post-1991 favoured asset-owners.

• Land and tenancy reforms – Redistribute surplus land, secure tenancy rights, and ensure women’s land ownership to democratise agrarian resources. E.g. Telangana’s Rythu Bandhu improved land access for small farmers.

• Inclusive access to credit and assets – Expand financial inclusion through SHGs, cooperative banks, and digital credit for marginalised sections. E.g. SHGs in Andhra Pradesh expanded women’s credit.

• Skill and education investment – Universal access to quality schooling, vocational training, and digital literacy to build human capital. E.g. Kerala’s literacy drive reduced poverty despite low per-capita income.

• Community-based resource management – Empower panchayats and local communities to share benefits of forests, minerals, and water use. E.g. FRA 2006 and PESA 1996 can be implemented more robustly.

• Progressive taxation and welfare redistribution – Wealth taxes, rationalised subsidies, and targeted social protection can reduce structural inequality. E.g. PM-Kisan & wealth tax proposals aim to reduce inequality.

• Strengthening employment guarantee and social security – MGNREGS, urban job schemes, and universal pensions can bridge income gaps in the short term. E.g. MGNREGS gave rural poor income support during COVID-19.

Q17. “In contemporary development models, decision-making and problem-solving responsibilities are not located close to the source of information and execution defeating the objectives of development.” Critically evaluate.(15 M)

• Information–action gap – Local officials and communities hold contextual knowledge, but higher bureaucracies make uniform policies, causing misalignment with ground needs. E.g. centrally designed irrigation schemes often fail in diverse agro-climatic regions.

• Delayed response and inefficiency – Problems requiring immediate attention face administrative delays due to multiple approval layers. E.g. slow relief during localised natural disasters despite robust national frameworks.

• Erosion of community participation – Centralised planning sidelines panchayats, cooperatives, and local SHGs, reducing ownership and accountability. E.g. Smart Cities Mission bypassed Gram Sabhas in slum renewal.

• Overemphasis on top-down targets – Schemes focus on achieving statistical goals (toilets built, houses sanctioned) rather than actual usability or local satisfaction. E.g. Swachh Bharat Mission toilets often unused due to water scarcity.

• Exclusion of marginalised voices – Remote decision-making underrepresents vulnerable groups who are directly affected, perpetuating inequality. E.g. Forest dwellers displaced in POSCO Odisha project with little consultation.

• National integration and uniform standards – Central policies ensure minimum service standards across states, preventing inter-regional disparity. a. E.g. National Food Security Act guarantees entitlements nationwide.

• Economies of scale – Centralised procurement and planning reduce costs, especially in health, food, and digital infrastructure. a. E.g. bulk vaccine procurement under the National Immunisation Programme.

• Better mobilisation of resources – Large-scale central financing enables ambitious programmes like PMAY or Jal Jeevan Mission which individual states may struggle to fund.

• Capacity deficit at local levels – Many panchayats or municipalities lack skilled staff, technical expertise, and fiscal powers to handle complex schemes. a. E.g. Urban local bodies in Bihar often lack town planners.

• Addressing inter-state spillovers – Issues like river pollution, energy grids, and climate adaptation require central coordination beyond local control. a. E.g. Namami Gange programme coordinates across 5 states.

• Over-centralisation undermines federal spirit – States and local bodies feel reduced to implementing agencies. a. E.g. Resistance of states like Kerala to one-size-fits-all GST compensation framework.

• Elite capture at local levels – Even where power is devolved, dominant groups often control resources. a. E.g. PESA Act under-implemented in tribal areas due to bureaucratic resistance.

• Insufficient fiscal decentralisation – Local bodies depend heavily on tied grants; only ~4% of GDP flows to panchayats (15th FC data).

• Weak accountability – Centralised schemes make it difficult for citizens to hold distant decision-makers responsible. a. E.g. Complaints under PMAY (Urban) often unanswered due to centralised portals.

• Digital divide in governance – Centralised dashboards exclude communities with poor connectivity, leaving local voices unheard. a. E.g. Dashboard reporting in Aspirational Districts Programme marginalised tribal villages without connectivity.

• Strengthening subsidiarity principle – Decisions should be devolved to the lowest effective level. a. E.g. Kerala’s participatory planning under the People’s Plan Campaign empowered Gram Sabhas to design local projects.

• Fiscal empowerment of local bodies – Greater untied funds through Finance Commissions. a. E.g. 15th FC’s ₹4.3 lakh crore allocation to rural and urban local bodies must be complemented with tax-raising powers.

• Capacity-building of grassroots institutions – Train local staff in digital governance, environment planning, and public health. a. E.g. Kudumbashree in Kerala shows how local women collectives can run poverty alleviation programmes effectively.

• Cooperative federalism in design – Union to set broad goals, states and panchayats to adapt to local needs. a. E.g. MGNREGS allows states to design works as per local requirements within central framework.

• Technology-enabled citizen participation – Digital dashboards linked with Gram Sabha audits to ensure transparency. a. E.g. Andhra Pradesh’s e-Panchayat initiative enhanced accountability in service delivery.

Q18. The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights has to address the challenges faced by children in the digital era. Examine the existing policies and suggest measures the Commission can initiate to tackle the issue.(15 M)

• Exposure to harmful and age-inappropriate content – Children frequently access violent games, explicit media, and misinformation, shaping behaviour and values. a. E.g. WHO classified “gaming disorder” as a mental health issue.

• Cyberbullying and peer pressure – Online harassment magnifies mental stress; victims often hesitate to report due to stigma. a. E.g. NCRB data shows a rise in cyberstalking cases against minors.

• Sexual exploitation and trafficking risks – Digital platforms are exploited for grooming and circulation of child sexual abuse material. a. E.g. Interpol has flagged India as a top source of CSAM circulation.

• Data exploitation by corporations – Ed-tech and social media firms harvest children’s data without informed consent. a. E.g. Cambridge Analytica controversy highlighted misuse of underage profiles.

• Widening inequality – The digital divide excludes poor children from safe access, while privileged groups face overexposure. a. E.g. During COVID-19, rural children faced both lack of devices and unsafe shared networks.

• POCSO Act, 2012 criminalises online child sexual abuse with stringent punishments. a. E.g. Delhi Police invoked POCSO against Telegram CSAM groups in 2021.

• IT Act, 2000 prohibits publishing and transmission of obscene material involving children. a. E.g. Used in “Bois Locker Room” Instagram case (2020).

• National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal provides an online complaint mechanism.

• Draft Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 introduces safeguards for minors’ data usage.

• School-based awareness campaigns under Digital India and NCERT’s Cyber Safety curriculum spread preventive education.

• Fragmented legal architecture – Lack of an integrated child online safety policy results in overlapping jurisdictions between MeitY, NCERT, and NCPCR.

• Enforcement gap – Conviction rates for cybercrimes against children remain low due to digital forensics shortage. a. E.g. NCRB 2022 showed <30% disposal rate.

• Capacity deficit at grassroots – Parents, teachers, and police are often digitally illiterate, weakening preventive monitoring.

• Limited psychological focus – Policies stress criminalisation but neglect counselling support for affected children. a. E.g. Post “Blue Whale Challenge,” few states offered mental health helplines.

• Centralisation without local adaptation – National frameworks do not empower schools or panchayats to tailor safety norms to local needs. a. E.g. Panchayats excluded from Digital India’s cyber safety outreach.

• Formulate a Child Online Safety Charter mandating default filters, parental controls, and algorithmic transparency on digital platforms. a. E.g. Similar to UK’s “Age-Appropriate Design Code.”

• Strengthen grievance redressal by creating district-level NCPCR cells linked to schools and child protection committees. a. E.g. Kerala’s childline networks show local grievance success.

• Promote digital literacy through integration of safe-internet modules in curricula and community campaigns. a. E.g. Kerala’s “Digital Literacy Mission” can be replicated nationally.

• Forge corporate partnerships with ed-tech and social media companies to enforce “safety by design” norms. a. E.g. EU’s GDPR model of consent for minors.

• Commission periodic audits on children’s digital behaviour, mental health, and safety trends for evidence-based policymaking. a. E.g. UK Ofcom reports track children’s online usage trends annually.

Q19. “Energy security constitutes the dominant kingpin of India’s foreign policy, and is linked with India’s overarching influence in Middle Eastern countries.” How would you integrate energy security with India’s foreign policy trajectories in the coming years?(15 M)

• High import dependence shapes diplomacy – India’s rising oil demand makes it the world’s third-largest consumer, compelling it to prioritise energy ties with Gulf states. a. E.g. Long-term LNG contracts with Qatar sustain India’s fertilizer and power sectors.

• Vulnerable sea lanes dictate naval posture – Most oil shipments transit chokepoints like Hormuz and Bab-el-Mandeb, exposing India to geopolitical turbulence. a. E.g. Indian Navy’s Operation Sankalp was launched after tanker attacks in the Gulf in 2019.

• Middle East as indispensable partner – Over 60% of India’s crude comes from GCC, binding energy with broader economic diplomacy. a. E.g. ADNOC’s crude storage facility in Mangalore reflects energy embedded in UAE ties.

• Diaspora–energy interlinkages – Nine million Indians in Gulf countries generate $50+ billion in remittances, reinforcing the mutual stakes in stable energy markets. a. E.g. India–UAE CEPA not only liberalises trade but anchors labour-energy cooperation.

• Green transition elevates Middle East’s role – Gulf states invest in hydrogen and renewables, aligning with India’s clean energy shift. a. E.g. India–Saudi agreement on green hydrogen complements India’s National Green Hydrogen Mission.

• Supplier diversification enhances resilience – India increased Russian oil imports post-Ukraine crisis, reducing vulnerability to OPEC pricing. a. E.g. Russia’s share in India’s crude basket rose to nearly one-third in 2023.

• Strategic reserves strengthen security – India’s petroleum reserves, partly co-filled by Gulf NOCs, provide emergency buffers. a. E.g. ADNOC storing oil in India’s caverns links UAE energy security with India’s needs.

• Naval security ensures supply chains – India’s active patrols in Gulf of Aden protect shipping against piracy and conflicts. a. E.g. Indian Navy escorted dozens of merchant vessels after Red Sea disruptions in 2023.

• Financial diplomacy reduces dollar risk – Local currency settlement with UAE lowers exposure to sanctions and exchange volatility. a. E.g. Rupee–dirham trade agreements expand resilience in energy payments.

• Early green energy diplomacy – MoUs with Oman and UAE on hydrogen/ammonia create the foundation for future energy corridors. a. E.g. India–Oman pact on ammonia supply links decarbonisation with foreign policy.

• Overdependence on Middle East persists – Despite diversification, India’s vulnerability to Gulf instability remains high. a. E.g. Drone strikes on Saudi Aramco in 2019 briefly spiked oil prices globally, hurting India’s imports.

• Limited upstream equity holdings – India controls few oil blocks abroad compared to China, restricting long-term energy autonomy. a. E.g. ONGC Videsh’s stakes in Abu Dhabi remain small relative to demand.

• Project implementation bottlenecks – Flagship refinery–petrochemical ventures face delays due to land and political issues. a. E.g. $44 billion Ratnagiri refinery project with Saudi Aramco and ADNOC stalled for years.

• Institutional fragmentation weakens strategy – Multiple ministries manage energy, leading to disjointed diplomacy. a. E.g. MEA, MoPNG, and MNRE often pursue parallel negotiations without unified coordination.

• Climate diplomacy imbalance – India risks being seen as over-reliant on fossil fuels while world powers push rapid decarbonisation. a. E.g. At COP27, India defended oil imports while pledging net-zero by 2070.

• Secure flexible long-term contracts – India must lock LNG/crude supplies with pricing linked to Asian benchmarks to reduce spot volatility. a. E.g. Renegotiated Petronet–Qatar LNG contract till 2048 reflects this approach.

• Expand SPR with Gulf co-ownership – Double reserve capacity and allow joint stocking with NOCs to strengthen supply chains. a. E.g. UAE’s ADNOC co-filling caverns in Mangalore should be scaled up.

• Build green energy corridors – Collaborate with Saudi, Oman, and UAE to import hydrogen and ammonia under India’s Green Hydrogen Mission. a. E.g. Pilot green ammonia shipments from Oman to Gujarat ports.

• Embed security in diplomacy – India should fuse naval patrols, logistics pacts, and intelligence-sharing with Gulf energy ties. a. E.g. Logistics agreement with Oman already supports joint maritime–energy security.

• Promote investment diplomacy – Acquire upstream oil blocks and co-develop mega refineries and petrochemicals with Gulf NOCs. a. E.g. West Coast refinery project, if revived, can symbolise energy partnership at scale.

Q20. “The reform process in the United Nations remains unresolved, because of the delicate imbalance of East and West and entanglement of the USA vs. Russo-Chinese alliance.” Examine and critically evaluate the East-West policy confrontations in this regard.(15 M)

• Conflicting visions of multilateralism – The USA and its allies favour liberal-democratic norms, while Russia and China advocate “sovereignty-first” models. This creates irreconcilable principles in UN negotiations. a. E.g. Divergence on humanitarian intervention in Syria and Ukraine.

• Veto politics entrenches deadlock – The P5’s veto powers are wielded as tools of geopolitical rivalry rather than consensus-building. a. E.g. Russia and China vetoed resolutions on Syria over 15 times, paralysing the UNSC.

• Power rivalry in emerging regions – West champions India, Japan, and Germany’s bids for UNSC seats, while China blocks India and Russia opposes Germany/Japan. a. E.g. China’s objection to India in G4 vs. its support for Pakistan’s parity narrative.

• Sanctions and counter-sanctions diplomacy – US-led sanctions regimes are resisted by Russia–China, who argue they reflect Western hegemony. a. E.g. Russian criticism of unilateral sanctions outside UN framework in Ukraine crisis.

• Weaponisation of UN platforms – Both blocs use UN debates for propaganda rather than genuine compromise. a. E.g. USA frames human rights violations in Xinjiang, while China highlights US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

• Prevents unilateral domination – Rivalry checks excessive influence of either bloc, keeping global governance multipolar. a. E.g. Veto ensures NATO interventions are debated internationally.

• Encourages bloc-based bargaining – Competing coalitions push countries like India or Brazil to hedge diplomatically and extract concessions. a. E.g. India’s balancing act in QUAD and BRICS gains visibility.

• Protects sovereignty of weaker states – Russia–China shield smaller states from Western-led interventions. a. E.g. Vetoes prevented regime-change actions in Syria.

• Stability through status quo – While reform is stalled, existing arrangements prevent sudden shifts that could destabilise balance of power. a. E.g. African Union still seeks common consensus on Ezulwini Consensus without disruption.

• Catalyst for alternative forums – UN’s dysfunction drives innovation in plurilateralism like BRICS, G20, and SCO, diversifying global governance.

• Erosion of UN credibility – Persistent deadlock undermines legitimacy of the UNSC. a. E.g. General Assembly bypass mechanisms like “Uniting for Peace” show frustration with UNSC paralysis.

• Marginalisation of Global South – Africa and Latin America remain underrepresented due to P5 rivalries. a. E.g. No permanent UNSC seat for Africa despite AU’s push.

• Veto abuse fuels humanitarian crises – Children and civilians in conflict zones suffer when UNSC fails to act. a. E.g. Delays in aid corridors in Syria due to Russian vetoes.

• Reform fatigue – Repeated stalemates since Kofi Annan’s 2005 reform report discourage member states. a. E.g. G4 and L.69 groupings face little progress despite decades of lobbying.

• UN as theatre, not problem-solver – Issues like Ukraine war or Gaza conflict show the UN being sidelined in actual peacemaking.

• Revitalise G4–African Union partnership for common bargaining power.

• Create veto restraint agreements in mass atrocity cases (France–Mexico proposal).

• Incremental reform strategy – Expand non-permanent categories as stepping stones to permanent membership.

• Strengthen General Assembly oversight to democratise decision-making.

• Promote middle-power coalitions (India, Brazil, South Africa) to bridge East–West divides.

All Question Papers & Analysis

For a complete set of UPSC Mains 2025 Question Papers – including Essay, General Studies (GS 1–4), Optional Subjects, and Language Papers – along with detailed analysis, visit the consolidated article here:

🔗 Click Here – All UPSC Mains 2025 Papers & Analysis

Get instant updates on UPSC Mains 2025 Question Papers, Answer Keys, Analysis, and Toppers’ Guidance directly on your phone. Join our Telegram community of serious aspirants and never miss an update.

• Our Official Facebook Page HERE

• Follow our Instagram Account HERE