Revision: the whole GS2 paper

The United States turned 250 in July 2026, and our Constitution turned 75 in January 2025. Both are durable democracies, built on different tenets.

Tenets they share

Popular sovereignty and a written constitution: Both open with "We the People" and treat the constitution as supreme law above every organ of the state.

Judicial review: America's court claimed it in Marbury v. Madison (1803), while India wrote it into Articles 13 and 32 and added the basic structure doctrine.

Rights and the rule of law: The Bill of Rights and Part III both restrain the state through independent courts.

Tenets that differ

Separation or fusion of powers: The American President has a fixed term and faces no confidence vote. India's executive survives only while it keeps the confidence of the Lok Sabha.

Federalism: America is an indestructible union of indestructible states. India is a union of destructible states, since Article 3 let Parliament reorganise Jammu and Kashmir in 2019.

Citizenship: Americans hold dual citizenship of nation and state, while Indians hold a single citizenship.

Nature of rights: American rights are largely limits on government. India adds Directive Principles of State Policy, which commit the state to social and economic justice.

Secularism: America keeps a wall of separation between church and state. India follows principled distance, which permits reform such as abolishing untouchability under Article 17.

Amendment: America has only 27 amendments and India over a hundred, though the basic structure limits Parliament.

The two share a liberal core of consent, rights and judicial review. They differ because America designed its government to restrain power, while India designed its government to use power for social change.

Decode

Examine the basic tenets of two political systems. The word tenets asks for founding principles, not a list of institutions.

Implicit demand

A pure contrast misses half the question, because the two systems share a liberal core. The answer should show both what is common and what differs, and explain why.

Architecture

A current hook of anniversaries → shared tenets → differing tenets across powers, federalism, citizenship, rights, secularism and amendment → verdict on design philosophy.

Articulation

Anchor: Marbury v. Madison, Articles 3, 13, 17 and 32, the reorganisation of Jammu and Kashmir, 27 American amendments. Money line: America designed its government to restrain power, while India designed its government to use power for social change.

The shared liberal core

Both constitutions derive authority from the people rather than from a monarch or a religious text.

India borrowed judicial review, the idea of a written Bill of Rights and the office of Vice President acting as chair of the upper house from the American model.

The Preamble of our Constitution was inspired partly by the American Preamble, which also begins with "We the People".

Both have independent election bodies at some level, though India's Election Commission is a single constitutional authority while American elections are run by states.

Both allow the removal of top officials by impeachment, under Article 61 in India and Article II in the United States.

The structural contrasts

Presidential system: fixed terms, strict separation, checks and balances such as the presidential veto and Senate confirmation of appointments.

Parliamentary system: collective responsibility under Article 75, a nominal head of state and a real executive drawn from the legislature.

The American Senate gives every state two seats, while our Rajya Sabha allots seats by population.

American states have their own constitutions. In India, only Jammu and Kashmir had one, and it ceased to apply after 2019.

Residuary powers lie with the states in America but with the Union in India under Article 248.

Emergency provisions under Articles 352, 356 and 360 have no American equivalent and reflect Partition era anxieties about unity.

The American Supreme Court's judges are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Indian judges are chosen by the collegium, after the court struck down the National Judicial Appointments Commission in 2015.

Rights, secularism and amendment

The American doctrine of due process shaped our reading of Article 21 after Maneka Gandhi (1978).

India permits reasonable restrictions on speech under Article 19(2), while American courts protect speech far more broadly under the First Amendment.

Affirmative action in America rests on court rulings and was curtailed for college admissions in 2023. India entrenches reservation in the Constitution itself.

American amendment needs two thirds of Congress and three fourths of the states. India uses three procedures under Article 368, and only some amendments need state ratification.

The basic structure doctrine from Kesavananda Bharati (1973) has no direct American counterpart.

In November 2025 the Supreme Court struck down parts of the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 that revived clauses it had already invalidated. The relation between tribunals and courts remains unsettled.

Where tribunals do curtail courts

Ouster of jurisdiction: The 42nd Amendment of 1976 added Articles 323A and 323B, which let Parliament exclude every court except the Supreme Court from tribunal matters.

Executive control: Ministries that litigate before a tribunal often appoint and fund its members, which weakens its independence.

Non judicial members: Technical and administrative members decide questions of law, sometimes without a judicial member on the bench.

Where the view overstates the case

Judicial review restored: In L. Chandra Kumar (1997), the court held judicial review part of the basic structure. Tribunal orders now go before a High Court division bench, so tribunals work as courts of first instance rather than substitutes.

Specialisation and speed: Bodies such as the National Green Tribunal and the National Company Law Tribunal bring expertise to technical disputes and relieve overloaded courts.

Constitutional validity and competency

Validity: Tribunals are valid under Articles 323A and 323B, but only while they remain as independent as the courts they replace.

Competency: In Madras Bar Association (2025), the court struck down a four year tenure, a minimum age of fifty and government choice between two nominees. It directed a National Tribunals Commission within four months.

Persistent gaps: Vacancies and short tenures still slow many tribunals, which defeats their purpose.

Tribunals curtail ordinary courts only when the executive controls them. Their validity rests on independence, so an autonomous National Tribunals Commission is the remedy the Constitution already demands.

Decode

How far do you agree asks for a qualified position. The second part asks for validity and competency, which are distinct: one is legal, the other is about capacity.

Implicit demand

The examiner wants the student to show that the curtailment argument was strong before 1997 and weaker after, and that the live problem is independence rather than jurisdiction.

Architecture

A current hook from the 2025 judgment → where tribunals curtail courts → where the view overstates the case → validity and competency → verdict.

Articulation

Anchor: the 42nd Amendment, Articles 323A and 323B, L. Chandra Kumar, Madras Bar Association 2025, the National Green Tribunal. Money line: tribunals curtail ordinary courts only when the executive controls them.

The constitutional scheme

Article 323A covers administrative tribunals for public service matters, and only Parliament can create them.

Article 323B covers taxation, land reform, industrial disputes, elections and other matters, and both Parliament and state legislatures can create these tribunals.

The Swaran Singh Committee recommended tribunals in 1976 to reduce the burden on High Courts.

The Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 created the Central Administrative Tribunal and allowed states to create their own.

Tribunals also exist under ordinary statutes, such as the Armed Forces Tribunal, the Securities Appellate Tribunal and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

The judicial line on tribunals

S.P. Sampath Kumar (1987) upheld tribunals as effective substitutes for High Courts, provided they were equally independent.

L. Chandra Kumar (1997) struck down the clauses excluding High Courts and Supreme Court review under Articles 226, 227 and 32.

R. Gandhi (2010) held that tribunals exercising judicial functions must have judicial members and independence comparable to courts.

Rojer Mathew (2019) struck down rules framed under the Finance Act, 2017 for weakening independence.

Madras Bar Association (2020 and 2021) set a five year tenure and made advocates with ten years of practice eligible, which Parliament then tried to override.

The judgment of 19 November 2025 said Parliament cannot enact struck down provisions again without curing the defect, and noted that the Union is the largest litigant before tribunals.

Competency and reform

The Law Commission in its 272nd report (2017) recommended uniform service conditions and a common selection method.

Several tribunals were abolished by the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021, and their work shifted to High Courts, which added to court pendency.

Tribunals often sit only in Delhi or a few cities, which raises the cost of access for litigants from distant states.

Appeals from many tribunals go straight to the Supreme Court, which burdens it with routine matters.

A National Tribunals Commission would handle appointments, budgets and infrastructure independently of parent ministries.

Nodal control of all tribunals by the Ministry of Law, rather than by the ministry being litigated against, would reduce conflicts of interest.

Justice B.V. Nagarathna is the only woman among 33 Supreme Court judges, and women hold just 116 of 781 High Court posts.

Why greater representation is desirable

Diversity: A largely male bench narrows the experience brought to cases on marriage, sexual violence and harassment.

Equity: Women form 38 per cent of subordinate judges, so the gap at the top reflects a blocked pipeline, not a lack of talent.

Inclusiveness: Women litigants trust courts more when the bench includes judges like themselves.

Better law: The Vishaka bench of 1997, including Justice Sujata Manohar, framed the first harassment guidelines.

What would help

Stated collegium criteria: Chief Justice Surya Kant wants women candidates to be "a norm and not an exception", which should become a written criterion.

A wider pool: The Manipur, Tripura and Uttarakhand High Courts have no woman judge, so elevation must consider women systematically.

Representation is not a favour to women judges but a condition for a judiciary that reflects the people it judges.

Decode

Discuss desirability, and the three values named in the question must each be addressed by name.

Implicit demand

Data on the gap is essential, and the answer must show that the problem is the pipeline to the top, not the entry level.

Architecture

A data hook → diversity, equity, inclusiveness and quality of law → what would help → verdict.

Articulation

Anchor: one woman in 33 Supreme Court judges, 116 of 781 High Court judges, 38 per cent in subordinate courts, the Vishaka bench. Money line: representation is a condition for a judiciary that reflects the people it judges.

The numbers

As of February 2026, women held 116 of 781 working High Court posts, or about 14.85 per cent.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court had the highest number, 18 of 61 judges.

Women made up about 38 per cent of subordinate judges in February 2025, or 7,852 of 25,886.

Justice Fathima Beevi became the first woman Supreme Court judge in 1989, and only a handful have followed since.

Justice B.V. Nagarathna is in line to become the first woman Chief Justice of India, for a short term in 2027.

Why the pipeline narrows

Elevation depends on seniority at the Bar and in district courts, where women face breaks in career due to care responsibilities.

The collegium works without published criteria, so informal networks matter more than open competition.

Few women are designated senior advocates, which reduces their visibility for elevation from the Bar.

Infrastructure gaps, such as the lack of separate washrooms and creches in many district courts, discourage women from staying in practice.

Reforms and good practice

A Memorandum of Procedure with stated diversity goals could guide the collegium without imposing rigid quotas.

Several states reserve posts for women in judicial service examinations, such as Bihar and Rajasthan, which builds the base of the pipeline.

The Supreme Court Gender Sensitisation and Internal Complaints Committee and the Handbook on Combating Gender Stereotypes (2023) aim at the culture of courts.

Comparative example: women form a much larger share of higher judges in countries such as Canada and the United Kingdom, where appointment bodies publish diversity data.

The National Commission for Women (NCW) received 25,743 complaints in 2024. Such volume shows its reach, but not whether it strategises across public and private spheres.

Where the NCW has made a difference

Grievance redressal: Its helpline and online portal let women report domestic violence and dowry harassment, its largest complaint categories.

Law reform: Its reviews of laws on dowry, rape and workplace harassment fed into reforms such as the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

Reaching districts: Public hearings through the Mahila Jan Sunwai and legal awareness camps take the commission beyond Delhi.

Public sphere: Its inquiries into custodial violence and workplace harassment keep police and employers answerable.

Where it falls short

Recommendatory powers: Under the NCW Act, 1990, it can summon and inquire like a civil court, but it cannot enforce its findings.

Political appointments: Members nominated by the Union government invite charges of selective activism. Its response to the Manipur complaints of 2023 was seen as delayed.

Reach into the home: Domestic violence and unpaid care sit inside the home, where complaint based redressal reaches only women who come forward.

Uneven reach: Over half its complaints in early 2025 came from Uttar Pradesh, which suggests weak awareness in other states.

No data led strategy: It reacts case by case, though the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) shows nearly a third of married women report spousal violence.

The NCW handles individual grievances well but does not yet strategise across both spheres. Statutory independence, powers to secure compliance and a data driven plan would turn it from a complaint desk into a policy body.

Decode

The question asks two things: can the NCW strategise, and can it tackle problems. Both spheres, public and private, must be covered.

Implicit demand

A yes or no is expected with reasons. The balanced position is that it redresses grievances but does not plan, and the reasons lie in its law and structure.

Architecture

A data hook → contributions → shortcomings of power, appointment, private sphere reach, geography and strategy → verdict with reforms.

Articulation

Anchor: 25,743 complaints in 2024, the NCW Act 1990, the Domestic Violence Act 2005, Manipur 2023, NFHS data on spousal violence. Money line: turn it from a complaint desk into a policy body.

Mandate and powers

The NCW was set up in January 1992 under the National Commission for Women Act, 1990, following a recommendation of the Committee on the Status of Women in India (1974).

It has a chairperson and five members nominated by the Union government, with at least one member each from the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

Its functions include reviewing constitutional and legal safeguards, recommending remedial legislation, taking suo motu notice of deprivation of rights and advising on planning.

It has the powers of a civil court to summon persons and require documents during an inquiry.

Its reports go to the Union government, which is not bound to act on them.

Evidence on performance

In January to May 2025, it received 7,698 complaints, led by domestic violence (1,594), criminal intimidation (989) and assault (950).

Uttar Pradesh accounted for 3,921 of those complaints, followed by Delhi and Maharashtra.

Its 24 hour helpline 7827170170 connects women to police, hospitals and One Stop Centres.

It runs initiatives such as the Digital Shakti campaign on online safety and capacity building for women in panchayats.

NFHS 5 found that about 29 per cent of ever married women aged 18 to 49 had faced spousal violence, yet very few sought help.

Reforms suggested

Selection through a committee including the Leader of the Opposition would reduce the perception of partisanship.

Binding powers to secure compliance, or at least a duty on governments to reply to its recommendations within a fixed period, would strengthen it.

Coordination with State Commissions for Women, many of which lack chairpersons and staff, would widen reach.

A standing research wing could use NFHS, National Crime Records Bureau and time use survey data to set priorities.

Attention to the private sphere needs partnership with Protection Officers under the Domestic Violence Act and with self help group networks in villages.

The World Bank estimates that extreme poverty in India fell from 27.1 to 5.3 per cent between 2011 and 2023. The sharpest gains came where programmes had political backing, which supports the statement only in part.

Where political will made programmes work

Public Distribution System: Chhattisgarh and Tamil Nadu reformed ration delivery in the 2000s. Free grain now reaches about 81 crore people under the PM Garib Kalyan Anna Yojana.

Rural employment: MGNREGA worked best in Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh, where governments backed social audits and timely wage payment.

Direct Benefit Transfer: The JAM trinity of Jan Dhan accounts, Aadhaar and mobile phones, pushed from the top, cut leakages in LPG subsidies and scholarships.

Housing and sanitation: PM Awas Yojana and the Swachh Bharat Mission moved fast under regular review by the Prime Minister's Office.

Where will alone was not enough

The showpiece risk: Targets chased for announcement can produce toilets without water and houses without livelihoods, as independent surveys of open defecation free claims found.

Design and funding: The Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) now offers 125 days of work. Its 60:40 cost share may strain poorer states.

Administrative capacity: Bihar and Uttar Pradesh lagged under the same schemes because their administration was weaker, not because intent at the centre differed.

Beyond income: NITI Aayog estimates that 24.8 crore people left multidimensional poverty in a decade. Schooling, health and assets matter as much as cash.

Political will turns a scheme on paper into delivery, but it is not sufficient. Programmes succeed when will is matched by sound design, assured funding and local capacity.

Decode

Discuss a statement with reference to performance. Evidence from actual programmes is the core, not a general essay on political will.

Implicit demand

The statement is largely true but incomplete, so the answer tests it: will explains the successes, while design and capacity explain the failures where will existed.

Architecture

A data hook → programmes that worked because of political backing → cases where will was not enough → verdict naming the missing conditions.

Articulation

Anchor: World Bank estimate of 5.3 per cent, 81 crore beneficiaries of free grain, Chhattisgarh PDS, JAM trinity, VB G RAM G, 24.8 crore out of multidimensional poverty. Money line: political will turns a scheme on paper into delivery, but it is not sufficient.

The poverty numbers

The World Bank estimate of 5.3 per cent uses the international line of $3 a day at 2021 prices.

The Household Consumption Expenditure Survey of the last two rounds showed a sharp rise in rural consumption and a narrowing gap between rural and urban spending.

The NITI Aayog national Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) uses twelve indicators across health, education and standard of living.

The Tendulkar committee (2009) estimated poverty at 21.9 per cent for the year 2011, and the Rangarajan committee (2014) placed it at 29.5 per cent.

Major programmes and their record

Integrated Rural Development Programme (1978): subsidised assets, criticised for poor targeting and loan defaults.

Deendayal Antyodaya Yojana National Rural Livelihoods Mission: built women's self help groups, and the government reported in August 2026 that it had crossed the target of three crore Lakhpati Didis.

MGNREGA (2005): provided a legal right to work and a floor under rural wages, but suffered delayed payments and fund shortages.

VB G RAM G replaced MGNREGA with 125 days of work, a 60:40 Centre to state cost share for most states and a pause of up to 60 days in peak farming seasons.

PM Jan Dhan Yojana opened over 50 crore accounts, which made direct transfers possible.

Ayushman Bharat PM Jan Arogya Yojana covers hospital costs up to ₹5 lakh per family a year, addressing a leading cause of households falling into poverty.

What political will means in practice

Budget priority and timely release of funds, since delayed wages under rural employment schemes discouraged workers.

Willingness to accept social audit and grievance hearings, as Andhra Pradesh did through its Society for Social Audit, Accountability and Transparency.

Reform of delivery systems, as in the computerisation of ration shops in Chhattisgarh.

Continuity across governments, since frequent renaming and redesign disrupt implementation.

Local ownership through panchayats and self help groups, so that delivery does not depend only on the centre's attention.

India signed a Bilateral Investment Treaty with Israel in September 2025, its first with a developed economy, despite Israel's isolation over Gaza.

Depth and diversity

Defence: Israel is among India's four largest arms suppliers, and the Barak 8 missile was developed jointly. Harop drones were reportedly used in Operation Sindoor.

Agriculture and water: Over thirty Centres of Excellence spread Israeli drip irrigation across Indian states.

Trade and technology: Trade stood near $5 billion in 2024, and a free trade agreement is under negotiation.

Regional connectivity: I2U2 and the India Middle East Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) embed ties in regional plans.

Why it cannot be rolled back

Separate tracks: Prime Minister Modi visited Israel in 2017 and Ramallah separately in 2018, so ties no longer hinge on Palestine.

Interest, not sentiment: Security, water and technology needs outlast changes of government in both countries.

The partnership rests on interests, so it will endure. India's balance lies in pairing it with steady support for a two state solution.

Decode

Discuss a claim with two parts: that ties have gained depth and diversity, and that they are irreversible.

Implicit demand

The second part is the real test. The answer should explain why the relationship is structural, while noting the Palestine balance that India keeps.

Architecture

A current hook of the investment treaty → depth and diversity across defence, agriculture, trade and connectivity → reasons it cannot be rolled back → verdict.

Articulation

Anchor: the Bilateral Investment Treaty of 2025, Barak 8, Operation Sindoor, $5 billion trade, I2U2, IMEC, the visits of 2017 and 2018. Money line: the partnership rests on interests, so it will endure.

The course of the relationship

India recognised Israel in 1950 but established full diplomatic relations only in January 1992.

The Kargil conflict of 1999 marked a turning point, when Israel supplied urgent military equipment.

Prime Minister Modi's visit in July 2017 was the first by an Indian Prime Minister, and ties were raised to a strategic partnership.

Prime Minister Netanyahu visited India in January 2018.

The Bilateral Investment Treaty was signed in New Delhi on 8 September 2025 by the finance ministers of both countries.

Areas of cooperation

Defence: Phalcon airborne warning systems, Heron and Searcher drones, Spike missiles and joint production under Make in India.

Agriculture: the India Israel Agricultural Project runs Centres of Excellence for vegetables, fruits and flowers.

Water: Israeli expertise in desalination, drip irrigation and wastewater reuse, including work in Uttar Pradesh and Gujarat.

Innovation: the India Israel Industrial Research and Development and Technological Innovation Fund (I4F) backs joint research.

Labour mobility: agreements since 2023 allow Indian workers to take jobs in Israeli construction and care work.

The balancing act

India supports a sovereign, viable Palestinian state and has given aid to the Palestinian people through UNRWA.

India has abstained on some United Nations votes on Gaza and voted for others, which reflects a case by case approach.

India condemned the Hamas attack of 7 October 2023 as terrorism while calling for humanitarian access in Gaza.

Relations with Iran and the Gulf states, and energy and diaspora interests there, limit how far India can align with Israel.

The United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), a principal organ under Chapter X of the Charter, has 54 members elected for three years.

Main functions

Coordination: It coordinates specialised agencies such as the World Health Organization under Article 63.

Studies and recommendations: It studies economic, social and health issues and advises the General Assembly.

Norm setting: It drafts conventions and convenes international conferences.

Civil society link: Under Article 71, thousands of non governmental organisations hold consultative status.

Development review: It hosts the High Level Political Forum on the Sustainable Development Goals.

Functional commissions

Status of Women: It sets gender equality norms and reviewed the Beijing Platform in 2025.

Narcotic Drugs: It schedules drugs, and moved cannabis out of the strictest schedule in 2020.

Statistical: It sets standards for national accounts.

Others: Population and Development, Social Development, Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice, Science and Technology for Development, and the UN Forum on Forests.

ECOSOC is the UN's development hub, though its recommendations bind no one.

Decode

A descriptive question with two parts: functions, then functional commissions. Both need roughly equal space.

Implicit demand

Charter articles give authority to the functions, and one line of recent work for the main commissions shows they are active bodies.

Architecture

Introduction with Charter basis and membership → five functions → commissions, with the three best known explained and the rest listed → verdict.

Articulation

Anchor: Chapter X, Articles 63 and 71, the High Level Political Forum, Beijing at thirty, cannabis rescheduling in 2020. Money line: ECOSOC is the UN's hub for development.

Structure and working

ECOSOC was established in 1945 under Articles 61 to 72 of the Charter.

Membership rose from 18 to 27 in 1965 and to 54 in 1973, with seats allocated by region.

Eighteen members are elected each year by the General Assembly, and each member has one vote.

Its year is organised into segments on management, humanitarian affairs, operational activities and integration.

The Development Cooperation Forum and the ECOSOC Youth Forum meet under its auspices.

Bodies linked to ECOSOC

Five regional commissions, including the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) in Bangkok.

Expert bodies such as the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues.

Specialised agencies such as the Food and Agriculture Organization, the International Labour Organization and UNESCO report to it.

The Commission on Sustainable Development was replaced by the High Level Political Forum in 2013.

The Commission on Human Rights, once an ECOSOC body, was replaced by the Human Rights Council under the General Assembly in 2006.

Critique and reform

Its broad mandate overlaps with the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and specialised agencies, which dilutes its influence.

Its recommendations are not binding, so outcomes depend on members and agencies.

Developing countries want it strengthened as a forum for global economic governance, where the Group of Twenty has taken the lead.

Consultative status has given civil society a voice, though critics say some states block rights groups from receiving it.

In August 2026 the Prime Minister announced that the target of three crore Lakhpati Didis had been crossed. He set a new goal of six crore, so the State is scaling up self help groups (SHGs), not retreating behind them.

Role of SHGs in development

Financial inclusion: The National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) began the SHG Bank Linkage Programme in 1992. It brought credit to women banks had ignored.

Livelihoods: Groups run dairies, food processing units and retail enterprises, as Kudumbashree in Kerala and Jeevika in Bihar show.

Service delivery: SHG women run canteens, supply take home rations and work as banking correspondents, which extends public services to remote villages.

Social change: Collective strength has helped women resist dowry and domestic violence, and many members now contest panchayat elections.

Why this is not withdrawal

The State builds the groups: Missions fund training, revolving funds and community investment funds, so SHGs carry public policy rather than replace it.

Limits of self help: Groups cannot provide public health, schooling or roads, and many remain small, indebted and confined to low margin work.

Government measures

A national mission: The Deendayal Antyodaya Yojana National Rural Livelihoods Mission has organised about ten crore women in roughly ninety lakh groups.

Cheaper credit: Collateral free loans up to ₹20 lakh and interest subvention make borrowing affordable for groups.

Markets and technology: Namo Drone Didi gives groups drones for farm services, while Saras fairs and government portals open markets for their products.

SHGs mark a changed State, not a retreating one. The State now works through organised women, and it must still provide what groups cannot.

Decode

The statement asserts State withdrawal. The directive asks to examine the role of SHGs and the measures of the government, which quietly supplies the evidence against the statement.

Implicit demand

The examiner expects the student to notice the contradiction: if the government is promoting SHGs so heavily, withdrawal is the wrong description.

Architecture

A current hook of the Lakhpati Didi target → roles across finance, livelihood, services and society → why this is not withdrawal → government measures → verdict.

Articulation

Anchor: Lakhpati Didi, NABARD linkage since 1992, Kudumbashree, Jeevika, ten crore women under the mission, collateral free loans up to ₹20 lakh, Namo Drone Didi. Money line: SHGs mark a changed State, not a retreating one.

The SHG movement

SHGs are informal groups of ten to twenty members, mostly women, who save regularly and lend to each other.

The idea drew on the work of MYRADA in Karnataka and on the Grameen Bank model in Bangladesh.

Swarnajayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (1999) was the first large government programme built around SHGs.

The National Rural Livelihoods Mission was launched in 2011 and renamed Deendayal Antyodaya Yojana in 2016.

Kudumbashree, launched in Kerala in 1998, links neighbourhood groups to local governments.

Government measures in detail

Community Resource Persons drawn from successful SHGs train new groups, which lowers the cost of scaling up.

The Start Up Village Entrepreneurship Programme supports rural enterprises run by SHG members.

The PM Formalisation of Micro Food Processing Enterprises scheme gives seed capital to SHG members in food processing.

The Lakhpati Didi initiative aims for each targeted member to earn at least ₹1 lakh a year, sustained over time.

Namo Drone Didi, approved in 2023, aimed to give 15,000 drones to women's groups for fertiliser and pesticide spraying.

SHG products are sold through Saras Aajeevika fairs, the Government eMarketplace and online retail partnerships.

Concerns

Microfinance debt stress, as in the Andhra Pradesh crisis of 2010, shows the risk of overborrowing.

Regional imbalance persists, with southern states far ahead of much of the north and north east.

Many groups remain credit channels without moving into sustainable enterprises.

Women's unpaid work in SHGs can add to their burden unless it brings real income and decision making power.

Elite capture within groups and dependence on external facilitators weaken their autonomy.

In December 2025 the Supreme Court suspended its 100 metre definition of the Aravallis, fearing it would open most of the range to mining. Competing sectors often defeat protection this way.

Illustrations of contradiction

Mining and ecology: The Environment Ministry banned new Aravalli mining leases only in December 2025, after illegal mining had erased whole hills.

Agriculture and air: Punjab's free power and assured paddy procurement keep rice dominant. Its 2009 groundwater law delays transplanting, leaving little time to clear stubble.

Infrastructure and forests: The Forest (Conservation) Amendment Act, 2023 exempted border land for strategic projects, and the Great Nicobar project will clear rainforest.

Energy and biodiversity: Coal mining in Hasdeo Arand continues despite its dense forest and elephant corridors.

Regulation and ease of business: The draft Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) notification of 2020 proposed clearances after construction.

Protection fails less from weak laws than from sectors pulling against each other. Cumulative impact assessment and an independent regulator would make environment a shared goal.

Decode

Comment with illustrations. The illustrations carry the marks, so each point must show two sectors pulling in opposite directions.

Implicit demand

The examiner wants contradictions within government, not just between industry and activists. Pairing sectors in each label makes that visible.

Architecture

A current hook of the Aravalli case → five paired contradictions → verdict with an institutional remedy.

Articulation

Anchor: the Aravalli order of December 2025, Punjab's groundwater law of 2009, the Forest Conservation Amendment Act 2023, Great Nicobar, Hasdeo Arand, draft EIA 2020. Money line: protection fails less from weak laws than from sectors pulling against each other.

More illustrations

Fertiliser subsidy favours urea, which distorts nutrient balance and degrades soil, while soil health cards urge balanced use.

Hydropower and highway projects in fragile Himalayan valleys, such as the Char Dham road, sit uneasily with disaster risk after events like the Joshimath subsidence of 2023.

The Coastal Regulation Zone notification of 2019 relaxed limits on construction near the coast, even as sea level rise increases risk.

Sand mining supports construction and state revenue, but it lowers riverbeds and damages bridges and aquifers.

Urban expansion over lakes and floodplains in cities such as Bengaluru and Chennai conflicts with flood control.

The Aravalli case

On 20 November 2025, the Supreme Court accepted a definition of Aravalli hills as landforms rising 100 metres above the surrounding terrain.

Critics argued that most of the range falls below that height, so the definition would remove protection from large areas.

On 24 December 2025, the Environment Ministry barred new mining leases across the Aravallis.

On 29 December 2025, a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant put the definition in abeyance and ordered a fresh expert review.

Ways to reconcile sectors

Strategic Environmental Assessment of policies and plans, not just individual projects.

An independent environment regulator, as the Supreme Court suggested in Lafarge Umiam Mining (2011).

Green budgeting and natural capital accounting so that ministries see the cost of degradation.

Crop diversification incentives in Punjab and Haryana, and support for machines that manage stubble in the field.

Meaningful public hearings and consent of gram sabhas under the Forest Rights Act, 2006.

The Sixteenth Finance Commission has recommended ₹4.35 lakh crore for rural local bodies. Yet panchayats raise under 5 per cent of their own revenue, according to the Reserve Bank of India (RBI).

Importance of panchayats

Democratic depth: The 73rd Amendment of 1992 created over 2.5 lakh panchayats with about 31 lakh elected representatives.

Voice for the excluded: Reservation for women, raised to half in over twenty states, has brought about 14 lakh women into office.

Local planning: Gram Panchayat Development Plans let villages set priorities, and the gram sabha anchors social audit.

Delivery: Panchayats implement rural employment, water supply under the Jal Jeevan Mission and sanitation.

The limit: States have devolved few of the 29 subjects in the Eleventh Schedule, so grants make panchayats answerable upward rather than to voters.

Sources beyond grants

Own taxes: Property tax is permitted in most states but rarely collected, and SVAMITVA property cards can now provide the assessment base.

Non tax revenue: Fees from markets, fairs, water supply, ponds and common land, and a share of royalty on minor minerals, can be charged.

Income yielding assets: Shops, cold storage units and small solar plants give steady income that grants cannot.

Institutional finance: Pooled borrowing and loans against assured grants can fund larger works.

Community and corporate funds: Corporate social responsibility funds and voluntary labour, as in Hiware Bazar, add resources.

Panchayats bring government to the village, but dependence on grants keeps them agents of the state. Own revenue is the condition for real self government.

Decode

Two parts: assess importance, then list sources of finance other than grants. Assess allows a limitation to be noted.

Implicit demand

The second part is where marks are won, and it must go beyond grants in every point. Data on the share of own revenue shows why the question matters.

Architecture

A data hook from the Finance Commission and RBI → importance with one limitation → five sources beyond grants → verdict linking finance to autonomy.

Articulation

Anchor: ₹4.35 lakh crore for rural bodies, under 5 per cent own revenue, the 73rd Amendment, 14 lakh women, SVAMITVA, Hiware Bazar. Money line: own revenue is the condition for real self government.

The finance picture

The RBI found that own tax revenue formed about 1.1 per cent and non tax revenue about 3.3 per cent of panchayat revenue, with grants making up the rest.

Average revenue per panchayat was about ₹21 lakh, ranging from under ₹3 lakh in Andhra Pradesh to about ₹64 lakh in West Bengal.

The Sixteenth Finance Commission recommended ₹7.91 lakh crore for all local bodies, of which ₹4.35 lakh crore is for rural bodies.

Its grants are split 80 per cent basic and 20 per cent performance based, and half of the basic grant is untied.

Entry conditions include timely constitution of State Finance Commissions and publication of audited accounts.

Importance beyond the answer

Article 243G empowers states to endow panchayats with powers for economic development and social justice.

The PESA Act, 1996 gives gram sabhas in Fifth Schedule areas control over minor forest produce and consent over land acquisition.

Panchayats played a key role in the pandemic response, running quarantine centres and tracking migrants.

Kerala's People's Plan Campaign of 1996 devolved about a third of the state plan to local bodies.

The eGramSwaraj portal and audit online bring panchayat accounts into public view.

More ways to raise resources

Profession tax, entertainment tax and tax on advertisements where state laws permit.

User charges for services such as solid waste management, with exemptions for the poor.

Leasing of fisheries in village ponds and auctions of produce from common land.

Carbon credits and payments for ecosystem services from community forests and restored wetlands.

Convergence with schemes such as the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme and state rural development funds.

Stronger State Finance Commissions and capacity building for tax assessment and collection.