17 November 2025

• Between Oct 10–Nov 14, 2025, 27 lakh workers were removed from the MGNREGS database vs 10.5 lakh additions.
• Deletions doubled the total from the previous six months, flagged by Lib Tech India.
• Govt is conducting e-KYC and a five-year job card renewal exercise; Ministry denies e-KYC– deletion link.
• Many deletions involve active workers.

Key Points

• FY 2025–26 (first 6 months): 98.8 lakh additions, 15.2 lakh deletions, net +83.6 lakh.
• By mid-Nov: net additions drop to 66.5 lakh, implying 17 lakh net loss in one month.
• States with high e-KYC completion show most deletions:
  • AP: 15.92 lakh
  • TN: 30,529
  • Chhattisgarh: 1.04 lakh
• Govt issued SOP: public disclosure → appeal period * gram sabha approval.
• e-KYC added due to misuse of NMMS (irrelevant photos, photo-to-photo capture, count mismatch).
• ABPS mandatory since 2023 earlier triggered 247% rise in deletions.

Static Linkages

• Article 41 (DPSP) – right to work.
• MGNREGA: legal guarantee of 100 days employment; Gram Sabha central to verification and approval.
• SC Aadhaar judgment: no exclusion due to authentication failure.
• Welfare economics: inclusion/exclusion errors.
• DBT, Aadhaar Act, social audit norms (Section 17).

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Reduces ghost/duplicate workers.
  • Strengthens real-time monitoring via geo-tagging.  
  • Enhances transparency in attendance & payments. Cons /
• Challenges
  • Exclusion errors rising due to Aadhaar mismatch.
  • Connectivity/digital literacy issues hinder NMMS use.
  • Administrative load on Panchayats for appeals & renewals.
  • Tech-first rollouts risk weakening a rights-based welfare law.
• Stakeholders
  • Workers: livelihood insecurity.  
  • States: operational burden.
  • Centre: focus on fraud prevention.
  • Civil society: warns of exclusion-by-design.

Way Forward

• Conduct pilot studies and impact assessments before new tech rollouts.
• Allow offline/alternative verification in low- connectivity regions.
• Ensure no work denial due to failed e-KYC/ABPS.  Strengthen training for mates/PRI staff.
• Make grievance redressal time-bound.
• Align with 2nd ARC recommendations on citizen- centric governance.

• At COP30 (Belém, Brazil), India joined 13 countries + AISCC to announce national platforms for “climate and nature finance.” Platforms will coordinate with the Green Climate Fund (GCF) to streamline access to climate finance.
• Comes amid strong developing-country demands for action on Paris Agreement Article 9.1 (developed-country climate finance obligations).
• India may soon release its National Adaptation Plan, increasing focus on adaptation funding.

Key Points

• GCF Commitments: $19 bn globally; only 25% disbursed (2024).
• India’s GCF Profile: 11 projects, $782 million across water, energy, coastal resilience, MSMEs, transport, climate start-ups; mostly concessional loans.
• New Platform Goal: Replace fragmented financing mechanisms; unify ministries & institutions for smoother fund access.
• GGA Indicators: Experts narrowed ~10,000 to 100 indicators, likely to be adopted at COP30.
• Global Platforms: Total now 16 (including Brazil & Caribbean).

Static Linkages

• CBDR-RC principle under UNFCCC.
• Paris Agreement goals of <2°C/1.5°C.  GCF formed under Cancun Agreements (2010).
• UNEP notes adaptation finance gap rising to $300+ bn/year by 2030.
• NAPs introduced under Cancun Adaptation Framework.

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Streamlines climate finance access.
  • Improves project readiness & technical capability.
  • Supports NAP, NDCs, and resilience goals.
  • Enhances South–South cooperation.
• Challenges
  • Slow GCF processes; stringent fiduciary rules.
  • Heavy reliance on loans → possible debt stress.
  • Developed-country under-delivery on climate finance.
  • Coordination across ministries remains complex.
• Stakeholders
  • Developing countries: predictable, easier finance.
  • Developed countries: prefer private-led finance.
  • GCF: balancing governance & reforms.

Way Forward

• Simplify climate finance access norms. Strengthen unified national climate finance architecture.
• Build capacity for bankable project design. Operationalise Loss & Damage Fund.
• Ensure more grant-based support for vulnerable sectors.
• Promote blended finance without diluting equity.

DELHI’S AIR NEEDS BOLD SOLUTIONS

KEY HIGHLIGHTS

• Delhi’s winter AQI regularly crosses 400+, prompting school closures and health advisories.
• Seasonal spikes from Deepavali, stubble burning and stagnant winter winds worsen baseline pollution.
• Long-term exposure now considered a public health emergency, not a seasonal event.
• NCR under the same political leadership offers scope for coordinated Clean Air Mission.

Key Points

• PM2.5 exposure can reduce life expectancy by ~10 years (AQLI).
• Air pollution imposes 1.36% GDP loss annually (health costs + lost productivity).
• Vehicular load: 3.3 crore+ vehicles in Delhi- NCR; enforcement of BS-VI norms remains weak.
• Construction dust contributes ~27% of PM2.5 (CPCB).
• Winter temperature inversion + basin topography trap pollutants.
• Global models:
  • London ULEZ – charges polluting vehicles. Los Angeles – strict emission norms and clean fuels.
  • Beijing – 35% PM2.5 reduction through coal bans + industrial relocation
• Static Linkages
  • Temperature inversion and smog – NCERT Class XI Geography.
  • Air Act 1981, NAAQS standards, CPCB-SPCB regulatory powers.
  • Articles 48A & 51A(g) – environmental protection duties.
  • CAQM – statutory body for NCR air quality.
  • Economic Survey – productivity loss due to pollution.
  • NITI Aayog – EV roadmap and clean mobility policy.

Critical Analysis

• Strengths / Opportunities
  • Cross-state political alignment enables unified action.
  • Technological tools available: bio- decomposers, EVs, monitoring systems.
  • Successful global precedents offer replicable frameworks.
• Challenges
  • Overlapping jurisdictions across NCR
  • Weak implementation of vehicular, industrial, and construction norms.
  • Farmer dependence on residue burning due to economic constraints.
  • Behavioural factors: cracker use, waste burning, excessive private mobility.
  • Meteorological disadvantages worsen baseline pollution.

• Stakeholders
  • Farmers – need viable alternatives to stubble burning.
  • Industries – concerned about compliance costs.
  • Citizens – health risks but low compliance in lifestyle changes.
  • Governments – often resort to short-term measures.

Way Forward

• Operationalise a Unified NCR Airshed Authority with binding powers.
• Expand EVs, electric buses, metro integration.
• Strict dust norms; mechanised sweeping; regulated construction.
• Scale up Happy Seeders, bio-decomposers; link incentives with MSP.
• Upgrade or shift polluting industries.
• Real-time public dashboards for transparency. Behaviour- and RWAs.

POCSO ACT IS GENDER-NEUTRAL BY DESIGN

• SC issued notice on a petition arguing that Section 3 (penetrative sexual assault) of the POCSO Act applies only to male perpetrators.
• The case questions whether POCSO is gender- neutral regarding offenders.
• Government records and statutory interpretation suggest the Act applies to all genders.

Key Points

• Section 3 includes digital, oral, and object penetration — acts possible by any gender.
• General Clauses Act, 1897 (Section 13): masculine terms include females unless context indicates otherwise.
• MoWCD (Lok Sabha reply, Dec 20, 2024): POCSO is a gender-neutral Act.
• POCSO Amendment Bill 2019 – SO&R: reiterates gender neutrality.
• In contrast, BNS Section 63 (rape) is gender- specific—indicating a deliberate choice to keep POCSO broader.
• SC in Sakshi (2004): child sexual abuse includes diverse acts beyond penile penetration.
• Research shows female-perpetrated CSA exists, though less commonly reported.

Static Linkages

• General Clauses Act, 1897 – rules of statutory interpretation.
• Purposive Interpretation – reading laws in light of their objectives.
• Article 15(3) – special provisions for children.
• UN CRC – non-discriminatory child protection.
• National Policy for Children (2013) – child safety irrespective of gender.

Critical Analysis

• Pros / Supporting View
  • Text and GC Act favor inclusivity.
  • Legislative intent clearly supports gender neutrality.
  • Ensures protection for all children and recognition of non-male offenders.
  • Prevents legal gaps and under-reporting. Cons /
• Challenges
  • Social bias may lead to under-recognition of female-perpetrated abuse.
  • Law enforcement and medical procedures often assume male offenders.
  • Ambiguous wording may cause inconsistent rulings.
  • Concerns about misuse (though limited evidence).
• Stakeholders
  • Child rights groups: support neutrality.
  • Law enforcement: needs training for non- traditional abuse patterns.
  • Women’s groups: seek balance without reinforcing stereotypes.

Way Forward

• Clear statutory amendment reaffirming gender neutrality.
• Updated SOPs for cases involving female or non-binary perpetrators.
• Targeted training for police and medical officers.
• Public awareness on all forms of child sexual abuse.
• Better NCRB data on gender of offenders.

• Government notified DPDP Rules, 2025 on 14 November 2025.
• Most data-protection safeguards pushed to 2027, while RTI dilution takes effect immediately.
• DPBI placed under MeitY, raising independence concerns.
• Rules finalised after delayed consultations; notified on day of Bihar election results.
• Comes eight years after privacy was declared a fundamental right in Puttaswamy (2017).

Key Points

• Delayed implementation: Major protections postponed; companies given 12–18 months for compliance.
• RTI impact: PIOs can reject nearly all personal data requests except what other laws mandate for disclosure.
• Government exemptions: Wide powers for State agencies to process data.
• Regulatory weakness: DPBI lacks autonomy; potential conflict of interest with MeitY.
• Minimal industry burden: Tech giants face low compliance pressure due to long timelines.
• Transparency issues: Draft–final changes minimal; opaque rule-making process.

Static Linkages

• Puttaswamy (2017): Privacy = fundamental right under Article 21; restrictions must meet proportionality.
• RTI Act Sections 8(1)(j), 11: Personal info disclosure allowed if public interest outweighs harm.
• Principles of Data Protection: Consent, purpose limitation, data minimisation (GDPR reference).
• ARC recommendations: Independent regulators for accountability.

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Provides long-pending legal framework for digital data use.
  • Simplifies earlier drafts; easier compliance for smaller entities.
  • Establishes statutory user rights and grievance redress.
• Cons
  • Weak regulator: DPBI under MeitY undermines neutrality.
  • Overbroad exemptions: State agencies may bypass safeguards.
  • RTI dilution: Shrinks transparency space built over two decades.
  • Delayed rollout: Citizens remain exposed to data misuse till 2027.
  • Limited public consultation: Reduces democratic legitimacy.
• Stakeholder Views
  • Government: Seeks flexibility, industry-friendly environment.
  • Industry: Benefits from long compliance window.
  • Civil Society: Flags privacy erosion and institutional weakness.
  • Citizens: Continue with limited control over personal data.

Way Forward

• Ensure independence of DPBI through structural reforms.  
• Narrow government exemptions using necessity proportionality tests.
• Restore RTI balance to protect public interest.
• Fast-track implementation of core safeguards.
• Strengthen Parliamentary oversight and transparent rule- making.
• Promote digital rights literacy.

SWING,BUT DO NOT MISS

Context of the News

• WHO Global TB Report 2025 shows India achieved the highest global decline in TB incidence (21% since 2015).
• Yet, India still contributes 25% of global TB cases and 32% of MDR-/RR-TB cases.
• TB mortality reduced to 21/lakh (2024) but remains above elimination targets.
• India missed its advanced 2025 TB elimination goal.

Key Points

• Incidence: 237/lakh → 187/lakh (2015–2024).
• State Burden: UP highest; Delhi highest prevalence rate.
• MDR-/RR-TB: India leads globally (32% cases).  
• Treatment success:
  • New cases – 90%
  • MDR-/RR-TB – 77%
• Drivers of progress: AI tools, molecular tests (CBNAAT/TrueNat), BPaLM regimen, nutrition support (NPY), Nikshay digital tracking.
• Persistent gaps: Rural diagnosis, socio- economic vulnerability, drug shortages, malnutrition.

Static Linkages

• Article 47 and public health duty.
• Disease determinants (NCERT Biology).
• Local governance and health delivery (73rd/74th Amendments).
• Primary healthcare structure under IPHS.  Social determinants of health.

Critical Analysis

• Strengths:
  • Fastest global decline in incidence.  Better diagnostics & surveillance.
  • Effective new DR-TB regimens.
• Concerns:
  • India still largest TB & MDR-TB contributor.  Diagnostic access gaps in rural/tribal areas.  Periodic drug shortages.
  • Nutrition deficits and stigma.
• Stakeholders:
  • Govt: Pushes digital + treatment innovations.  Patients: Face stigma, financial stress.
  • Healthcare workers: HR shortages.
  • Private sector: Under-reporting persists.

Way Forward

• Expand molecular testing at PHCs.  
• Ensure uninterrupted drug supply.
• Strengthen nutrition and social protection.  
• Universal DST for early MDR detection.
• Scale community-based care (ASHAs, ULBs).  
• Use AI for screening & prediction.
• Intensify awareness to reduce stigma.

CATASTROPHE AVERTED,LONG ROAD AHEAD

Context of the News

• A VBIED blast near the Red Fort ended Delhi’s 14-year run without major terror attacks.
• Parallelly, Gujarat unearthed a ricin-based terror plot involving educated individuals.
• Over 2,900 kg of explosive precursors were seized, averting coordinated attacks.
• The incidents highlight digital radicalisation, urban surveillance gaps, and intelligence coordination failures.

Key Points

• Educated actors (including doctors) used professional cover to build long-term terror modules.
• Multi-state movements & ammonium nitrate procurement continued for two years undetected.
• Delhi’s AI-enabled CCTV systems failed to flag the suspicious loitering vehicle.
• NCR-wide alerts were not enforced; no checkpoints intercepted the accused’s 60 km travel.
• Ricin—CWC Schedule 1 toxin—could cause mass casualties if mixed with food.
• Monitoring of ammonium nitrate remains weak under existing regulations.
• Political restraint prevented premature blame and polarisation.
• Kashmir discourse revived: need for statehood, youth engagement, trust-building.

Static Linkages

• UAPA provisions; Explosives Act & Ammonium Nitrate Rules, 2012.
• Smart Cities security systems & Integrated Control Centres.
• Digital radicalisation trends from UN CT reports.
• Centre–State roles in public order and internal security.
• MAC–SMAC intelligence sharing mandates.

Critical Analysis

• Positives
  • Large seizure prevented mass attacks; multi- state ops coordinated well.
  • Political maturity avoided polarising narratives.
• Concerns
  • Predictive surveillance missing; intelligence gaps across states.
  • Poor ammonium nitrate tracking.
  • Community apathy allowed module survival.  Digital spaces accelerate radicalisation.
• Stakeholder Views
  • Police: Need real-time data & AI tools.
  • States: Seek better Centre-led coordination.  
  • Communities: Fear reporting; lack awareness.
  • Civil groups: Concern over surveillance overreach.

Way Forward

• Upgrade AI-driven urban surveillance.
• Strengthen MAC–SMAC real-time protocols.  Tighten ammonium nitrate tracking end-to- end.
• Institutional deradicalisation involving educators & community leaders.
• Restore J&K statehood for accountable local governance.
• Create NCR-wide instant alert & checkpoint SOPs.