25 November 2025

• Goa gave contradictory claims on tiger presence:
• Before SC committee (2024): no resident tigers.
• Before Mahadayi Tribunal (2018): resident tiger population with corridor connectivity.
• Bombay HC (July 2023) ordered notification of Mhadei WLS as Tiger Reserve.
• Goa challenged this via SLP in SC.
• SC (Sept 2025) asked Central Empowered Committee for a report and stayed resort approvals.
• Triggered by poisoning of four tigers in 2021.

Key Points

• Goa argues:
  • NTCA requires 800–1000 sq km inviolate area, Goa has only 745 sq km.
  • Proposed area houses ~1 lakh people → relocation impossible.
  • Only 3 tigers found (2018 census), no cubs * transit corridor, not habitat.
• NGOs/NTCA argue:
  • Mhadei forms key corridor to Bhimgad & Anshi-Dandeli (35 tigers).
  • Tiger Reserve status improves legal protection, funding, prey conservation.

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Secures Western Ghats tiger corridor.
  • Enhances habitat protection, anti-poaching, eco-restoration.
  • Supports watershed conservation.
• Challenges
  • High human density → relocation issues.  Limited evidence of resident tigers.
  • Development pressures vs conservation needs.
• Stakeholders
  • State Govt: socio-economic concerns  Communities: displacement fears
  • NTCA/NGOs: ecological necessity
  • SC: balances rights & environmental duties

Way Forward

• Fresh scientific assessment of tiger presence.
• Community-centred conservation; minimise displacement.
• Strengthen prey base, anti-poaching, corridor protection.
• Consider phased notification or selective core areas.
• Improve interstate coordination for Western Ghats landscapes.

AMPLITUDE OF GUBERNATORIAL DISCRETION

• The President of India sought the Supreme Court’s advisory opinion under Article 143 on questions relating to the Governor’s role in assenting to Bills under Article 200.
• The reference followed disputes between several State governments and Governors on delays, withholding assent, and reserving Bills for the President.
• The Supreme Court gave its opinion on 11 of the 14 questions, touching upon the scope of gubernatorial discretion, timelines, and judicial review.
• The advisory has widened the perceived discretionary power, raising concerns over State autonomy and Centre–State relations.

Key Points

• SC: Governor has discretion in assenting, withholding, or reserving Bills.
• No fixed timeline but prolonged, unexplained delay can face limited judicial review.
• If Legislature re-passes a returned Bill, Governor must assent “as soon as possible.”
• Constituent Assembly removed explicit discretion from draft provisions.
• SC justifies discretion partly due to anti- defection law, making rogue legislative outcomes unlikely.
• Advisory expands discretion beyond Sarkaria/Venkatachaliah/Punchhi recommendations.
• Long-pending Presidential assent remains a federal issue (e.g., 74 Bills pending historically).

Static Linkages

• Constitutional provisions relating to:
• Articles 153–167 (Governor), 200 (Assent to Bills), 201 (Bills reserved for President).
• Article 143 – Presidential reference for SC advisory opinion.
• Article 356 – Governor’s report leading to President’s Rule.
• Concept of Aid and Advice (Article 163; 74).  Tenth Schedule (Anti-defection law) – restricts MLAs’ freedom of voting.
• Federal principles and quasi-federal nature of the Constitution (K.C. Wheare).
• Judicial precedents:  Shamsher Singh vs. State of Punjab (1974) – Governor must act on aid and advice except in exceptional situations.
• Hargovind Pant vs. Raghukul Tilak (1979) – Governor is not an employee of the Union.
• Constituent Assembly debates on discretionary powers.

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Prevents constitutional stagnation by allowing judicial scrutiny of extreme delays.
  • Acknowledges situations requiring constitutional oversight by Governor.
  • Ensures mandatory assent after reconsideration.
• Cons
  • Broadens discretion beyond commission recommendations.
  • Risks political misuse during Centre–State conflicts.
  • No timelines → continues legislative uncertainty.  
  • May weaken the supremacy of elected State Legislatures.
• Stakeholders
  • States: fear central overreach.
  • Union: views discretion as constitutional safeguard.
  • Judiciary: balances constitutional morality & federalism.

Challenges

• Politicised appointments.
• Lack of transparent criteria for reserving Bills.
• No mechanism except courts for resolving Union– State legislative conflicts.

Way Forward

• Insert constitutional/time-bound deadlines for assent.
• Adopt commission recommendations on Governor appointments.
• Clearly define grounds for reserving Bills.  Strengthen Inter-State Council processes.
• Ensure periodic reporting on pending Bills.

SOCIETY MUST RECLAIM RESPECTFUL DIALOGUE

• Growing concern over declining neutrality and balanced judgment in public discourse.
• Politics, media and social networks now exhibit heightened polarisation and reduced tolerance for moderation.
• Digital algorithms increasingly amplify outrage, shrinking space for reasoned debate.
• Analysts warn this trend is eroding democratic functioning, institutional trust and social cohesion.

Key Points

• Neutrality is increasingly dismissed as weakness; society is pushed into rigid binary choices.
• Decision-makers face exhaustion navigating hostile, polarised environments.
• Selective neutrality and hypocrisy weaken trust in institutions.
• Polarisation disrupts the legislative process, undermines judicial credibility, and fragments society.
• Social media boosts homophily, widening ideological divides and enabling misinformation.
• Consequences include hate speech, political violence, mental stress and shrinking social networks.

Static Linkages

• Preamble values: justice, liberty, equality, fraternity.
• Deliberation in parliamentary democracy as per Constitution.
• Judicial neutrality and separation of powers.
• Ethical governance: objectivity, impartiality (ARC).
• Social integration theories: trust and bridging social capital.

Critical Analysis

• Positives
  • Polarisation can mobilise participation and highlight neglected issues.
• Concerns
  • Democratic dysfunction: poor debate, legislative gridlock.
  • Institutional mistrust: courts and regulators seen as partisan.
  • Social fragmentation and declining interpersonal trust.
  • Emotional strain on citizens and administrators.
  • Digital manipulation and radicalisation risks.
• Stakeholders
  • Citizens affected by misinformation and hostility.
  • Institutions struggle to uphold neutrality.  
  • Media incentivised by sensationalism.
  • Civil servants must maintain constitutional objectivity.

Way Forward

• Promote dialogue-based democratic culture and civic education.
• Enforce algorithmic transparency and regulate harmful digital practices.
• Strengthen media literacy and fact-checking.
• Institutionalise bipartisan consultation and restore trust in public bodies.
• Encourage community-level bridge-building and ethical leadership.

LABOUR AND HONOUR

• Centre to implement four Labour Codes (Wages, Industrial Relations, Social Security, OSH).
• Passed in 2019–20, delayed as States had not finalised Rules; most have now issued drafts.
• Codes replace 29 labour laws, aiming to simplify compliance.
• Unions say worker-centric recommendations of the 2002 Second National Labour Commission were ignored.
• India needs 78.5 lakh non-farm jobs/year till 2030 (Economic Survey 2023–24).
• Gig economy, AI and new work forms require updated labour protections.
• Indian Labour Conference hasn’t met since 2015 despite promise of tripartite consultation.

Key Points

• Consolidation into four Codes for uniform wage definition, simpler compliance, and formalisation push.
• First-time statutory recognition of gig and platform workers.
• Expected to ease industrial operations and improve investment climate.
• Labour unions worry about retrenchment threshold rise (300 workers), fixed-term jobs, and weaker bargaining power.
• Implementation depends heavily on States → risk of uneven rollout.

Static Linkages

• Article 43A – worker participation in management.
• Concurrent List – labour as shared legislative domain.
• ILO Tripartite Convention, 1976 – consultation obligations.
• Second National Commission on Labour (2002) – recommended consolidation of labour laws.
• EPF, ESI, Maternity Benefit – existing social security mechanisms forming the base.

Critical Analysis

• Benefits
  • Streamlined regulations → Ease of Doing Business.  
  • Reduced litigation due to clearer wage definition.
  • Broader social security net, including gig workers.
  • Potential boost to formal sector hiring.
• Challenges
  • Tripartite consultation gap → legitimacy concerns.
  • Social security for gig workers lacks funding clarity.
  • Increased flexibility may cause contractualisation.  
  • Enforcement capacity in States remains weak.
• Stakeholders
  • Employers: welcome flexibility.
  • Workers/Unions: fear dilution of rights.
  • States: varied preparedness.
  • Government: aims for modernisation + job creation.

Way Forward

• Convene 47th ILC for consensus.
• Build a portable, tech-driven social security system for informal & gig workers.
• Strengthen digital inspections and independent audits.
• Provide funding clarity for gig worker benefits.
• Ensure States adopt uniform, transparent Rules.

• 2025 G-20 Summit held in Johannesburg, the first in Africa.
• African Union participated as a full G-20 member (added during India’s 2023 presidency).
• Discussions reflected Global South priorities— conflicts, inequality, economic volatility.
• India proposed six global initiatives on development, health, data, skills and critical minerals.
• U.S. boycotted the summit, raising concerns about G-20’s cohesion.
• Declaration called for peace in Sudan, DRC, Palestine and Ukraine and invoked Ubuntu.

Key Points

• Global South–centric declaration on conflict, inequality & economic uncertainty.
• India’s proposals: Traditional Knowledge Repository, Africa Skills Multiplier, Global Health Team, Drug– Terror Nexus Initiative, Open Satellite Data Partnership, Critical Minerals Circularity.
• Weaker terrorism language vs 2023 New Delhi Declaration.
• U.S. absence creates doubts ahead of its 2026 presidency.
• “Ubuntu” highlighted collective responsibility.

Static Linkages

• G-20: ~85% global GDP, 75% trade, 2/3rd population.  AU membership similar to EU’s representation.
• UN Charter: prohibition of force; peaceful settlement of disputes.
• India–Africa: ITEC, IAFS, capacity building focus.  
• Critical Minerals List (India, 2023).
• Drug–terror nexus recognised under NDPS Act & UNODC.
• Multilateralism vs Bretton Woods imbalance.

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • AU membership expands Global South voice.
  • India’s initiatives strengthen global capacity & data- sharing.
  • Balanced approach to multiple conflicts.
  • Use of satellite data improves global food and disaster response.
• Cons
  • U.S. boycott dents G-20 credibility.
  • Weak terrorism references indicate diluted consensus.
  • G-20 lacks enforcement; commitments remain advisory.
  • Global North–South divergence persists.
• Stakeholder Views
  • Developing nations see empowerment.
  • Developed nations cautious on structural reforms.
  • India gains leadership momentum.
  • Africa gains visibility and bargaining power.

Way Forward

• Strengthen Global South coalition in G-20.  Push for IMF–World Bank reforms.
• Expand India–Africa cooperation in skills & digital public goods.
• Establish G-20 conflict mediation mechanism.
• Build transparent critical mineral chains.
• Diplomatic efforts to re-engage the U.S.
• Track and implement G-20 commitments effectively.

CHANDIGARH’S FUTURE UNDER ARTICLE 240

Context of the News

• Centre clarified it does not plan to bring Chandigarh under Article 240, amid opposition from Punjab parties.
• The proposal—if implemented—would allow an independent Administrator instead of the Punjab Governor.
• Concerns include dilution of Punjab–Haryana influence over the shared capital and wider Central powers.
• Issue recalls the 2016 attempt to appoint an independent Administrator.

Key Points

• Article 240 empowers the President to make regulations (equal to Parliamentary laws) for select UTs.
• Chandigarh is not under Article 240 currently.  Bringing it under Article 240 would allow:
  • Changes to laws without Parliamentary approval.
  • Stronger Central control over administration.
• Supporters claim potential for greater funding and even a future Assembly.

Static Linkages

• Constitutional framework of Union Territories.  Distinction between Articles 239, 239A, 239AA, 240.
• Concepts of federalism, Centre–State administrative control.
• Background of Punjab Reorganisation (1966).

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • More streamlined Central administration  Higher budgetary support
  • Opportunity for institutional reforms
• Cons
  • Erodes federal balance
  • Reduces Punjab–Haryana say in shared capital  Regulations bypass Parliament
  • May set centralisation precedent

Way Forward

• Maintain status quo unless consensus achieved.
• Prefer Parliamentary debate over executive regulation.
• Strengthen Centre–Punjab–Haryana coordination.
• Ensure changes align with cooperative federalism.

JUSTICE SURYA KANT BECOMES 53rd CJI

• Justice Surya Kant sworn in as the 53rd CJI at Rashtrapati Bhavan.
• Oath by President Droupadi Murmu; tenure till 9 Feb 2027.
• Known for major constitutional rulings: Article 370, Governor/President assent to Bills, sedition law stay.
• Widespread celebrations in Hisar, Haryana, his native district.

Key Points

• Youngest Advocate General of Haryana (2000).  Became Chief Justice of Himachal Pradesh High Court (2018).
• Elevated to the Supreme Court in 2019.
• Part of bench monitoring Special Intensive Revision of Electoral Rolls (important for electoral reforms).
• Bench stayed registration of new FIRs under sedition pending Union Government review.
• Widely respected legal career with strong grounding in constitutional, criminal, and cyber law issues.

Static Linkages

• Article 124: Appointment of Supreme Court judges, including CJI.
• Collegium System: CJI + 4 senior-most SC judges recommend appointments.
• Oath of Office: Administered by President under the Third Schedule.
• Tenure: No fixed term; holds office till age 65 (Article 124).
• Article 370: Special status to J&K repealed in 2019 through Presidential Orders + Reorganisation Act.
• Sedition (124A IPC): Colonial law—SC has repeatedly emphasised need for proportionality in restrictions on speech (linked to Article 19(1)(a)).
• Governor/President Assent: Articles 200 and 201; absence of timelines debated as causing legislative delays.

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Strengthens constitutional jurisprudence.
  • Protects fundamental rights (sedition stay).
  • Experience relevant for cyber law and electoral reforms.
• Challenges
  • Short tenure may limit reforms.
  • High pendency needs systemic change.
  • Collegium transparency concerns persist.
• Stakeholders
  • States: Interested in rulings on Governor’s discretion.
  • Citizens: Expect safeguarding of rights.
  • Legal system: Needs clarity in new-age laws.

Way Forward

• Define time-bound processes for Bill assent.  Accelerate eCourts Phase III.
• Consider Constitutional Courts.
• Reform sedition law with rights-friendly framework.
• Improve judicial infrastructure & move toward AIJS.