3rd September 2025

GOVERNORS CAN’T SIT ON BILLS ENDLESSLY: SC JUDGES

•  Issue: Delay by Governors in granting assent to State Bills under Article 200 of the Constitution.
• Forum: A 5-judge Presidential Reference Bench of the Supreme Court (2024–25).
•  Trigger: April 8, 2024, SC judgment (2-judge Bench) in Tamil Nadu Governor case →
  imposed 3-month
  deadline for Governor/President to act on Bills; beyond that, deemed assent.

•  Article 200: Governor can (a) assent, (b) withhold assent, (c) return (if not Money Bill), or (d) reserve
  Bill for President.
• Article 201: When reserved, President may assent or withhold assent.

•  CJI B.R. Gavai, Justices Vikram Nath & P.S. Narasimha:

• “No organ can impair the functioning of the Constitution.”

• Whether SC can impose a general timeline on Governors/President.
•  Risk of judiciary overreaching separation of powers.
•  Instead of “deemed assent” alone, why not consider
  “deemed withholding” or “deemed reservation”?

 Kapil Sibal (WB):

•  Governor not royalty in a Republic.
•  Collaboration > confrontation between constitutional offices.
•  Delay = thwarts legislative sovereignty.
•  Giving absolute power = absurdity, risk to future of federalism.

•  Urgency is inherent in Governor’s role.
•  Bills reflect felt necessity of times; cannot be stalled. Delay = undermines constitutional
  balance.

• Governors have discretionary power to withhold Bills (Article 200).
• States reject this absolute reading; say it distorts federalism & democracy.

Larger Issues at Stake

• Federalism: Balance between Centre-appointed Governor & State Legislature’s sovereignty.
•  Separation of Powers: Can judiciary fix binding timelines for constitutional functionaries?
•  Constitutional Morality: Offices should function collaboratively, not obstructively.
•  Judicial Innovation vs. Overreach: “Deemed assent” doctrine tested.

Precedent – April 2024 SC Judgment

• Set 3-month deadline → if Bills pending, they get deemed assent.
• Current Bench reviewing whether such judicially imposed deadlines are valid.

INDIA WILL COMMAND MAJOR SHARE OF $1 TRILLION GLOBAL 

•  Global semiconductor market projected to reach $1 trillion.
• India expected to hold a significant share in coming years.
• Emphasis on reducing “file to factory” time →
  faster clearances, lesser paperwork.

• Next phase underway → long-term strategy, not just short-term policy moves.
• Use of National Single Window System →integrates approvals from Centre & States.
• 2025: 10 cumulative projects approved (5 new in 2025 alone).
• Investment attracted: $18 billion (~₹1.5 lakh crore).

• Chips called “digital diamonds” →compared with crude oil as growth driver of past century.
• Semiconductor manufacturing seen as a key economic driver of the 21st century.
• India’s GDP growth: 7.8% (2025) despite global slowdown & trade uncertainties.

•  Self-reliance (Atmanirbhar Bharat) in critical tech.
•  “Designed in India, made in India, trusted by the world”→goal of technology sovereignty.
•  Reduces dependence on global supply chains dominated by East Asia (Taiwan, South Korea, China).

• U.S. tariffs & trade uncertainties affecting global supply chains.
• India positioning itself as an alternative manufacturing hub amidst geopolitical shifts.
• Significance for strategic autonomy and technology security.

Policy & Governance Angle

• Ease of Doing Business (EoDB) reforms: single window, quicker approvals.
• Reflects shift in governance: execution with precision & scale.
• Long-term commitments instead of populist/short-term measures.

INDIA NEEDS MORE WOMEN JUDGES IN THE SUPREME COURT

•  Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia retired (Aug 9, 2025) →created 2 vacancies.
• Appointments made: Justice Vipul Pancholi & Justice Alok Aradhe (Aug 29, 2025).
• No woman appointed →Justice B.V. Nagarathna remains the sole woman judge (out of 34).
• Justice Nagarathna dissented in Collegium but was ignored.
• Highlights structural gender imbalance in judicial appointments.

•  Since 1950 →287 SC judges, only 11 women (≈3.8%). Women SC judges (chronological):Fathima Beevi (1989) →first woman SC judge.
• Sujata Manohar, Ruma Pal, Gyan Sudha Mishra, Ranjana Desai, R. Banumathi, Indu Malhotra, Indira Banerjee, Hima Kohli, Bela M. Trivedi, B.V.
  Nagarathna.
• First time >10% women representation = 2021 Collegium (CJI Ramana) →3 women appointed together.
• No SC/ST women judges ever appointed; Fathima Beevi = only Muslim woman.

•  9 men elevated directly from the Bar.
• Only 1 woman (Justice Indu Malhotra, 2018).
• Women lawyers → largely excluded from SC/HC elevations.

•  Women appointed later in career →shorter tenures, limited chance at CJI or Collegium.
•  Justice Nagarathna will be first woman CJI (Sep 24–Oct 29, 2027) →but only for 36 days
• Several women judges with seniority overlooked.

Collegium Appointment Procedure

• Memorandum of Procedure (MoP):CJI + 4 senior-most judges recommend →sent to Law Minister →PM →President.
•  Collegium process = opaque, discretionary, inconsistent transparency.
•  Criteria used: caste, religion, regional representation (occasionally).
•  Gender not institutionalised as a criterion.

Concerns

• Exclusion of women → undermines representation,inclusiveness, public trust.
• Lack of diversity → weakens legitimacy of judiciary.
• Tokenism & delayed appointments reduce women’s influence in decision-making.
• Absence of policy/institutionalised mandate for gender representation in higher judiciary.

Arguments for Women Representation

• Women judges →bring unique perspectives, empathy, lived experiences.
• Strengthens gender-sensitive jurisprudence.
• Enhances public trust, confidence & democratic legitimacy.
• Aligns with SC’s own judgments mandating 30%representation for women in Bar Associations.

Reform Suggestions

• Institutionalise gender diversity as a criterion in Collegium/MoP.
• Greater transparency in Collegium deliberations.
• Proactive Bar-to-Bench elevation of women lawyers.
• Appoint women judges earlier in career to ensure longer tenures.
• Ensure intersectional diversity (caste, community, region + gender).

UNMISTAKABLE SHIFT

•  First visit by PM Modi to China in 7 years; first bilateral meeting with Xi Jinping since 2020 border standoff.
• Visit signals a shift in India’s foreign policy outlook amidst strained ties with the U.S. (tariffs,sanctions, mistrust of Trump administration).

•  Resumption of dialogue: Fast-tracking boundary resolution via Special Representatives.
• Confidence-building: Approval for direct flights, visa facilitation, economic ties →aimed at stabilizing world trade.
•  Narrative of cooperation: Modi emphasized “mutual trust, respect, sensitivity”; Xi used metaphor “Dragon & Elephant must come together.”
• Unthinkable a year ago → reflects realignment of priorities.

• Modi, Xi, Putin photographs evoked RIC trilateral memories.
• Significance: Russia-China-India grouping gaining renewed attention in Eurasian geopolitics.

• Terrorism: Strong language against “cross-border movement of terrorists.”
• Condemned Pahalgam attack (India) and Balochistan attacks (Pakistan) →balancing tone.
• West Asian crisis: Common ground on Gaza humanitarian crisis and condemnation of U.S.-Israeli
  strikes on Iran.
• China’s Belt & Road Initiative (BRI): India maintained opposition, consistent with past stand.

INDIA TRADE VOLUME WITH GERMANY

• First visit to India by German Foreign Minister Johann David Wadephul.
• Meetings with EAM S. Jaishankar and Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal.
• Comes amid PM Modi–Xi Jinping meeting in Tianjin (China), seen as a step towards India–China
  normalisation.

•  Strategic Partnership since 2000 (25 years completed in 2025).
• Germany sees India as an “indispensable global partner”.

•  Foreign & security policy, defence Economy & trade
• Science & research
• Skilled migration (IT & healthcare)
• Trade volume (2024): €31 billion →
  scope to double.
  India–EU FTA (under negotiation) expected to boost trade.

• Germany: Was highly dependent on Russian gas →reduced to zero direct imports.EU target: Complete independence by 2027.
• India: Dependent on Russia for defence imports.
• German suggestion: Diversify defence imports →increase Europe–India defence cooperation.
• Strategic rationale: Reducing dependencies puts pressure on Russia, cuts its oil & gas revenues.

China viewed simultaneously as:

• Partner (e.g., climate change cooperation) Competitor
• Systemic rival Concerns:
• Support to Russia’s war in Ukraine = “game changer”. Unclear military build-up + power
  projection in Indo-
  Pacific.
• Taiwan Strait escalation →risk to global security & prosperity.
• Positive view: India–China steps to normalise ties.

• Geopolitical convergence: Both India & Germany diversifying away from Russia.
• Economic complementarity: Germany needs skilled workers; India has demographic advantage.
• Strategic Indo-Pacific linkages: Europe acknowledges Indo-Pacific security affects European
  prosperity.
• Rules-based order: Shared interest in countering authoritarian disruptions.

CHINA’S PARADE, ASIA’S DIVIDE

•  Viral handshake of Modi, Xi, and Putin at SCO (Tianjin) = photo-op, not alliance.
• Highlights impracticality of a Eurasian coalition against the U.S.

•  Modi skipped China’s WWII victory parade →signals distance from Beijing’s attempts to reinterpret history for present-day legitimacy.
• Puts India in same camp as Quad powers (U.S., Japan, Australia).

• Europe = collective reconciliation post-1945.
• Asia = fragmented, contested memory.
• China: frames WWII as “War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression”.
• Japan: urges boycott of parade; fears legitimisation of Chinese dominance.
• Southeast & Central Asian attendance →signalling goodwill to Beijing.
• Philippines absent (conflict with China in South China Sea).

• Indian Army: fought Japan in Burma, received Japanese surrenders.
• Subhas Chandra Bose’s INA, backed by Japan, sought independence.
• Gandhi: Quit India, refused to back Britain.
• Communists: first called war “interimperialist”, later backed Allies after Germany attacked USSR.
• Result →fractured nationalist consensus, weakening India’s bargaining power post-war.

• Despite shared anti-imperial sentiment, India fought Britain, China fought Japan →no solidarity.
• Chiang Kai-shek–Gandhi meeting (1942) →no breakthrough.
• China gained UN Security Council permanent seat; India sidelined.
• Modi’s absence from Beijing parade today reflects enduring divergence in historical interpretations and future vision of Asia.

Geopolitical Ironies & Regional Signals

• Pakistan Army Chief at Beijing parade may invoke Indian Army’s WWII role →historical irony.
• South Asian participation (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Maldives, Myanmar, Pakistan) →Delhiisolated in memory politics.

Lessons for Today

• WWII left India weakened by Partition and misreading geopolitics.
• Present risk: repeating mistakes if India fails to understand dynamic Washington–Moscow–Beijing interplay.
• Imperative: Define clear, autonomous national interest amidst great power rivalry..

DECODING THE GDP SURPRISE

• Q1 GDP growth: 7.8% (higher than expected).
• Driven by: services, manufacturing, construction, govt. spending, private consumption.
• RBI projection for FY25-26: 6.5%.
• RBI quarterly forecast:
  Q2: 6.7%
  Q3: 6.6%
  Q4: 6.3%

•  Base effect: Contributed ~40 basis points to growth.
• GDP deflator: 0.9% (lowest outside Covid years).
• Low deflator → artificially boosts real GDP vs nominal GDP.
• Frontloaded exports (before US tariffs of 50%).
• Government capital expenditure provided a temporary boost.

• Nominal GDP growth (Q1): 8.8% (vs. budget assumption of 10.1%).
• Real GDP inflated due to low deflator.
  Implications of lower nominal GDP:
• Fiscal deficit pressure (smaller economic pie →deficit % rises).
• Lower tax revenues (slower GST, direct taxes, risk of GST cuts).
• Credit growth slowdown (linked to nominal expansion).
• Corporate top-line pressure (earnings tied to nominal GDP).

Why mismatch?

• GDP boosted by low deflator; revenues not
  .Export frontloading effect is temporary.
• Govt. expenditure not fully captured in private indicators.
• Informal/non-corporate sector adds to GDP but not to listed firms.
• High-frequency indicators (PMI, freight) more reflective of private sector.

External risks:

• US tariffs and trade deal uncertainty.

Domestic risks:

• Tepid credit growth.
• Deferred demand (anticipation of GST cuts).
• Revenue shortfall→less room for public services & infrastructure.

• Concepts tested:
• Real vs Nominal GDP.
• GDP Deflator.
• Base Effect.
• Fiscal Deficit dynamics.
• Macro vs Microeconomic divergence.
• Themes for GS3 / Essay:
• Growth vs Fiscal Consolidation.
• Global trade shocks and domestic resilience.
• Reliability of GDP data as a growth indicator.