16 December 2025

• Union government proposes Viksit Bharat — Guarantee For Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill to replace MGNREGA, 2005.
• Marks shift from demand-driven, rights-based employment to a supply-driven, allocation- based scheme.
• Bill aligned with Viksit Bharat @2047 vision.  Civil society groups warn of dilution of the right to work and higher burden on States.

Key Points

• Workdays: Increased from 100 to 125 days.  Nature:
  • MGNREGA: Legal entitlement on demand.
  • VB-G RAM G: Fixed allocations decided by Centre.
• Cost Sharing:
  • NE & Himalayan States: 90:10.
  • Other States/UTs: 60:40 (State share rises sharply).
• Centralisation:
  • Centre decides State-wise allocations and notified rural areas.
• Flexibility:
  • Programme may be paused during peak agricultural seasons.
• Technology:
  • Aadhaar payments, app-based attendance, geotagging made statutory.
• Rationale:
  • Government cites socio-economic transformation of rural India.

Static Linkages

• Welfare state role under DPSPs.
• Employment generation as poverty alleviation.
• Fiscal federalism and Centre–State cost sharing.
• Decentralisation and role of Gram Panchayats.  Technology-led governance reforms.

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Higher guaranteed workdays.
  • Improved transparency via technology.  
  • Predictable budgeting for Centre.
• Cons
  • Weakens right-based framework.  
  • Higher fiscal stress on States
  • Centralised control undermines cooperative federalism.
  • Fixed caps reduce crisis-response capacity.
  • Risk of exclusion due to selective area notification.

Way Forward

• Retain demand-driven entitlement with reforms.
• Ensure universal rural coverage.
• Provide fiscal support to weaker States.  
• Strengthen Gram Sabha role.
• Independent social audits and parliamentary oversight.
• Link works to climate resilience and asset creation.

UGC BILL HEADED TO JOINT PANEL

KEY HIGHLIGHTS

• Union government introduced the VBSA Bill, 2025 to replace UGC and subsume AICTE and NCTE.
• Strong Opposition objections led the government to propose referral to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC).
• Concerns raised over executive overreach, federalism, autonomy of universities, and Hindi nomenclature.
• Teacher–student groups termed it a revival of the 2018 HECI Bill.

Key Points

• Establishes a 12-member VBSA umbrella regulator.
• Separates funding from regulation; grants to be handled by mechanisms under the Ministry of Education.
• Entire VBSA composition controlled by the Centre.
• Only two teacher representatives from State institutions, centrally nominated.
• Provides for graded autonomy, compliance norms, penalties, and closure powers.

Static Linkages

•  Education in Concurrent List (42nd Constitutional Amendment).
• UGC created under UGC Act, 1956.
• AICTE (1987) and NCTE (1993) are statutory regulators.
• Public-funded higher education linked to equity, access, and federal governance.

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Streamlines fragmented higher education regulation.
  • Aligns with NEP 2020 emphasis on autonomy.  
  • JPC referral enhances parliamentary scrutiny.
• Cons
  • Centralised appointments weaken institutional independence.
  • Funding delink may increase bureaucratic and political discretion.
  •   Reduced State role undermines federalism.
  • Autonomy without safeguards risks commercialisation.

Way Forward

• Ensure independent, multi-stakeholder appointments.
• Create transparent, rule-based funding mechanisms.
• Strengthen State representation.
• Balance autonomy with public accountability.
• Address linguistic concerns through inclusive naming.

SHANTI BILL: PRIVATE NUCLEAR

• Centre introduced Sustainable Harnessing and Advancement of Nuclear Energy for Transforming India (SHANTI) Bill, 2025 in Lok Sabha.
• Replaces Atomic Energy Act, 1962 and Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage (CLND) Act, 2010.
• Objective: Attract private (Indian & foreign) investment in nuclear power.
• Part of India’s strategy to meet net-zero by 2070 and ensure clean baseload energy.

Key Points

• Ends NPCIL monopoly on operating nuclear plants.
• Gives statutory status to AERB, accountable to Parliament.
• Revised liability regime:
  • Limits operator’s right of recourse against suppliers.
  • Aligns with global nuclear liability conventions (CSC).
• Operator liability capped:  Based on plant size.
  • Maximum penalty limited to ₹1 crore, even for severe breach.
• Capacity targets:
  • Nuclear power to increase from 8.8 GW → 100 GW by 2047.
• Policy support:
  • ₹20,000 crore Small Modular Reactor (SMR) Mission.
  • Expansion of 220 MW PHWRs.
• Current contribution:
  • ~1.5% of installed capacity.
  • ~3% of electricity generation.

Static Linkages

• Atomic energy under Union List (Seventh Schedule).
• Nuclear energy as low-carbon baseload power.
• Principle of civil nuclear liability vs absolute liability.
• Role of independent regulators in high-risk sectors.
• India’s commitments under international nuclear safety norms.

Critical Analysis

• Advantages
  • Attracts foreign capital and advanced nuclear technology.
  • Removes liability bottlenecks of CLND Act, 2010.
  • Strengthens regulatory legitimacy.
  • Enhances grid stability alongside renewables.
• Concerns
  • Low penalty cap may weaken safety deterrence.
  • Reduced supplier liability raises moral hazard.  
  • Public safety and environmental concerns.
  • Need for strong parliamentary oversight.

Way Forward

• Ensure independent, transparent nuclear regulation.
• Strengthen emergency preparedness & liability insurance.
• Regular review of liability caps.
• Public consultation for plant siting.
• Integrate nuclear with renewables and storage.

• April 2025: SC in State of Tamil Nadu vs Governor fixed timelines for Governors to act on State Bills and allowed deemed assent in case of inaction.
• Special Reference No. 1 of 2025: Constitution Bench reversed the spirit of the ruling.
• Held that:
  • Timelines lack constitutional text.
  • Deemed assent is unconstitutional.
  • Governors/President have wide discretionary space.
• Advisory opinion, but carries strong persuasive authority pasted

Key Points

• Article 200 gives Governor multiple options on Bills.
• Courts can only direct a decision, not impose consequences.
• Governors may refer even reconsidered Bills to the President.
• Legislative delays by Raj Bhavans get institutional legitimacy.
• Weakens enforceability of State legislative will.

Static Linkages

• Governor as constitutional head, not parallel veto authority.
• Assent is a procedural step, not constitutional adjudication.
• Federalism requires respect for elected legislatures.
• Judicial review remains the final test of constitutionality.

Critical Analysis

• Concerns
  • Enables motivated silence by Governors.  
  • Dilutes legislative supremacy of States.
  • Expands indirect Union control over State law- making.
  • No effective remedy against denial of assent.
• Justification by Court
  • Relies on textual interpretation.
  • Avoids judicial overreach into executive discretion.

Way Forward

• Define assent timelines through convention or amendment.
• Restrict referral to President after legislative reiteration.
• Implement Sarkaria & Punchhi Commission safeguards.
• Ensure federal balance through accountability norms.

OMAN VISIT: BEYOND ROUTINE DIPLOMACY

Context of the News

• PM Narendra Modi visited Oman (Dec 17, 2025) during a West Asia–Africa tour amid regional instability.
• Visit marks 70 years of India–Oman diplomatic relations.
• Second PM visit after 2018; Sultan of Oman visited India in Dec 2023.
• Focus on trade diversification, defence, connectivity, energy transition.

Key Points

• Strategic Partnership (2008); Oman is a key pillar of India’s West Asia engagement.
• Defence & Security:
  • Military cooperation MoU (2005).
  • First Gulf country with tri-services exercises with India.
  • Duqm Port Logistics Agreement (2018) enables Indian Navy basing and turnaround.
  • Indian naval deployment in Gulf of Oman for anti-piracy since 2012–13.
• Economic Relations:
  • Bilateral trade: $10.6 bn (FY 2024–25).
  • Oman FDI in India (2000–2025): $605.57 mn.
• Investment:
  • Oman–India Joint Investment Fund invested $600 mn; third tranche $300 mn (2023).
• Digital Cooperation:
  • RuPay card launched in Oman; NPCI– Central Bank of Oman payment linkage.
• Upcoming Areas:
  • Likely India–Oman CEPA (second in Gulf after UAE).
  • IMEC connectivity, green hydrogen, renewables, SPRs, space, defence production.

Static Linkages

• Strategic partnerships and logistics agreements
• Maritime security in Indian Ocean Region  
• Trade agreements as diversification tools  
• Digital public infrastructure diplomacy
• Energy security and strategic reserves
• Neutrality and mediation in foreign policy

Critical Analysis

• Positives
  • Strengthens India’s maritime and strategic footprint.
  • Supports trade diversification amid tariff uncertainties.
  • Enhances fintech and DPI exports.
• Challenges
  • Trade potential underutilised.
  • Regional conflicts may affect connectivity projects.
  • Defence co-production requires sustained follow-through.

Way Forward

• Early conclusion of India–Oman CEPA.
• Integrate Oman into IMEC maritime nodes.
• Expand cooperation in green hydrogen and renewables.
• Deepen defence co-production and logistics interoperability.