Winners' Dashboard
Demo Classes
+91 99714 44054
info@manulawclasses.com
Today in History (November 6th, 2013)
On this day, Legendary player Sachin Tendulkar and scientist Prof. CNR Rao were announced to be conferred with the country’s highest civilian award ‘Bharat Ratna’.
Let’s Revise
1. Which of the following pollutants is most commonly released by firecrackers that contribute to air pollution in Delhi?
a) Methane
b) Propane
c) Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
d) Ozone (O3)
Answer: c)
Explanation: Firecrackers primarily release particulate matter (PM2.5) that is small enough to penetrate deep into the lungs and enter the bloodstream. These fine particles are one of the major contributors to poor air quality, particularly in Delhi during festivals.
2. What health risks are most commonly associated with the air pollution caused by firecrackers?
a) Respiratory and cardiovascular problems
b) Skin irritation and rashes
c) Eye strain and headaches
d) Digestive issues
Answer: a)
Explanation: The pollutants released by firecrackers, such as PM2.5 and toxic gases, can aggravate respiratory conditions like asthma and bronchitis and increase the risk of cardiovascular diseases. Prolonged exposure to these pollutants can cause serious health complications, particularly for vulnerable groups like children, the elderly, and people with pre-existing health conditions.
3. Which of the following gases is NOT typically associated with the pollution from firecrackers?
a) Sulfur dioxide (SO2)
b) Carbon dioxide (CO2)
c) Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
d) Ammonia (NH3)
Answer: d)
Explanation: While sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbon dioxide (CO2), and nitrogen oxides (NOx) are common pollutants produced by firecrackers, ammonia (NH3) is not a significant byproduct. Firecrackers mostly release gases such as sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, which contribute to respiratory issues and environmental degradation.
4. What is the role of meteorological conditions in the air pollution levels during firecracker use in Delhi?
a) High wind speed
b) Low wind speeds and cold temperatures
c) Frequent rain
d) Sunny weather
Answer: b)
Explanation: In winter, the combination of low wind speeds, colder temperatures, and a phenomenon called temperature inversion traps pollutants close to the ground. This worsens the air quality during Diwali when firecrackers are commonly used, as the pollutants linger longer in the air.
5. Which pollutant level is typically measured in micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m³) and indicates the level of air pollution caused by firecrackers?
a) Carbon Monoxide (CO)
b) Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
c) Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
d) Ozone (O3)
Answer: b)
Explanation: PM2.5 is the fine particulate matter (less than 2.5 microns in diameter) that is a major contributor to air pollution, especially from firecrackers. These particles can easily penetrate the lungs and enter the bloodstream, causing significant health risks. PM2.5 levels are typically measured in micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m³).
Summary of Today’s News
Every private property can not be acquired by the State: Supreme Court of India
A nine-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, in a majority judgment, held on Tuesday that not every resource owned by private players can be considered a “material resource of the community” to be used by the government to serve the “common good”.
1. State Acquisition of Private Property: The Supreme Court ruled that the state does not have the right to acquire every private property by classifying it as a “material resource of the community” for serving the “common good.”
2. Rejection of Rigid Economic Dogma: The majority opinion, authored by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, rejected the view that all private property should be subject to state control, describing this as a “rigid economic theory” rooted in past socialist ideologies.
3. Transition in India’s Economic Policies: The Court emphasized that India has transitioned from a socialist economic model to one that encourages liberalization, private investment, and market-based reforms.
4. Dissenting Opinion of Justice Iyer (1977): The Court referred to the dissenting opinion of Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer from a 1977 case (Ranganath Reddy vs. State of Karnataka), which had influenced later rulings, leading to the need for this nine-judge bench.
5. Constitutional Vision and Economic Democracy: The Court highlighted the vision of India’s Constitution to promote an economic democracy and noted the importance of trusting the wisdom of elected governments. It pointed to India’s dynamic economic growth as evidence of the success of diverse economic policies.
6. Evolution of Economic Policy: The judgment stressed that India’s economic policies have evolved, and the public has consistently voted for governments with varied approaches, rejecting a single economic dogma.
This ruling underscores the shift in India’s economic model and the Supreme Court’s stance against state overreach in private property matters.
Supreme Court Uphold Uttar Pradesh Madrasa Education Board Act 2004.
1. Partial Upholding of the U.P. Madrasa Act: The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Madrasa Education Board Act, 2004, while confirming that the State has the authority to regulate madrasa education to ensure educational standards.
2. Conflict with Higher Education Laws: The Court declared that provisions related to higher education (Kamil and Fazil levels) under the Act were unconstitutional, as they conflicted with the University Grants Commission (UGc) Act, which falls under the Union’s exclusive jurisdiction for regulating higher education.
3. State’s Regulatory Powers: The Court found that, except for higher education levels (Kamil and Fazil), the provisions of the Act were consistent with the State’s obligation to ensure that students in recognised madrasas attain a minimum level of competency, enabling them to participate effectively in society and earn a living.
4. Curriculum and Infrastructure Oversight: The Act allows the Uttar Pradesh Madrasa Board to prescribe the curriculum, set teacher qualifications, and regulate infrastructure standards, but it does not interfere with the day-to-day administration of madrasas.
5. Minority Rights and State’s Interest: While recognising the right of minorities under Article 30 of the Constitution to establish and administer educational institutions, the Court clarified that this right is not absolute. The State has the interest and authority to ensure quality education in minority institutions and can impose regulations for granting aid or recognition.
6. Balance Between Rights and Standards: The judgment emphasized that the Constitution allows the State to balance the right of minorities to run educational institutions with the need to ensure a standard of excellence in education, including secular education in madrasas.
7. Definition of “Education”: The Court interpreted the term “education” broadly under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List, bringing madrasas, which provide religious instruction alongside secular education, within its scope.
8. Religious Character Preservation: The Court stated that the State could enact regulations to ensure madrasas impart secular education to a required standard, without compromising their religious or minority character.
In summary, the Court upheld the State’s right to regulate madrasa education for quality control while preserving the rights of religious minorities to establish and manage such institutions. However, provisions relating to higher education were struck down due to conflict with central laws.
U.P. Cabinet approves new guidelines for appointment of DGP; bypassing the Centre
1. New Guidelines for DGP Appointment in U.P.: The Uttar Pradesh Cabinet has approved new rules for selecting the Director General of Police (DGP), bypassing the Centre’s involvement, including the need to send a shortlist to the Union Public Service Commission (UPSc).
2. Appointment Process: Under the new rules, the selection of the DGP will be done by a panel that includes a retired High Court judge, instead of the current system, which involves sending a list of eligible senior Indian Police Service (IPS) officers to UPSC.
3. U.P. Without Regular DGP Since 2022: Uttar Pradesh has been without a permanent DGP since 2022, and despite multiple reminders from the Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHa), the state has not formed the required panel of senior IPS officers as mandated by the UPSC.
4. Contempt Notices from Supreme Court: In October, the Supreme Court issued contempt notices to several states, including Uttar Pradesh, for appointing ad hoc DGPs instead of following the 2006 Supreme Court judgment, which mandates the appointment process.
5. Compliance with Supreme Court Verdicts: The U.P. government claims the new rules are in line with the 2006 and 2019 Supreme Court rulings, which required a minimum tenure of six months for the DGP and emphasized the need for a more transparent and independent appointment process.
6. Criticism of the New Rules: Former U.P. DGPs and legal experts have criticized the new rules. Prakash Singh, who filed the 1996 petition that led to the 2006 judgment, raised concerns that the new rules bypass the UPSC entirely, though it includes a UPSC representative in the panel. Sulkhan Singh, another former DGP, argued that the new rules violate the Supreme Court’s directives on police accountability and freedom from political influence.
7. Current DGP Appointment Process: The existing process for DGP appointments involves a committee headed by the UPSC chairperson, with participation from the Union Home Secretary, the Chief Secretary, and a senior officer from the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF).
In essence, the new rules allow U.P. to select its DGP without UPSC involvement, which has led to legal debates about compliance with Supreme Court guidelines.
India sends Letter of Intent to host 2036 Games
1. India’s Bid for 2036 Olympics: India has taken the first formal step toward hosting the 2036 Olympics by sending a Letter of Intent (LoI) to the International Olympic Committee (IOc) on October 1, 2023.
2. Prime Minister’s Push: The move aligns with Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s public push for India to host major international events, including the 2030 Youth Olympic Games. Modi had also declared India’s intention to bid for the 2036 Olympics during the 141st IOC session in Mumbai in 2023.
3. India’s Potential Milestone: If successful, India will become only the fourth Asian country to host the Summer Olympics, joining China, South Korea, and Japan.
4. Sports Likely to Be Included: The bid could feature sports like yoga, kho-kho, kabaddi, and chess, showcasing India’s cultural and sporting diversity.
5. Initial Step in a Long Process: The LoI is just the beginning of a lengthy selection process, with no fixed deadlines. After the IOC elections next year, the Future Hosts Commission (FHc) will begin detailed discussions on infrastructure, accommodation, security, and public services before narrowing down potential cities or regions for the bid.
6. Competition from Other Bidders: India faces strong competition from other confirmed bids, including Chile (Santiago), Indonesia (Jakarta, Bali, Nusantara), and Turkey (Istanbul), along with potential bids from wealthier countries like Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
7. Challenges Within India: India’s bid may be hindered by internal issues, including ongoing infighting within the Indian Olympic Association (IOa), which has slowed progress in recent months. The IOA’s involvement remains crucial, as it is the official channel of communication with the IOC.
In summary, while India has made an official bid for the 2036 Olympics, the process is complex and competitive, with significant internal challenges to address.
