xploring education

https://youtu.be/faBZGu91ckY?si=XYvPd...

1 week ago | [YT] | 2

xploring education

youtube.com/shorts/i2lyVNYiO5...

2 weeks ago | [YT] | 2

xploring education

https://youtu.be/_aYb-9spgN8?si=mfaRW...
रोज रात 10 बजे

2 weeks ago | [YT] | 2

xploring education

1 month ago | [YT] | 7

xploring education

भारत की पहली बुलेट ट्रेन परियोजना, जो मुंबई और अहमदाबाद के बीच बन रही है, उसका पहला परिचालन खंड सूरत से वापी (लगभग 100 किमी) के बीच अगस्त 2027 तक शुरू करने का लक्ष्य रखा गया है। यह खंड गुजरात राज्य में स्थित है और यह भारत में हाई-स्पीड रेल के संचालन की दिशा में एक महत्वपूर्ण कदम होगा।

1 month ago | [YT] | 5

xploring education

Xploring education channel से कौन कौन जुड़े हुए है

1 month ago | [YT] | 4

xploring education

Sunny Kumar:
IAS Gurukul - Sociology Optional by Pranay Aggarwal:
Context :

👉The Supreme Court ruled on the 16th Presidential Reference concerning the powers of Governors and the President in granting assent to State Bills.
👉The Court held that neither the judiciary nor legislatures can impose fixed timelines or presume “deemed consent” if Governors delay decisions.
👉The judgment affects Centre–State relations and the functioning of State legislatures.

Background

Articles 200 & 201 govern the Governor’s powers regarding State Bills:

-Grant assent
-Withhold assent
-Return for reconsideration
-Reserve for the President

👉Frequent delays by Governors in Opposition-ruled States have led to constitutional confrontations.
👉A 2025 progressive SC judgment had earlier indicated timelines and allowed “deemed assent” to prevent executive inaction.
👉The new judgment undoes those safeguards, citing lack of explicit constitutional text.

Key Issues Highlighted in the Verdict

A. Unchecked Power to Delay State Legislation

SC held Articles 200 & 201 provide no timelines, thus delays cannot be judicially curtailed.
Governors can sit on Bills indefinitely, impacting governance and legislative efficiency.

B. Weakening of Federalism

-Judges recognized separation of powers but the outcome favours the Union-appointed Governor over elected State governments.
-States lose procedural tools to challenge delays.

C. “Deemed Assent” Rejected

-Court said “deemed consent” is unconstitutional since not explicitly mentioned.
-Contradicts earlier judicial innovations using Article 142 to ensure constitutional functioning.

D. President’s Enhanced Discretion

-Once a Bill is reserved, President need not consult the Council of Ministers on timelines.
-Makes the process more opaque and susceptible to political influence.

E. No Remedy After Second Passage

-Even if State Assembly passes a Bill twice, Governor may reserve it again, delaying indefinitely.

F. Constitutional History Ignored

-Constituent Assembly debated – and removed – “in his discretion” for Governors.
-Sarkaria Commission recommended decision within 6 months.
-Court's interpretation disregards these.

4. Implications for States and Federalism

A. Increased Executive Overreach
-Governors can stall legislation indefinitely without accountability.
-President’s powers become more dominant over State matters.

B. Weakening of State Autonomy
-State governments lack mechanisms to ensure their Bills receive timely assent.
-Legislative paralysis likely in Opposition-ruled States.

C. Judicial Review Becomes Limited
-Court disallowed strict timelines or mandamus, reducing judicial oversight.

D. Rise in Political Tensions
-May deepen friction between Centre and States over constitutional powers.

5. Constitutional & UPSC-Relevant Analysis
Federalism (Article 1 – Union of States)

-Verdict tilts balance toward the Union.
-Violates quasi-federal spirit and principles from S.R. Bommai.

Separation of Powers
-Judiciary refrained from entering the domain of the executive, but arguably at the cost of constitutional functionality.

Cooperative Federalism
-Ruling undermines trust and cooperation, essential for functioning federal democracy.

Constitutional Morality
-Governors should act on aid & advice; delays violate the principle of responsible government.

Way Forward
A. Legislative Reforms

-Parliament may amend Articles 200 & 201 to:
-Introduce timelines (e.g., 3–6 months).
-Mandate written reasons for delays.
-Provide deemed assent after set period.

B. Strengthen Constitutional Conventions
Codify the principle that Governors act on aid and advice except in rare constitutional situations.

C. Council of States Mechanism
Inter-State Council or Rajya Sabha committees may mediate disputes involving Governors.

D. Judicial Clarity Needed
SC may need to revisit in a future larger bench to safeguard federal structure.

Mains Practice Question
Q. The Supreme Court’s ruling on gubernatorial assent powers has significant implications for India’s federal structure. Analyse.

Q. Consider the following statements:
1. Article 200 imposes a constitutionally defined deadline for Governors to assent to Bills.

2. The Sarkaria Commission recommended a six-month limit for Governors to decide on Bills.

3. Governors are constitutionally required to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers in matters of assent.

1 month ago | [YT] | 5

xploring education

1 month ago | [YT] | 2

xploring education

📘 World Philosophy Day (20 November)

"Philosophy inspires us to question, reflect, and understand the world beyond appearances. 🧠
Let’s celebrate the pursuit of wisdom that nurtures human thought and harmony."

#WorldPhilosophyDay #Knowledge #Wisdom #

1 month ago | [YT] | 4

xploring education

https://youtu.be/kM1b_HVEziI?si=htCKm...

1 month ago | [YT] | 4