A test for brown sahibs

in 2014, of the 1,122 new recruits for the civil service, only 53 came from those who wrote papers in Indian languages.

It is a shame that it had to come to violence before attention focused on students protesting for days in Delhi against unfairness in the civil service exam. There is unfairness and unfairness of a stupid kind, which makes it worse. This is not just because the aptitude test appears to eliminate students writing tests in Indian languages, but because it could be eliminating good candidates and enlisting ‘educated’ idiots. If you want proof, please remember that Indian bureaucrats are world famous for being obdurate, arrogant and obsolete. And it is often the children of bureaucrats of this genre who today take the civil service examinations in English, so they start with an unfair advantage.

In 2014, of the 1,122 new recruits for the civil service, only 53 came from those who wrote papers in Indian languages, and this is worrying. But a linguistic disadvantage is not the only problem. After Thursday night’s clashes between the police and protesting students in Delhi, I decided to do a little research. I Googled the CSAT syllabus and some question papers.

As I ploughed my way through long, banal passages about ‘creative society’ and ‘inclusive governance’, I realised that, even if translated into Indian languages, the questions would mystify anyone who did not come from St Stephen’s College. No offence to this fine institution, but as I read through the question papers, I visualised the most pompous bores of my acquaintance who always remind me that they went to ‘Stephen’s’. Usually they speak no Indian language (except to their servants) and have no understanding of the hopes and aspirations of the sort of people who voted to bring Narendra Modi to 7, Race Course Road. The students objecting to the CSAT aptitude test are from this new breed of middle-class, aspirational Indians who believe they have a right to participate in governing India.

They are probably intelligent, talented young men and women who would easily be able to answer the CSAT questions if they were asked more intelligibly. Example: Why are Indian forests and rivers ruined? ‘Short-term increases in some ecosystem goods and services have come at the cost of the long-term degradation of others’. If you think that is a convoluted bit of writing, I recommend that you download some CSAT papers and read them. Every passage is written in this kind of long-winded prose.

You may also discover that the reason why India counts among the worst governed countries in the world is because people who becometop officials, police officers and tax inspectors are usually the wrong kind. The right kind do not stand a chance of getting in even if they know India’s problems and complexities well. This is because the tests are all wrong. Speaking for myself, I would give up plans for government service if I were to sit for a CSAT question paper. They appear to have been written by brown sahibs for the progeny of brown sahibs and I would refuse on principle.

Ironically, one of the passages I came across was about ‘inclusive growth’. I am not going to bore you by quoting from it, but suffice it to say that it seemed to be written by someone who was oblivious of what the word inclusive should mean. If anything is guaranteed to enlist brown sahibs and exclude other capable Indians from becoming civil servants, it is the CSAT test. So if the Prime Minister truly wants to bring about parivartan and vikas, he is going to need to do more than appoint a three-member committee to examine the grievances of the protesting students.

The defining characteristic of the recent general election was the anger of ordinary voters against bad governance. Everywhere I went, the biggest complaints were about how basic public services did not work. This was blamed on corruption, but reality is more complicated and at the root of the problem is the kind of person who comes into government service.

The pretentious bores of yesteryear are being replaced by officials who are no longer brown sahibs, but who are trying to become brown sahibs. This is because of the nature of the examinations they take to enter government service. When protesting students tell reporters that CSAT excludes students from rural India from standing a chance, they are right. The CSAT syllabus has ‘English comprehension skills’ as one of its requirements, so even the Prime Minister would probably fail.

Speaking of which, please Prime Minister speak in Hindi when you go to the United States, it makes Indians proud. And, it signals to the vast majority of Indians who speak no English that you represent their hopes and aspirations. Do not let some evil bureaucrat misguide you on this. He may only be doing it because he himself speaks no Indian language

A nation’s well-being defined with four key indices, one reintroduced

The Human Development Report for 2014 reintroduces a gender development index based on a sex-disaggregated HDI, defined as the ratio of the female HDI to the male HDI. GDI measures gender inequalities in achieving the three basic dimensions of human development. GDI was part of the report till 2010 but had then been taken out.

With a female HDI of 0.519 and a male HDI for 0.627, India’s GDI is 0.828. Bangladesh has a GDI of 0.908 — it has a better female HDI than India’s — and Pakistan has 0.750. Pakistan, incidentally, has the lowest female HDI in the region.

Three other broad indices that the report gives out are a multidimensional poverty index, a gender inequality index, and an inequality-adjusted HDI. All three were introduced for the first time in 2010.

MPI identifies multiple deprivations in the same household in education, health and living standards.

Gender inequality index reflects gender-based inequalities in three dimensions — reproductive health, empowerment and economic activity. Reproductive health is measured by maternal mortality and adolescent birth rates; empowerment is measured by the share of parliamentary seats held by women and attainment in secondary and higher education by gender; and economic activity is measured by the labour market participation rate for women and men.

India ranks 135 in human development index: UNDP

Improvement in human development measures has slowed down in the past few years, according to the 2014 Human Development Report (HDR) released on 24 July in Tokyo. The human development index (HDI), a measure derived from life expectancy, education levels and incomes, barely grew from 0.700 in 2012 to 0.702 in 2013.

Even that small improvement could be at risk of getting reversed given the bleak picture of the vulnerabilities facing people across the world. About 1.5 billion people are afflicted with 'multi-dimensional poverty', that is, they suffer from overlapping deprivations in education, health and living standards. A further 800 million are at the brink of falling back into poverty. Nearly 80% of the global population lacks comprehensive social protection. About half of all workers — more than 1.5 billion — work in "informal or precarious" employment.

This slowdown in human development is a result of the lingering global economic crisis that has caused a dip in income growth in Europe, Arab countries, and Central Asia, the report says. The expected number of years of schooling too is not growing adequately, with 43% primary students dropping out before completing primary education worldwide. Life expectancy growth has slowed down in Asia, although there is improvement in child mortality rates in Africa.

The HDR covers 187 countries across the world and is published annually by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). In the current report, the top five countries ranked in terms of the HDI are Norway, Australia, Switzerland, Netherlands and the US. The bottom five in this ranking are Niger, Democratic Republic of Congo, Central African Republic, Chad and Sierra Leone.

India is ranked at 135, among the 'medium development' countries like Egypt, South Africa, Mongolia, Philippines and Indonesia. Among India's neighbours, Bhutan and Bangladesh too figure in this category. Pakistan (ranked 146) and Nepal (145) are in the 'low development' category, while Sri Lanka (73) is in the 'high development' category.

The HDR notes that over 200 million people are affected by natural disasters and 45 million, the largest number in 18 years, were displaced by conflicts at the end of 2012. These factors also contributed to denting the improvement in human development.

READ ALSO: Life expectancy in India goes up by 7.9 years since 1990: UNDP report

HDR 2014 introduces a gender development index (GDI) for the first time, which measures gender development gaps among 148 countries. While the overall gender gap is an 8% deficit for women, the income gap is shockingly high — per capita income for men is more than double that for women.

Tracking inequality in incomes, health and education, the report says that inequality has declined in health access, remained constant in education but increased by two percentage points with respect to income.

The report urges a three-fold policy path to get the world out of the morass it is stuck in: universal provision of social services, stronger social protection and a return to full employment policies. All these would require a strong and active role of the state.

Citing recent estimates of giving universal basic old age and disability pension, basic childcare benefits universal healthcare, social assistance and 100-day employment guarantee, the report says India would need to spend just about 4% of its GDP to provide all this.

.No leader of the opposition

As the new BJP government completes two months in office, it is quite clear that it does not intend to shift the tone, tenor and substance of politics. Having been elected on a wave of expectations, the BJP has started sending signals that, at least in the field of political conduct, it does not have a game plan to seize the initiative and think differently. The first signal came in the way it dealt with the issue of appointing governors, as this writer argued on these pages (‘If there were no governors’, IE, June 26). The issue of the leader of the opposition (LoP) appears to be another signal. As in the case of the governors, this is not about a few individuals or one person getting some perks. This is about the way institutions are handled. Democratic politics is as much about institutions as it is about mobilisations and winning elections. Having proven its ability in the latter terrain, the BJP seems to be following in the footsteps of its predecessors in disregarding the responsibility to build and strengthen institutions. To ridicule the Congress for not being eligible for the post of LoP is easy and rooted in transient politics. Dealing with the issue in a more mature and farsighted manner can open up space for the institutionalisation of political practice. According to the existing provisions, the Congress does not have the required numbers. But the issue now is whether an alliance can be recognised as a legislative party for the purpose of designating an LoP. Assuming that the leader of the Congress in the House is not entitled to “salaries, perks and cabinet rank” as per the existing legislation, the more complicated issue is whether the various committees that require the LoP to be a member (such as the committee for the appointment of the CVC) can function without her. The BJP is said to be dodging the second issue by contemplating an amendment to the relevant acts. A government that amended the TRAI regulations to suit its convenience could easily revise the LoP act and agree to make the leader of the single largest party or the leader of the largest alliance the LoP. Therefore, the argument that the designation of the LoP requires a specific strength in the House is rather specious. The government appears to be taking refuge in technicalities in trying to deny the Congress leader the position. In the end, it might, with bad grace, agree to make the leader of the largest party/ alliance the LoP, after having tested the patience of the Congress on this issue. It might also want to show the Congress in a poor light bydemonstrating how the party is craving that position. But in the process, the BJP contributes to the demeaning of the office and the larger idea that government and opposition together are responsible for running the affairs of Parliament. In the meanwhile, the Congress has also not done much to deserve being called the leader of the opposition. Instead of strategising how best to become the de facto leader of the opposition, the Congress is seen running from pillar to post (reportedly even considering recourse to the judiciary) to get that recognition. The Congress may take pride in the fact that it has disrupted proceedings in the House somewhat effectively. But whether it can force the government to rethink any matter is a crucial test. Besides, whether a parliamentary victory was won by voice power or the power of argument will, in the long run, determine whether the Congress wants to do justice to procedural decorum or just make its presence felt. It would do well to revisit the remarks made by the speakers of the 14th and 15th Lok Sabhas on the issue of decorum and the obligations of parliamentarians. This Lok Sabha is quite different from the Houses where the BJP was a large opposition party around which the NDA was woven. The Congress is not only weak, but also isolated. The so-called UPA has become almost fictitious. Other major parties in the opposition, such as the TMC, AIADMK and BJD, are not only outside the Congress-led coalition, but also the main opponents of the Congress in their respective states. This has put the Congress in a tricky position where it has to coordinate with its opponents. It will require floor management, which the Congress was weak in even when in power. More than that, it will require a flexibility of approach and a readiness to build broad-based coalitions. This is exactly what the Congress lacks. The 16th Lok Sabha has at least four major players in the opposition: the TMC, AIADMK, BJD and Congress. All of them are currently in power in some state or the other and so have to manage their state’s interests. Therefore, structurally, there is very narrow room for a concerted opposition to the NDA. Besides, barring the Congress, the state-based parties have limited interest in opposing the BJP — they would be willing to do business with it almost any time and, as such, might not be “in opposition” to the government. So the Congress will not only have to take the initiative, but also tread cautiously to ensure broader and more durable opposition to the government. Such an initiative can take shape only if the Congress chooses to oppose the government on two broad principles — democratic propriety and procedure on one hand, and states’ rights on the other. Both these platforms can be acceptable to the other parties in the opposition and help the Congress gain sympathetic public opinion. The experience so far, not only in the last two months butalso during NDA rule from 1998 to 2004, is that the Congress is clueless when in opposition. Perhaps long years in government have robbed the party of the skills of an opposition. Even in the states where it has been in opposition, its performance has been dismal. Therefore, the demand that its leader be recognised as LoP is rather pathetic — a party should be recognised as the opposition on the strength of its policies, its leadership and the confidence it inspires as an alternative, not just on the basis of legal provisions and the generosity of the ruling party. When either the ruling party or the opposition is unconcerned with institutionalising political practices, it is bad enough, when both show the same symptoms, it underscores the bankruptcy of the political 

Allies and liability,COALITION GOVT

Whatever one might say about the timing, motives or ramifications of Justice Markandey Katju’s sensational disclosure, nobody has yet been able to disprove the facts about the undue extensions given to a “tainted” additional judge of the Madras High Court because of the DMK’s threat to pull out of the UPA government and thus bring it down. My submission is that this was not the only gross impropriety committed in the name of coalition compulsions. At the time when the Congress’s main ally, the Left, was objecting to the government’s proposal to partially privatise several public sector undertakings, for instance, some DMK ministers reportedly barged into the prime minister’s office to warn him that selling any shares of the Neyveli lignite project would bring his government down.

Since public memory is proverbially short, let me remind the reader that when the single-party rule of the Congress ended and the coalition era began, a large proportion of the political class, including pundits and commentators, virtually jumped with joy. At long last, they said, the country will have “real democracy” and those excluded from politics for so long would be empowered. However sincere the belief, reality did not redeem it.

To begin the story from the beginning, it is not clear when exactly the coalition era began. Arguably, it was after the humiliating defeat of Indira Gandhi in the post-Emergency election in 1977. For even though the Janata Party pretended to be a single political entity, it was, in fact, a coalition of four parties, united only in their abhorrence of the Congress and divided over almost everything else. In any case, the Janata collapsed ignominiously in 30 months. Indira spectacularly returned to power. She, and after her assassination, her elder son Rajiv, who was practically dragooned into politics, ruled the country for a decade.

His former cabinet colleague and nemesis, V.P. Singh, replaced Rajiv. Singh headed what he called the National Front, but turned out to be a notional front. In any case, the front’s strength was so limited that it needed the support of two opposite poles of the political spectrum, the BJP and the Communists, to survive. Within 11 months, however, Singh’s government fell because of his unilateral decision to enforce the Mandal report recommending 27 per cent reservations for OBCs. With Rajiv’s patronage, the former Young Turk, Chandra Shekhar, became prime minister but lasted only 120 days.

After Rajiv’s assassination in the midst of the 1991 general election, P.V. Narasimha Rao ran a minority Congress government for the full five years, though the means he used made him the first former PM to be dragged to a court of law on criminal charges. No wonder, the Congress was defeated in the 1996 polls (though it retained140 seats in the Lok Sabha). For the first time, the BJP became the largest party in the House, but Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s first government became a 13-day wonder. A new government of the so-called United Front, headed by H.D. Deve Gowda, was then sworn in. It, too, could not have survived even for a day without the Congress’s support “from outside”. The then Congress president, Sitaram Kesri, for reasons of his own, pulled the plug on Gowda but let the UF rule under the leadership of I.K. Gujral. Another group of Congressmen pulled the rug from under Gujral’s feet because he would not expel the DMK from his government, which the Congress suspected was complicit in Rajiv’s assassination. (Ironically, it later became a close ally of the Congress.)

In the general election in 1998, the BJP came to power by heading the NDA, with Vajpayee again as prime minister. But this government fell, for want of a single vote in the Lok Sabha, only a few days after celebrating its first anniversary. Why? Because J. Jayalalithaa of the AIADMK withdrew her support since the BJP-led government could not or would not withdraw the court cases filed against her by the state government led by her bitterest foe, M. Karunanidhi. The country had to endure another election before which the BJP, as a caretaker government, fought the Kargil war. This time round, it won with a comfortable majority.

It is to Sonia Gandhi’s credit that in the 2004 polls, she led the Congress back to power even though the BJP was so confident of its future that it had advanced the election by some months. By then, the Congress had been in the wilderness for eight years, and the dynasty for 13.

In all fairness, the coalition era in India began in 1999 and ended, for the foreseeable future at least, in May this year, when the BJP won a clear majority on its own and a dominant one with its allies.

What Jayalalithaa did to the first NDA coalition has already been mentioned. Under pressure from other allies, Vajpayee had to put on the back burner some of the prime elements in his party’s programme. Some allies walked out of his government. However, overall, he seems to have managed his coalition better than the diarchy of Sonia and Manmohan Singh did or could during the decade they ran the ruling coalition, the UPA. Vajpayee usually spoke of “coalition dharma”, Manmohan of the “compulsions of coalition politics”.

Addressing vulnerabilities,HDR-2014

The 2014 Human Development Report (HDR) draws attention to the urgent need to address human vulnerabilities and build resilience as conditions for accelerating and sustaining progress. Human insecurity stems from not only low and uncertain incomes, but from many other sources, including inadequate access to health, food and shelter, unsafe environments, and inadequate protection of civil and political freedoms. Individuals experience vulnerability when they become physically weak, economically impoverished, socially dependent, publicly humiliated or psychologically harmed. Families feel vulnerable when they do not have access to good quality affordable healthcare, when they are exposed to unsafe environments, or when safety is compromised when societies are faced with crime and violence. At the same time, all new born babies are vulnerable to diseases, just as all women are to domestic violence. Preparing citizens for a less vulnerable future entails strengthening the intrinsic resilience of communities and countries. The HDR recommends how to do this.

The report connects human vulnerability to factors and conditions that erode people’s capabilities and freedoms. The concept of vulnerability becomes less abstract, the report argues, when broken down into who is vulnerable, what are they vulnerable to, and why.  People feel vulnerable when they lack core capabilities that prevent them from doing things they value and in coping with threats they face without suffering serious consequences.

The report identifies “structurally vulnerable” groups of people that are more vulnerable than others by virtue of their history or of their unequal treatment by the rest of society. Such a disadvantage can be traced to many factors, including gender, ethnicity and geographic location. Human insecurity is compounded by the overlapping of structural vulnerabilities. For example, this could happen to groups that, in addition to having to cope with disabilities, are also poor and belong to a minority group.

The report has an interesting discussion on “life-cycle vulnerabilities” that are contingent upon a person’s age, and hence, stage in life. For example, new born babies are particularly vulnerable during the first 1,000 days of life, older children during the transition from school to work, and adults when they move from the world of work to an era of retirement. Since capabilities are built over a lifetime, the report argues that setbacks at these critical points in a person’s life can have adverse and prolonged impacts. For instance, neglecting childhood development has serious ramifications for learning in school, holding on to a job and coping with growing old. Such neglect also transmits vulnerabilities to the next generation.

The HDRs have gained popularity because of the ranking of countries on the Human Development Index (HDI). What does the 2014 HDR reveal? The not-so-good news is that there has been no change in India’s rank on the HDI. As in 2012, India continues to rank 135out of 186 countries for which the index has been computed. In South Asia, whereas Sri Lanka (ranked 73) and the Maldives (ranked 103) fare better, India does marginally better than Bhutan (ranked 136) and Bangladesh (ranked 142), and much better than Nepal (ranked 145), Pakistan (ranked 146) and Afghanistan (ranked 169).

India fares badly on gender equality and ranks 127 on the Gender Development Index (GDI) — a new measure of gender gaps in levels of human development achievements for 148 countries. Countries are ranked based on the absolute deviation from gender parity on the HDI. This means countries are penalised not only for gaps that disfavour women, but also for those that disfavour men. The largest gender gap in HDI is observed in South Asia (17 per cent), followed by Arab states and sub-Saharan Africa, with a gap of about 13 per cent each. The most unequal is Afghanistan, where the HDI for females is only 60 per cent of the male HDI.

Four other findings merit attention. First, the top five countries leading the HDI ranking are Norway, Australia, Switzerland, Netherlands and the United States — the same as in 2012. Similarly, as in 2012, the lowest scores in HDI are Niger, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Central African Republic and Sierra Leone. For the first time, Japan no longer ranks first on the HDI among Asian countries. Three countries have done better: Singapore, Hong Kong and, importantly, South Korea. Second, levels in human development continue to rise, though the pace has slowed for all regions over 2008-13 compared to 2000-08. Third, inequalities in health are decreasing, those in education remain persistently high, and income inequality continues to grow particularly in developing countries. Four, computation of the Multi-Dimensional Poverty Index (MPI) reveals that, despite recent progress in poverty reduction, more than 2.2 billion people are either near or living in multidimensional poverty. It is however unfortunate that the Indian government’s reluctance and subsequent delay in commissioning the fourth round of the National Family Health Survey has meant that data used for computation of the MPI is seriously outdated (pertains to 2005-06).

Returning to the main theme, the report contains a set of practical recommendations for addressing vulnerabilities and building resilience to future shocks. It advocates embracing the principles of equity and universalism, putting people first, and investing in strengthening collective voice and action. The HDR calls for reinforcing universal access to basic social services, especially health and education, introducing well-designed interventions to address life-cycle vulnerabilities (focusing on early childhood and the transitions from youth to young adulthood and from adulthood to old age), and strengthening social protection (including unemployment insurance and pension programmes). The report highlights the need to build capacities for disaster preparedness and recovery so that communities can better deal with and recover from shocks. At the macro level, it rightly calls for a commitment to full employment (rather than targets of economic growth), recognising that the value of employment extends far beyond the income it generates. Thereport’s main takeaway is that unless vulnerabilities are addressed immediately and effectively, and efforts are made to ensure that every member of society benefits from investments in human development, human progress can be neither equitable nor sustainable. This is indeed a timely and important message — not just for India but for all nations of the world.

Prime Minister launches MyGov: A platform for Citizen Engagement towards Surajya http://mygov.nic.in

Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi today launched MyGov, a platform that empowers the citizens of India to contribute towards Surajya. Speaking on the occasion, which also marked the completion of sixty days of the new Government, the Prime Minister said the success of democracy is impossible without participation of the people. Stating that in the past, there used to be a big gap between the people and the processes of governance, the Prime Minister said that in the past sixty days, the experience of his Government was that there were many people who wanted to contribute towards nation-building, and devote their time and energy. The only thing they required was an opportunity to shine and showcase their contribution. The Prime Minister said the MyGov platform is a technology-driven medium that would provide this opportunity to contribute towards good governance. The Prime Minister expressed confidence that the people would welcome this initiative. He also invited suggestions to strengthen and improve the platform. He hoped that everyone would join hands through this platform to take the country forward, and to meet the aspirations of the poorest of the poor. He said he was confident of success in this mission, because he recognized the strength and capability of 125 crore Indians. The Prime Minister said he looked forward to receiving the suggestions, views and ideas of the people. The platform - MyGov - presents an opportunity to the citizens to both ‘Discuss’ and ‘Do.’ There are multiple theme-based discussions on MyGov where a wide range of people would share their thoughts and ideas. Further, any idea shared by a contributor will also be discussed on these discussion forums, allowing constructive feedback and interaction. For those who wish to go beyond discussions and wish to contribute on the ground, MyGov offers several avenues to do so. Citizens can volunteer for various tasks and submit their entries. These tasks would then be reviewed by other members and experts. Once approved, these tasks can be shared by those who complete the task and by other members on MyGov. Every approved task would earn credit points for completing the task. National Informatics Centre (NIC), Department of Electronics and Information Technology (DeitY) would implement and manage the platform “MyGov” which would facilitate Citizen Engagement in Good Governance. Groups and corners are an important part of MyGov. The platform has been divided into various groups namely Clean Ganga, Girl Child Education, Clean India, Skilled India, Digital India, Job Creation. Each group consists of online and onground tasks that can be taken up by the contributors. The objective of each group is to bring about a qualitative change in that sphere through people’s participation. The Minister for Communication and IT, Law and Justice, Shri Ravi Shankar Prasad, and senior officers of the Government of India were present at the launch of the platform. Road Ahead The inauguration of MyGov is a small step towards the larger mission of becoming a one stop centre for citizen engagement towards good governance. Over time the number of groups, tasks and discussions will increase. MyGov would also be used as a comprehensive knowledge repository, giving insights from the sharpest and brightest minds across India.

Ban of Endosulfan

The study done by ICMR’s National Institute of Occupational Health in 2002 showed significantly higher prevalence of neurobehavioral disorders, congenital malformations in female subject and abnormalities related to male reproductive system. Another study conducted by Calicut Medical College in Nov-Dec 2010 in the same area showed reproductive morbidity, sexual maturity congenital anomalies and cancer in younger ages. Infertility in the women 30 years and older was significantly higher but amongst younger age group (20-29) infertility was comparable with the unsprayed area indicating that the probable effect of Endosulfan is gradually coming down. State Government of Kerala has sent a proposal amounting toRs. 448.258 crores for relief and rehabilitation of Endosulfan victims in Kasargod district of Kerala. Based on Programme Implementation Proposals received from the State under the National Rural Health Mission (Now NHM), support has been provided to the State within their resource envelope. Government has sanctioned Rs. 10.88 crore for health facilities in Kasargod district during the period 2012-13 to 2014-15(till date). The Hon’ble Supreme Court passed an ad-interim order on 13.05.2011 banning production, sale and use of Endosulfan in the country till further orders. Accordingly, the Central Government issued instructions on 14.05.2011 to all State Governments/Union Territory Administrations to implement the interim order of the Court in toto, which are binding on all manufacturers. The Secretariat of Central Insecticides Board & Registration Committee has written to the Pesticide Associations to recall Certificates of Registration for Endosulfan. These certificates have been treated as withdrawn in compliance of Supreme Court’s directions. On the basis of the interim report of the Joint Expert Committee on Endosulfan, Hon’ble Supreme Court of India vide its order dated 30-09-2011and 13.12.2011 allowed export of existing stocks of Endosulfan Technical to the tune of 1090.596 MT and formulation 2698.056 KL which was manufactured prior to the banning of Endosulfan by Supreme Court vide its order dated 13.5.2011. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its Order dated 23-04-2012 directed the Union of India to file a report on the disposal/phase out of Endosulfan Technical, Endosulfan Formulation and its raw material viz., HCCP available with manufacturers, States & formulators. Accordingly, a report was submitted by Ministry of Agriculture on 12-07-2012 on the manner of disposal of Endosulfan& HCCP stock available with manufacturers, States, formulators.