Release by DOPT REGARDING AGE FOR IAS-2015,SAMVEG IAS,DEHRADUN

http://www.thehindu.com/multimedia/archive/02210/Civil_Services_Exa_2210656a.pdf

No change in age limit, attempts for IAS-2015: DoPT,SAMVEG IAS DEHRADUN

Dear candidate 
there is no change in age limit as per Dopt notice.so donot be panic.prepare with all your wisdom and energy for IAS 2015.IT IS VERY DIFFICULT FOR GOVT TO CHANGE AGE ABRUPTLY FROM 32 TO 26 YEARS.A POPULAR GOVT CAN NOT TAKE SUCH ARBITRARY DECISIONS.
SAMVEG IAS DEHRADUN
No change has been made in the age limit/attempts for Civil Services Examination, 2014, will be implemented from CSE2015.

The Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) has clarified that no change has been made in the age limit/attempts for Civil Services Examination, 2014.

“The Group of Ministers at its meeting held on December 16, 2013, while accepting the age of entry in the CSE to be 21, discussed the upper age limit and decided to go by the recommendations of the Core Group on Administrative Reforms, which is 26 years for the unreserved category, 28 for OBC and 29 years for SC/ST, and two years additional for physically challenged candidates in each category,” said the DoPT statement.

The GoM further decided to reiterate its earlier decision regarding the number of attempts i.e. three for unreserved candidates, five for OBCs, six for SC/ST candidates with additional two attempts for physically challenged candidates in each category. It was decided to implement these provisions from CSE2015.

“The above mentioned decisions were noted for record and further necessary action. However, before any action in this regard could be taken, the government further took a decision on February 7, 2014, to allow two additional attempts to all categories of candidates with effect from CSE2014, with consequential relaxation of maximum age for all categories of candidates, if required,” said the statement.

Thus, the DoPT reiterated, the current position is two additional attempts for all categories, apart from four for the unreserved, unlimited attempts for the SC/ST and seven attempts each for the OBC and the physically challenged (General and OBC) categories.

In its 10th report titled “Refurbishing of Personnel Administration – Scaling New Heights,” the Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) recommended permissible age as 21 to 25 for general candidates, 21 to 28 for OBCs, and 21 to 29 years for SC/ST candidates as also for the physically challenged.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/no-change-in-age-limit-attempts-for-this-year-dopt/article6612165.ece?ref=sliderNews

Govt says no to UPA move to lower UPSC age limit
The Narendra Modi government declared on Tuesday it was not considering any proposal to reduce the age limit of civil service aspirants in an announcement that effectively buried the UPA's last-minute decision to bring down the upper age limit by four years.

The announcement came against the backdrop of newsreports that suggested the Modi government would implement the decision finalised by the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) earlier this year.

"There is no proposal before the government to reduce the age limit for civil services," a government spokesperson said.

Instead of reducing the age limit, the government has already announced that civil service aspirants -- who may have lost out due to changes in the exam pattern -- would get two additional attempts and consequential age relaxation.

Government sources told HT there had been several attempts in the past to explore the possibility of reducing the upper age for the civil services examination, right from the Atal Bihari Vajpayee-led NDA government's tenure.

"But they were all nipped in the bud due to opposition from the political class that feels it would put rural candidates at a disadvantage," a senior official said, conceding that the politicians "did have a point".

The official said the Manmohan Singh-led Prime Minister's Office (PMO) too had been keen on reducing the age profile of civil service candidates but was not able to have its way.

The empowered group of ministers of the UPA asked to study recommendations of the Administrative Reforms Commission, however, had approved the decision to fix 26 as the upper age limit for unreserved candidates, 28 for OBC, 29 for SC/ST candidates with an additional 2 years for physically challenged aspirants.

"But this decision does not mean anything since all decisions of the previous government would be reviewed, and processed afresh," an official said.

A Swachh Financial Sector Abhiyan? The FSLRC is another United Progressive Alliance initiative that Mr Modi is keen to adopt and implement

According to a newspaper report, Prime Minister Narendra Modi is seeking to revamp financial sector regulations. For this, he wants a report on the implementation of recommendations of the Financial Sector Legislative Reforms Commission (FSLRC).

The FSLRC is another United Progressive Alliance initiative that Mr Modi is keen to adopt and implement. And as with all his other initiatives, Mr Modi is not interested in putting out a white paper on the current status so that the nation knows where we are and where we are headed under the new thinking emanating from him.

Apparently, the Prime Minister's Office has sought a status report from the finance ministry on the progress of the FSLRC recommendations after President Pranab Mukherjee brought the tardy implementation to Mr Modi's attention in early October.

It so happened that at the same time, a bureaucratic reshuffle pushed out Arvind Mayaram as the finance secretary, followed by G S Sandhu as the financial services secretary who was zealously implementing the prime minister's Jan Dhan Yojana. In place of Mr Mayaram came the dynamic Rajiv Mehrishi from Rajasthan, while Hasmukh Adhia from Gujarat, Mr Modi's man, has replaced Mr Sandhu as the new financial services secretary. Clearly, the financial sector is an important area for the prime minister. He is preparing the ground for important decisions.

However, the government has not yet signalled that it is keen to implement the two main FSLRC recommendations - a Unified Financial Regulatory Agency (UFRA) and a central platform to hear all grievances of financial consumers called Financial Redressal Agency (FRA). These two would have been the most ambitious steps so far. It would have amounted to a big-bang reform of the sort that many expected the prime minister to implement but which he has steadfastly refused to, preferring incremental changes.

The FSLRC, as we know, has proposed massive fundamental changes in financial regulations. One was demolishing sectoral regulators for insurance, capital markets and pension, and putting them under the UFRA. It must be remembered that the FSLRC recommendations were so contentious that that there were major differences among the members on important issues.

One of the commission members, Kishori J Udeshi, a former deputy governor of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), objected to the proposed overbearing role of government regarding capital flows: "When the rule-making vests with the government, the RBI may be consulted, but if there is a disagreement, the RBI would willy-nilly have to deal with a fait accompli and be accountable for the actions it would be required to take in the light of the government's decisions."

P J Nayak, former chairman and managing director of Axis Bank, had a different problem: "One must view with apprehension the very substantial statutory powers recommended to be moved from the regulators (primarily the RBI) to the finance ministry and to a statutory Financial Stability and Development Council (FSDC), the latter being chaired by the finance minister. The finance ministry thereby becomes a new dominant regulator."

J R Verma, professor at Indian Institute of Management (IIM), Ahmedabad, pointed out the "authorisation" requirement for providing any financial service, defined very broadly in Section 2(75), amounted to regulatory overreach. "Many activities carried out by accountants, lawyers, actuaries, academics and other professionals as part of their normal profession could attract the registration requirement because these activities could be construed as provision of a financial service. Similarly, investors who rebalance their own portfolios regularly and day traders who routinely place limit orders on a stock exchange could also be deemed to require authorisation. An expansive reading of Section 2(75) (k) could require even a messenger boy who delivers a mutual fund application form to obtain authorisation. All this creates scope for needless harassment of innocent people without providing any worthwhile benefits."

Y H Malegam, professional accountant and the longest-serving director of the RBI, believed that non-banking finance companies and housing finance companies must continue to be regulated and supervised by the RBI.

In essence, of the six members other than the chairman, four of them had important points of disagreement that could not be ironed out before the report was signed. Is this why the Modi government is moving to implement the less controversial regulations such as setting up the Financial Sector Appellate Tribunal (FSAT), the Resolution Corporation, the Public Debt Management Agency (PDMA) and the Financial Data Management Centre (FDMC)?

If the Modi government really wants to make an impact, however, it should think of fast-tracking the Financial Redress Agency, putting some genuine pro-consumer people to run it, who will make it a mission to treat the duped and harassed financial consumer fairly.

As this column has explained many times in the past, while the business of financial services essentially runs on the deposits we put in the bank, the insurance premium we pay or mutual funds we buy, the financial consumers have absolutely no voice anywhere.

The three main regulators have different approaches to grievance redressal and different standards to stop harmful from coming pitched at the consumer. None of them is proactive. Unit-linked insurance products were straightened out only in 2010, after being allowed to run amuck for five years when millions of people lost money.

The RBI still does not care to rein in banks selling third-party products without any obligation to their customers. Chain-money schemes are being regulated by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (and it is making a hash of it) when it is a deposit-taking activity and should be regulated by the RBI.

Finally, India is probably the only country where jewellers to manufacturing companies to builders can pick up money from the public without coming under any regulation. Financial consumers are in a mess. It is time for a Swachh Financial Sector Abhiyan.

Healthy Life Styles is the Key to Check Diabetes

 November 14th, birthday of Frederick Banting, who, along with Charles Best, discovered insulin, is celebrated as World Diabetes Day. National Diabetes Month, observed each year in November, is a time for communities across the country – and the world – to renew and reinforce their fight against diabetes and encourage action to change the life style to reduce its impact.

As diabetes is a chronic disease and needs lifelong treatment, it becomes an economic burden on patients and family. The most important aspect of diabetes is occurrence of complications that increases the cost of management. Heart disease in diabetes is 21.4%, neuropathy 17.5%, peripheral vascular disease leading to ulcers 6.3%-30%, Retinopathy (eye) 19.0%, and Micro albumina (kidney) 26.3%.

Diabetes is part of a larger global epidemic of non- communicable diseases. This disease affects 6.6% (285 million people) of the world's population in the 20-79 years age group. According to the International Diabetic Federation (IDF), this number is expected to grow to 380 million by 2025. The IDF findings reveal that in 2007, countries with the largest numbers of people with diabetes are India (40.9 million), followed by China (39.8 million), the United States (19.2 million), Russia (9.6 million) and Germany (7.4 million).

India is home to 40.9 million people with diabetes – nearly 15% of the global diabetes burden and is projected to   increase to 70 million by 2025.  Impaired Glucose Tolerance (IGT) is also a serious problem in India. Type-2 diabetes is more common and results from a genetic predisposition and from lifestyle factors characterised by a high calorie intake and little exercise. The age of onset in India has been shifting towards younger people. Among Indians in their late teens, ‘adult-onset’ diabetes already manifests itself more often than ‘juvenile onset’ diabetes does. The reasons are the same as those behind the diabetes epidemic worldwide. One set of factors is urbanisation, a rise in living standards and the spread of calorie-rich, fatty, fast foods cheaply available in cities to rich and poor alike. Another is the increased sedentariness that has resulted from the replacement of manual labour by service jobs, and from the advent of video games, television and computers that keep people seated lethargically watching screens for hours every day.

Although poor Indians are currently at lower risk than affluent Indians, the rapid spread of fast food exposes even urban Indian slum dwellers to the risk of diabetes. In India, diabetes is no longer a disease of the affluent or a rich man's disease. It is becoming a problem even among the middle income and poorer sections of the society. Excessive insulin resistance has been observed in Asian Indians as a predominant mechanism leading to Type 2 diabetes.

            This alarming scenario led the Government to start the National Diabetes Control Programme on pilot basis during the seventh five year plan in 1987 in some districts of Tamil Nadu, Jammu & Kashmir and Karnataka, but due to paucity of funds in subsequent years this programme could not be expanded further in remaining states. However to contain the increasing burden of Non-Communicable Diseases, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, launched the National Programme on Prevention and Control of Diabetes, Cardiovascular diseases and Stroke (NPDCS) on 8th January 2008. The Government of India launched the National Programme for Prevention and Control of Cancer, Diabetes, Cardiovascular Diseases and Stroke (NPCDCS) in 2010 by merging the National Cancer Control Programme and the National Programme for Prevention and Control of Diabetes, Cardiovascular Diseases and Stroke. The programme is under implementation in 100 districts and will be expanded to cover all districts of the country in a phased manner during 12^th Five Year Plan. The integration of services at district level and beyond, equitable with universal coverage under the umbrella of National Health Mission is envisaged under the programme.

In the 12^th five year plan, NPCDCs is being implemented in the 35 States/UTs from 2013-14. NPCDCs has now been brought under the umbrella of NHM in PIP mode. Interventions upto District level and below have been integrated under the Mission and funds provided through NCD Flexi pool. While State NCD Cells are functional in 21 states, District NCD Cells are   functional in 96 districts. An average of 6.15% was found suspected to be Diabetic (above 140mg/dl, random) and an average of 5.12% was found to be either pre hypertensive or hypertensive. 29000 Glucometers, 5.8 crore Glucostrips and 6.67 Lancets have been supplied to 21 States for Diabetes screening under NPCDCS, Urban Health Check-up (four cities) and Pilot Phase of School Health Programme (four Districts).As on 31st March 2014 5,5,39,571 persons have been screened for Diabetes and Hypertension under various health facilities,schools,urban slums and work places..

            The commitment to strengthen health system stewardship for improved monitoring of NCDs, related risk factors and comorbidities in India was reiterated during GoI-WHO ‘Call for Action on NCD’s at New Delhi in 2011.The development of the National NCD Monitoring Framework and targets was based on consultative process with the relevant stakeholders.

With the successful implementation of the programme, it is expected to achieve behaviour change in the community to adopt healthy life styles including dietary patterns, enhanced physical activity and reduced intake of tobacco and alcohol resulting in overall reduction in the risk factors of common NCDs in the community.

To conclude, considering the ever-increasing burden of diabetes, health system has to be strengthened with standard care at all levels. The Government has taken certain initiatives at national level which is appreciable but there is a need to implement them at grass route level in focussed manner before it takes the shape of pandemic in India. Awareness about the causes and easy way of preventions are the key to success.

 14^th November is Observed as World Diabetes Day

How to brand India To galvanise foreign investment, the government has to think harder about how to create and maintain a national brand

Governments are living embodiments of 'mission creep' - often starting with noble intentions of reducing personnel, they end up with trying to do more, and spread themselves in unimaginable nooks and crannies, consequently becoming ineffective in most actions. The Narendra Modi-led government has promised 'less government, more governance'. Then, where should one fit the notion of India's 'country brand'? In the government box, that refers to new actions to be undertaken by official agencies, or that labelledgovernance, relating to actions that may be guided by thegovernment, but involve many others, i.e. non-state actors? Let me lay out the case and let you judge.

Marketing guru Martin Sorrel was in India a few months back and delivered some home truths (BS, August 20, 2014). His core message: 'Brand India has lots of positives, but there are negatives too. The new government will have to take immediate steps to rectify these.' He went on: 'Poor brand image and FDI inflows have a direct correlation, in terms of tourism, fresh investment, education and technology.'

In my first book Inside Diplomacy (2000) I had argued that there had been 'no global survey or assessment of how Indians are seen by others'. An "India brand audit" carried out by Ogilvy and Mather was published in August 1998 which summarised assessments of people in different countries towards India. Americans interviewed said: restores faith in humanity; like going back to childhood, standing before a toy store; generates curiosity, rewarding. British observers said: a synthesis of the impossible, real and harsh, coexistence with the spiritual, the spirit of India never leaves you. Chinese said: offers more than can be seen, feel curious and alienated, too strange; they also had nasty comments about squalor and inefficiency.

Images evolve over time, even while basics are deep-rooted and shift only gradually; Wally Olins, another leading exponent, said: 'Branding works when it projects and reinforces a changing reality - but it can be counterproductive if isn't rooted in fact.' This is a key issue for India - in the 1990s, in the early days of reforms, the challenge was to project India as a country open for business, with a transformed economic environment. In recent years, thanks to the economic slowdown and a slackened will in the government, many foreign investors lost interest in India - and many opted for alternate destinations.

The only bright cloud on that dismal horizon has been the 'Incredible India' tourism promotion campaign, which helped to keep up a momentum of rising foreign tourist arrivals. (Our tourist numbers, at 7.2 million in 2013, seem puny in comparison to Thailand's 27 million, and China's 120 million; but the average foreign tourist spend in India is the second highest in the world). But what has been missing is a link between this tourism campaign, and wider promotion of an 'India Brand', across the spectrum of economic activity. Needed actions:

First, a dispassionate assessment is required in the major target countries of how India is perceived, to provide a baseline, and identify the principal issues. This should cover not only potential foreign visitors, but also business, academia, the media and other important sectors and information multipliers. We should do this jointly with a reputed agency such as Pew, because at each location, it is local surveyors that can obtain authentic responses.

Second, a national strategy has to be established, to cover promotion actions in tourism, attracting foreign investments and business, external TV and radio broadcasting strategy, the education establishment that attracts foreign students, and our public diplomacy. In a word, we must coordinate the projection of the India brand. This entails harmonisation of the perspectives of different government agencies, business associations, the tourism industry, and a series of non-state actors that can contribute. A permanent 'India brand board' should be established, which draws in major contributors, state and non-state - not because they have to function under the authority of such a board, but because they would be valued partners in a harmonised national strategy. Similar boards function well in France and the UK, bringing in multiple autonomous entities, with foreign ministries coordinating such actions. Perhaps in India this should be nested in the PM's office.

Third, this country image is for external audiences, but this exercise must not be used to serve domestic political objectives. The experience of the 2003 'Indian Shining' campaign has entered the lore of how branding is can be misused for partisan purpose - and boomerang. The presence of non-state actors in a brand board should help. Another benefit: deepened engagement of business, academic scholars, the media, and other non-official agencies in Indian public diplomacy, largely missing at present.

Fourth, 'India Brand Equity' and 'Invest India' are joint undertakings of the Departments of Commerce and Industry, respectively, with CII and Ficci. They have a major role in projecting the India brand, and should be integrated into this harmonised new campaign. The former dates to the late 1990s, and needs renewed impetus. The Invest India campaign too needs strong collective effort.

Fifth, the network of over 120 Indian embassies and high commissions and 40 consulates is currently under-utilised in India promotion activities. The ministry of external affairs is only their direct supervisor - they belong to the whole of government and the whole of India. It is the narrow walls that have been raised between different official agencies, with further separation between them and non-state public institutions. The unified marketing of India is just the kind of activity that mandates such collective 'ownership' of our overseas representation. Embassies have a latent capacity for micro-actions that fit into a macro image strategy.

'Make in India' is a simple, captivating slogan. It's realisation hinges on multiple actions by a gamut of state and non-state actors, who together constitute India's 'national diplomatic system'; the first step is to acknowledge them in their diversity, as legitimate contributors. A second is to harness them in what has to be nothing short of a national effort. The goal is not just the branding of India, but how we use it for the realisation of a prosperous, dynamic, egalitarian India.

India’s first nesting site of white-bellied heron found

A nesting site of the extremely rare white-bellied heron has been discovered in a remote part of the Namdapha Tiger Reserve in Arunachal Pradesh.

It is estimated that there are only 250 white-bellied herons (Ardea insignis) left in the world and only about 50 left in India.

“This is the first nesting site of the white- bellied heron to be discovered in India. Before the discovery of this site, Bhutan was (thought to be) the only country in the world to have a breeding population of the white-bellied heron,” Gopinathan Maheswaran, the scientist who is in charge of the bird Section of the Zoological Survey of India told The Hindu.

According to Mr Maheswaran, who has spent years in the wilderness looking for rare birds, there are very few people in the country who have encountered the white-bellied heron.

Declared a critically endangered species under the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), it is an “extremely shy” bird which feeds on fish in clear fast flowing rivers. The confluence of Noa-Dihing and Namdapha rivers in the Namdapha Tiger Reserve supports a few individuals of white-bellied heron by providing them with freshwater fish.

The nest of the bird was found about 18 metres above ground on an East Indian almond (Terminalia myriocarpa) tree adjacent to a dry river bed covered in tall grass and small shrubs, said Himadri Sekhar Mondal, a research scholar who along with Mr. Maheswaran observed behaviour of the herons at the nesting site. The scientists observed the courtship of a pair of white-bellied heron that went on to build a nest at the site earlier this year.

The Department of Science and Technology, Government of India, has funded a three-year study on the species with a view to document the foraging behaviour of the critically endangered bird.

US-China climate deal lowers expectations of strong global climate deal in 2015

The US and China announced a historic and sub-par bilateral pact on climate change ahead of the UN  negotiations that will lead to a new global agreement in 2015 in Paris. The US announced it would reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 24-26 per cent below 2005 levels by 2025, and China announced it would ensure its emissions peak by around 2030.

Together, historically the largest emitter of GHG gases and the current biggest emitter China set an extremely low benchmark for other countries to follow under the Paris agreement. The move drained out hope of a 2015 climate agreement and consequent commitments from countries at Paris that could keep the global temperature rise below 2 degree Celsius.

But, on the flip side, it eased the pressure on India, a far smaller emitter than the US and China, to take on any onerous new commitments in the short run. While India is expected to also put up a domestically decided target soon, it will now have the example of the two countries to also commit to a low-range target. The target could be in terms of only a slower rate of growth of emission intensity or accompanied by a long-off target year for peaking when India’s emissions would peak — a year much beyond that China has announced.

For the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government, still mulling the ideas advocated by its newly appointed minister, Suresh Prabhu to distance India from China and bring it closer to the West, fell apart with the announcement. The joint declaration showed that there were several major issues in the climate negotiations where China, India and the US actually saw eye to eye in aiming to protect their short-term economic interests though not necessarily fighting a robust fight to slow down climate change.

The higher end of the US target of cutting emissions by 26 cent cut by 2025 below 2005 levels is so low that it already has environmentalists up in arms. It translates to a mere 13.88 cent cut reduction below 1990 levels by 2025. The ball for a low-hanging fruit had been set in place earlier by EU announcing that it would only take a 40 per cent cut to its emissions below 1990 levels by 2030, of which it has already achieved around 20 per cent reduction. The US target fell even lower on relative terms to the EU targets. Its new target is less than half of that the EU has promised to take by 2030. Both the EU and the US promised targets are far below the upper range for emission cuts that the UN climate panel had set at 40 per cent four years ago and has now revised upwards.

THE GREEN ROUTE

ANNOUNCED TARGETS US: 24-25% cut below 2005 levels by 2025 China: Peak its total emissions by 2030 and then go below EU: 30-40% 1990 levels by 2030

EMISSION LEVELS IN 2012 US: 16.4 tonne CO2 per capita emissions China: 7.1 tonne CO2 per capita emissions India: 1.6 tonne CO2 per capita emissions EU: 7.4 tonne CO2 per capita emissions

WHERE THEY STAND IN 2030 US: 12 tonne*CO2 per capita emissions with new target China: 12 tonne*CO2 per capita emissions with new target India: 4-7.5 tonne CO2 per capita emissions with business as usual *Approximate figures Source: UNFCCC, Centre for Science and Environment and Government of India

 

Centre for Science and Environment (CSE)’s Sunita Narain lambasted the US-China announcement, saying it was neither “historic” nor ambitious, but just a self-serving agreement between the world’s two biggest polluters. Extrapolating the numbers, CSE said the two countries would converge at 12 tonne per capita of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) by 2030, leaving the world on a trajectory that would take global temperature rise beyond 3 degree by the end of the century.

CSE’s Chandra Bhushan said, “In fact, if India were to follow the principals of this (US-China) deal, then we need not do anything till 2040 and beyond. Our per capita emissions in 2030 will be less than 4 tonne per capita CO2e compared to 12 tonne per capita of the US and China,” he adds.

The Indian government’s earlier compendium of five modelling studies done by different institutions showed that India’s emissions remained between 4-7.5 tonne per capita by 2030. These studies were conducted before the climate change action plans were put in place and India took a target to cut emission intensity of its economy by 20-25 per cent by 2020.

Countries are required to formally volunteer their targets to fight climate change by March 2015 which will form part of the new global agreement to be signed in December 2015. This new agreement is to operate from 2020 onwards. For all practical purposes, the developed countries have already locked down the targets for the pre-2020 period and have steadfastly refused to up them. The US has a 17 per cent below 2005 level target which equals to less than 1 per cent reduction below 1990 levels. The EU has taken a 20 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020 target.

The US and China have announced that they will formally submit these new numbers as part of their voluntary targets for the 2015 agreement. While some countries have asked that such voluntary targets be assessed for their adequacy and equitable burden sharing between countries, and have objected to the move for different reasons. The joint announcement has revived memories of the 2009 Copenhagen deal that brought the BASIC countries (China, India, Brazil and South Africa) together with US, snubbing EU and its allies. The joint US-China decision along with the low EU target promises to now turn Paris 2015 agreement in to a low-ambition deal with the promise of review of the adequacy of such numbers still uncertain.