संघ-राज्य संबंध : सुधारों की आवश्यकता

केंद्र में मोदी सरकार के गठन के साथ ही संघ-राज्य संबंधों में सुधारों की आवश्यकता एक बार फिर सुर्खियों में है। ऐसा माना जा रहा है कि एक मुख्यमंत्री के रूप में प्रधानमंत्री इन जरूरतों से रूबरू रहे हैं और वे इसमें खासी दिलचस्पी लेंगे। योजना आयोग के स्थान पर नवगठित संस्था नीति आयोग में गवर्निंग कौंसिल को स्थान देना इसी दिशा में एक कदम है। संघ-राज्य संबंध : सुधारों की आवश्यकता पर पद्मभूषण डॉ. सुभाष काश्यप का आलेख यहां प्रस्तुत है।
भारत में संघ को मजबूत करने का एकमात्र उपाय यह है कि वह अपनी शक्तियों में कमी करे और मुख्य बातों की ओर ही ध्यान दे। आर्थिक उदारीकरण के साथ राजनीतिक शक्ति और व्यवस्था का विकेंद्रीकरण आवश्यक हो गया है। भारत संघ को फेडरल संघ का रूप देने के लिए यह जरूरी है कि वह स्वायत्तशासी इकाइयों के रूप में काम करे। इस व्यवस्था में शासन के अनेक स्तर हो सकते हैं-पंचायतों से संसद और संघ सरकार तक। प्रस्तावित शासन-संगठन संकेंद्रित वृत्तों से युक्त होने के कारण गांधीजी के आदर्श के निकट होगा। शक्तियों का वितरण इस तरह होना चाहिए कि हर उच्चतर स्तर की प्रशासनिक इकाई को कम से कम आवश्यक शक्तियां दी जाएं, जो काम तृणमूल धरातल की संस्थाएं कर सकें, वह उनके हाथ में छोड़ देना चाहिए। उच्च स्तर की सरकार को यह शक्ति नहीं होनी चाहिए कि वह निम्न स्तर की विधिवत निर्वाचित सरकार को बर्खास्त कर दे।
यदि हम सचमुच बहुस्तरीय शासन की स्थापना करना चाहते हैं और तृणमूल धरातल पर लोगों को सत्ता सौंपना चाहते हैं तो संविधान के अनुच्छेद 245, 246 तथा अन्य प्रासंगिक अनुच्छेदों तथा 7वीं अनुसूची में संशोधन कर संघ, राज्यों और पंचायतों तथा नगरपालिकाओं की स्थानीय सरकारों के बीच शक्तियों का स्पष्ट वितरण करना होगा। इससे संविधान के बुनियादी ढांचे अथवा संसदीय प्रणाली पर कोई प्रतिकूल प्रभाव नहीं पड़ेगा। इसके कारण सुशासन तथा आर्थिक विकास में सहायता ही मिलेगी।
अब समय आ गया है कि संघ-राज्य संबंधों तथा स्थानीय शासन-संस्थाओं की व्यापक समीक्षा की जाए। इस विषय में कोई सर्वतः स्वीकृत प्रतिमान नहीं हो सकता। भारत को स्थायित्व, सुरक्षा और विकास की आवश्यकता है। यह लक्ष्य एकात्मक और फेडरल राज्य-व्यवस्था के बीच समन्वय स्थापित करने से प्राप्त हो सकता है। सबसे ज्यादा जरूरी यह है कि राजनीतिक व्यवस्था में स्थिरता बनी रहे। इसके साथ ही वह लोगों के प्रति उत्तरदायी भी होनी चाहिए। नया फेडरल राज्य स्वायत्तशासी इकाइयों का संयुक्त राज्य बनेगा। ये स्वायत्तशासी इकाइयां संघ की अधीन या सहायक इकाइयां नहीं होंगी। वे विभिन्न धरातलों पर फेडरेशन की भागीदार होंगी। भारत फेडरल संघ होगा जिसमें शासन के अनेक स्तर होंगे। सत्ता की शृंखला पंचायतों से शुरू होकर संसद तक पहुंचेगी।
(i) पृथक राज्यों की राजनीतिक मांगों को जातीय आकांक्षाओं से अलग करके देखना चाहिए। सिद्धांततः सुशासन की दृष्टि से बढ़ती हुई आबादी के कारण छोटे-छोटे राज्य अच्छे हो सकते हैं। संख्या में अधिक राज्य संघ को मजबूती देंगे। कुछ स्थितियों में नए राज्यों का निर्माण करने की अपेक्षा उप राज्य संरचनाओं का गठन किया जा सकता है। संपूर्ण देश को 4-5 जोनों तथा 40-50 छोटे-छोटे राज्यों में बांटना हितकर होगा। ये राज्य यथा-संभव समान आकार के होने चाहिए तथा इन्हें संसद के दोनों सदनों में या कम से कम एक सदन में समान प्रतिनिधित्व प्राप्त होना चाहिए। आशा की जा सकती है कि प्रस्तावित परिवर्तनों से ज्यादा स्थिरता, जवाबदारी, मजबूत संघ, सुशासित, विकसित और तेजी से विकाशील राज्यों का पथ प्रशस्त होगा।
(ii) राज्यपालों की नियुक्ति के मानदंडों में परिवर्तन होने चाहिए। सरकारिया आयोग की सिफारिशों की परीक्षा होनी चाहिए और उन्हें कार्यान्वित किया जाना चाहिए।
(iii) अनुच्छेद 356 से संबंधित समस्याएं अनुच्छेद 256, 257, 355, 356 और 365 के अनुचित क्रियान्वय के कारण पैदा हुई हैं। इन सब अनुच्छेदों को एक साथ पढ़ने की जरूरत है। अनुच्छेद 355 के अधीन संघ सरकार, अनुच्छेद 356 के अधीन राष्ट्रपति शासन लागू किए बिना राज्य के प्रति कुछ दायित्वों का निर्वहन कर सकती है।
(iv) अर्थव्यवस्था के उदारीकरण के कारण केंद्रीय नियंत्रण की आवश्यकता नहीं रहती। आय कर, निगम कर और परोक्ष करों को समवर्ती सूची में स्थानांतरित किया जा सकता है। इससे कर-प्रणाली में सुधार और समन्वय होगा।
(v) संघ-राज्य संबंधों पर समग्र दृष्टि से विचार करने की आवश्यकता है। राजनीतिक सत्ता चार स्तरों पर विभक्त होनी चाहिए। विभिन्न समूहों को शासन में भागीदार बनाने की जरूरत है। इससे संघ मजबूत बनेगा और राष्ट्र में भावनात्मक तथा सांस्कृतिक दृष्टि से निखार आएगा। शक्तियों का वितरण ऐसा होना चाहिए कि शासन के प्रत्येक उच्चतर स्तर को न्यूनतम आवश्यक शक्तियां दी जाएं। उदाहरण के लिए ग्राम पंचायतें या नगरपालिकाएं जैसी तृणमूल संस्थाएं जो काम कर सकें वह काम पूरी तरह उनके ऊपर छोड़ देना चाहिए। उच्चतर स्तर की सरकार को यह अधिकार नहीं होना चाहिए कि वह अपने से नीचे स्तर की विधिवत निर्वाचित सरकार को बर्खास्त कर सकें। कुशल राज्यकर्मचारी लोकतंत्रात्मक विकेंद्रित शासन का स्थान नहीं ले सकते।
(vi) ग्यारहवीं और बारहवीं अनुसूची को आदेशात्मक बना देना चाहिए। इन दोनों अनुसूचियों को मिलाकर एक सामान्य सूची का निर्माण करना चाहिए। संसद सदस्यों तथा विधायकों को जिला विकास प्रक्रिया का भाग नहीं होना चाहिए। विधि और व्यवस्था के कार्य स्थानीय निर्वाचित निकायों को ही सौंपना ठीक होगा। ग्राम सभा और ग्राम पंचायतों की शक्तियों का वर्गीकरण करना आवश्यक होगा। स्थानीय निकायों के लिए स्थानीय कर्मचारी रखे जाने चाहिए।
(vii) संसद सदस्यों की क्षेत्रीय विकास योजना शक्तियों के वितरण के फेडरल सिद्धांत के प्रतिकूल है।
(viii) उत्तर-पूर्वी राज्यों में अवैध देशांतरण को रोकना चाहिए। शासन की स्थानीय परंपरागत संस्थाओं को आधुनिक रूप देने और महिलाओं के साथ न्याय करने की आवश्यकता है। इन परंपरागत संस्थाओं को शासन की संस्थाएं बनाया जा सकता है। राज्य सरकार, स्वायत्तशासी जिला परिषदों और शासन की परंपरागत प्रणाली के अधिकार-क्षेत्र एक-दूसरे से मिलते हैं। इससे अनेक समस्याएं पैदा होती हैं। अधिकार क्षेत्र की इस परस्पर-व्याप्ति को रोकने की आवश्यकता है। प्रत्येक स्तर की अधिकारिता का स्पष्ट रूप से निरूपण करना उचित है। छठीं अनुसूची में संशोधन कर स्वायत्तशासी जिला परिषदों को अधिक स्वायत्तता दी जानी चाहिए। स्वायत्तशासी जिला परिषदों में गैर-कबाइली लोगों की भागीदारी का प्रश्न विचारणीय है। परंपरागत संस्थाओं, स्वायत्तशासी जिला परिषदों तथा अधीन न्यायपालिका के परस्पर-व्याप्त अधिकार-क्षेत्र के कारण न्याय-प्रशासन में दिक्कतें पैदा हो रही है। उन्हें सुलझाने की आवश्यकता है। मानव अधिकारों तथा कबाइली अधिकारों के संघर्ष और संरक्षण विधियों को भी समझने और सुलझाने की जरूरत है।

IPS

Inner line permit

What it takes to crack the #civilservices entrance

t took Ira Singhal, this year’s Indian Administrative Services (IAS) exam topper, four years to get to that position. Singhal’s was a special case—she had earlier cracked the exam but was refused a posting because of her disability. But nearly seven out of every 10 candidates require at least three attempts before succeeding in the civil services entrance.

Abysmal success rates, years of preparation and multiple attempts by candidates past their mid-twenties studying subjects other than what they have been trained in, and the ability to get into some of the country’s best educational institutions are some of the key attributes of the IAS entrance process. Here’s what data put out by the Union Public Services Commission (UPSC) for the decade up to 2012 (the latest available numbers) tells us.

The civil services exam has among the lowest success rates among competitive examinations. More than 40.59 lakh people applied during 2002-2012. Only 20.11 lakh appeared for the preliminary exam. Those who qualify the preliminary stage have to go through two more stages: main examination and interview. The entire process lasts 9-10 months. The overall success rate has always been less than five people per 1,000 applicants.

However, if there is one example of the Indian youth not giving up, it is the civil services exam. Only one in every 10 candidate succeeds in the first attempt.

The civil services has always been viewed as a dangerous career choice because it might be too late to pursue other avenues if one does not succeed. However, this does not deter aspirants to continue their dogged pursuits, often well past their mid-twenties.

Satyendranath Tagore, the elder brother of Rabindranath Tagore, was the first Indian to qualify for the Indian Civil Service exam in 1863. Tagore was an author, song composer and linguist. Recent data, however, shows that technocrats are dominating the civil services exams. Those with an engineering and medical background have the highest success rate among interviewed applicants. This might be so because those who enter engineering and medical colleges in India have to undergo tough competition right after higher secondary level. In that sense, they are, statistically speaking, the creamy layer in a given lot of students.

The background of a candidate doesn’t mean that the person automatically opts for that subject in the main examination. Neither engineering nor medical sciences are among the top 10 subjects. Public administration is the most preferred subject. The reason for its popularity might be a shorter syllabus with many things in common with the general studies portion for the preliminary examination and easy availability of preparatory material, said Rakesh Kumar, who qualified the civil service exam in 2009.

Delhi had the maximum successful candidates in the decade up to 2012. That could be perhaps owing to the number of top Indian educational institutions in that city. Delhi University, Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) and Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) have sent the maximum number of candidates to the civil services. Indeed, in JNU, the library’s reading room has been christened Dhaulpur House, the building which houses UPSC headquarters.

However, if one looks at the home states of serving IAS officers, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar top the list. That isn’t so surprising, given that these states (if one includes Jharkhand which was carved out of Bihar in 2000) are the top two by population. But socio-economic factors might also be at play with the tag of an IAS officer putting a premium in these states. For in many states, for instance West Bengal, the number of serving IAS officers does not match the state’s rank in population.

The disproportionately high number of successful candidates from Delhi is also a reflection of the fact that a large number of those who aspire to get into civil services come to this city for preparations.

The tale of getting into the civil services is one of hard work and dogged perseverance. That’s why it is all the more baffling how the Indian bureaucracy, which comprises such hard-working and committed people, earned the disrepute of running what is considered an inefficient government machinery.

Old but not gold

More than one person has asked me what happened to the idea of repealing old laws. I am a bit surprised, because that information is in the public domain. It is just that the media hasn’t picked it up. First, the Law Commission reports: In September 2014, the 248th report of the Law Commission was submitted. This gave us a database of 1,086 Union laws. This database excludes the 253 laws that were recommended for repeal earlier, but still continue to be on the statute books. It excludes the 34 statutes that have been repealed — though some government ministries and departments don’t know that these have been removed from the law books. The database also excludes the appropriation acts. The 248th report recommended the repeal of 72 statutes and identified another 261 for further scrutiny. In October 2014, the 249th report of the Law Commission was submitted. This identified 77 more statutes for repeal. There were separate recommendations on partial repeal and on the 11 World War II ordinances. In October 2014, there was also the 250th report of the Law Commission. This identified 73 more statutes for repeal. Without getting into the details of how the numbers add up, with these three reports, 258 statutes have been identified for repeal. Further, in November 2014, there was the 251st report of the Law Commission. With 30 more statutes added, the number of laws identified for repeal now went up to 288. 

That still doesn’t answer the original question. Commission reports are fine. What about action? In fairness, after a report is submitted, there is a process for repeal that has to be followed. One needs to write to the Union government ministries and state governments. One can only draft a bill to repeal a law after this process of receiving comment is over. Thus, on May 13 came the first Repealing and Amending Act (Act No 17 of 2015). This repealed 35 statutes (mostly amending statutes) and amended two others. Then, on May 14, there was the Repealing and Amending (Second) Act (Act No 19 of 2015). This repealed 90 statutes (amending statutes) and amended two. It is certainly true that getting rid of amending acts is an easier task. Repealing principal acts is more complicated, and especially for the 250th and 251st reports, feedback from the Union ministries and state governments is still pending. But at least some people know of the four Law Commission reports. I find it strange that few know of the R. Ramanujam Committee, though that information is also in the public domain. This was set up by the prime minister’s office in September 2014. It submitted a mammoth four-volume report, more comprehensive than the Law Commission exercise. Thus, we know that since 1834, 6,612 Central statutes have been enacted. 

At some point or the other, 3,831 have been repealed. We are left with 2,781 Central statutes (as of October 2014), including amending legislation and appropriation acts. Of these, the Ramanujam Committee identified 1,741 Central acts for repeal. (The committee is also undertaking a consolidation exercise, but let’s ignore that.) Of the 1,741 statutes, 777 need to be repealed by the Union government; 83 by state legislatures, since these are Central acts on state subjects; 624 are Central appropriation acts; and 257 are Central appropriation acts on state subjects, which, therefore, have to be repealed by state legislatures. If one ignores those that have to be repealed by the state legislatures, the 125 statutes that have already been repealed — 90 by the Repealing and Amending (Second) Act, 2015, and 35 by the Repealing and Amending Act, 2015 — must be benchmarked against the 1,401 acts that have been identified for repeal (777 plus 624). It is true that we haven’t even done 10 per cent yet. But that doesn’t mean nothing is being done.

 Let’s get the appropriation acts out of the way first, because those are easier to handle. There are 902 of them, including railway and state appropriation acts. Once legal opinion has been obtained, these will go — it is only a matter of time. Looking at the Law Commission and Ramanujam Committee reports together,  the picture is something like this: 637 acts can be repealed by Parliament (once the ministries send in their views); 84 acts have to be repealed by state legislatures; 58 acts can be repealed by Parliament, but only in consultation with state governments; and for 28 acts, which have something or the other to do with state reorganisation, the views of the home ministry are essential. Out of this complicated agenda, I suspect one will soon have a third repealing and amending act, whereby another 197 of those old statutes will be junked. I don’t think the process is taking inordinately long. It is also an exercise that should have been undertaken in 1950, when the Constitution came into effect, and not in 2015. 

Having said this, it is important to appreciate another aspect. It isn’t always the case that a statute can be repealed in its entirety. There are cases where a statute needs to be retained, but has sections that should be scrapped. There are instances where a consolidation and harmonisation exercise is required. There are also instances where repeal has to be matched with new legislation to plug the gaps. These take more time than outright repeal. If media reportage has been tardy on this repealing exercise, it has been tardier on a parallel and ongoing exercise in Rajasthan. The Rajasthan law reform project is not only about labour legislation. There, too, there is outright repeal, consolidation and harmonisation of rules as well as of acts. Some statutes have already been repealed and one is left with roughly 600 state-level statutes, 400 principal and 200 amending. At least 10 per cent of the former and 100 per cent of the latter are likely to go soon. The writer is member, Niti Aayog. 

17 Million USD and 78.5 Million Euros (approx) earned through launching of satellites of foreign countries under commercial arrangement by ISRO

17 Million USD and 78.5 Million Euros (approx) earned through launching of satellites of foreign countries under commercial arrangement by ISRO

The Government, through Antrix Corporation Limited (Antrix), the commercial arm of Department of Space, is generating income through launching of satellites of foreign countries on-board ISRO’s launch vehicle. Till date, 45 satellites from 19 countries have been successfully launched using ISRO’s Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV), under commercial arrangement. The total income earned through launching of these satellites of foreign countries amounts to approximately 17 Million USD and 78.5 Million Euros. The launch missions conducted by ISRO for launching Indian satellites are intended for National development.

The Antrix has signed agreements for launching 28 more foreign satellites from 6 countries viz., Algeria (3), Canada (4), Germany (4), Indonesia (2), Singapore (6) and USA (9). The launches of these foreign satellites are envisaged during 2015-2017 time period. Further, discussions with foreign agencies/companies are ongoing for providing launch services to their satellites on-board ISRO’s Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) and Geo-synchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV).

The images received from the Indian Remote Sensing (IRS) satellites (RESOURCESAT-2, RISAT-1 and CARTOSAT-1) are marketed globally by Antrix Corporation Limited (Antrix), the commercial arm of Department of Space, through International Ground Stations established outside India. The IRS images of region outside India received and processed at ISRO’s Ground Station are also marketed to global customers through Antrix.

The Government is planning to provide space based systems for South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation countries. The objective of this satellite project is to develop a satellite for SAARC region that enables a full range of applications and services to all our neighbours in the areas of telecommunication and broadcasting applications viz. Television, Direct-to-Home (DTH), Very Small Aperture Terminals (VSATs), Tele-education, Telemedicine and Disaster Management.

While the cost towards building and launching the satellite will be met by Government of India, cost towards ground systems are expected to be sourced by the respective SAARC countries.

India ranks at 12th position in terms of power generation from nuclear source as per data published in May 2015 by PRIS of IAEA

India ranks at 12th position in terms of power generation from nuclear source as per data published in May 2015 by PRIS of IAEA

There are thirty one countries including India in the world which generate electricity from nuclear source. According to the data published in May 2015, by Power Reactor Information System (PRIS) of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), India ranked at 12th position in terms of power generation. However, it stood at 6th position in terms of number of reactors in operation country- wise, globally.

The current installed nuclear power capacity is 5780 MW, which is expected to increase to 10080 MW on progressive completion of projects under commissioning/ construction by 2019. The Government has accorded financial sanction and administrative approval for Gorakhpur Haryana Anu Vidyut Pariyojana (GHAVP) Units – 1&2 (2X700 MW) and Kudankulam Units- 3&4 (2X1000 MW) with a total capacity of 3400 MW. These projects are being prepared for launch in the current year.

In addition, one Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor of 500 MW capacity at Kalpakkam, Tamil Nadu is at advanced stage of commissioning. Construction of two more Fast Breeder Reactors (FBR 1&2) of 600 MW capacity each at Kalpakkam, Tamil Nadu is also planned. More nuclear power projects based both on indigenous technologies and with international cooperation are planned in future.

India has signed Nuclear agreements with USA, France, Russia, Namibia, Mongolia, Republic of Korea, Argentine Republic, United Kingdom, Republic of Kazakhstan, Canada, Sri Lanka and Australia. India is open to negotiation with other friendly countries who seem to have potential to make contribution to India’s nuclear energy programme.

............................................

Nuclear power capacity expected to reach 10080 MW on progressive completion of projects presently under commissioning/construction by the year 2018-19

The nuclear power capacity is expected to reach 10080 MW on progressive completion of projects presently under commissioning/construction by the year 2018-19. The Government has accorded financial sanction for two more projects namely Gorakhpur Haryana Anu Vidyut Pariyojana (GHAVP) Units 1&2 (2x700 MW) and Kudankulam Nuclear Power Projects (KKNPP) Units – 3&4 (2X1000 MW) with a total capacity of 3400 MW. These are being readied for start of construction in the current year. Another 2X700 MW project is also planned to be taken up in the near future. On progressive completion of these projects, the target is expected to be achieved by the year 2024. The Government, in July 2014, had announced tripling of the then existing capacity of 4780 MW in the next ten years, that is by the year 2024. A capacity of 1000 MW has already been added with the start of commercial operation of Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project Unit-1 (KKNPP 1) in December, 2014.

M/s General Insurance Corporation of India (GIC-Re) have on 12th June, 2015 launched Indian Nuclear Insurance Pool (INIP) with the capacity of Rs1500 crore to provide insurance to cover the liability as prescribed under Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act 2010.