Milk Production and per capita Availabilty of Milk in the County

Milk Production and per capita Availabilty of Milk in the County

The total quantum of milk produced in the county during 2015-16 is 155.5 million tonnes and the per-capita availability of milk is 337 grams per day. The State/UTs- wise per capita availability of milk during 2015-16 is given below.

The Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries (DADF) is implementing the following Dairy Development Schemes to increase the production of milk:

(i)        National Dairy Plan (Phase-I): The Government of India has approved National Dairy Plan Phase- I (NDP-I) with an outlay of Rs. 2,242 Crore for  implementation during 2011-12 to 2018-19 as a Central Sector Scheme in 18 major milk producing states.

(ii)      National Programme for Dairy Development (NPDD) under the Central Sector Scheme “National Programme for Bovine Breeding and Dairy Development”.

(iii)       Dairy Entrepreneurship Development Scheme: “Dairy Entrepreneurship Development Scheme (DEDS)” is implemented through National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) across the country.

The Government does not have any special scheme for setting up of high-tech dairies to boost milk production. However, the Department is implementing “Dairy Entrepreneurship Development Scheme” (DEDS) from 1.09.2010 through National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) in which back ended capital subsidy (25% of the project cost for General Category and 33.33% for SC & ST beneficiaries) is provided under bankable projects through eligible financial institutions, subject to the norms of the scheme for establishment of small dairy unit from 2 to 10 crossbred cows or indigenous cows/ buffaloes.

The mechanism for ensuring availability of quality milk in the country is governed under Food Safety & Standards (FSS) Act, 2006 which is implemented by the Food  Safety & Standards Authority of  India  through  the  State/Union  Territories’  Food  Safety  Commissioners. 

State-wise Per Capita  Availability of Milk During  2015-16
(gram/day)
Sl. No.	States/UTs	per capita availability
1	Andhra Pradesh#	475
2	Arunachal Pradesh	105
3	Assam	70
4	Bihar	219
5	Chhattisgarh	133
6	Goa	74
7	Gujarat	545
8	Haryana	877
9	Himachal Pradesh	505
10	Jammu & Kashmir	395
11	Jharkhand	152
12	Karnataka	282
13	Kerala	200
14	Madhya Pradesh	428
15	Maharashtra	239
16	Manipur	76
17	Meghalaya	83
18	Mizoram	57
19	Nagaland	89
20	Odisha	124
21	Punjab	1032
22	Rajasthan	704
23	Sikkim	282
24	Tamil Nadu	283
25	Tripura	109
26	Uttar Pradesh	335
27	Uttarakhand	434
28	West Bengal	145
29	A&N Islands	87
30	Chandigarh	93
31	Dadra & N. Haveli	72
32	Daman & Diu	10
33	Delhi	36
34	Lakshadweep	113
35	Puducherry	108
All India		337
#Included Telangana Note: Per capita availability is calculated  based on State estimates of production and projected population as on 1st March, based on Census of India 2001 of RGI

Indian federalism needs the Inter-state Council

Indian federalism needs the Inter-state Council
It can be the core component of Modi’s vision of cooperative federalism
B.R. Ambedkar once described India and its states as “one integral whole, its people a single people living under a single imperium derived from a single source”. It was a necessary sentiment at a time when a newly independent and partitioned nation was trying to frame a coherent idea of itself. But the political and economic context has changed drastically since then. The relationship between the centre and the states has failed to keep pace with its evolution.

The Inter-state Council (ISC) meet convened last week after a decade’s gap is thus all the more significant. And the discontent there—chief ministers have voiced their concerns on issues ranging from adventurism by governors to shifting of subjects from the state list to the concurrent list—makes that gap particularly puzzling.

The council, after all, is a proven concept. Based on the Sarkaria Commission’s recommendations, it was constituted under Article 263 of the Constitution in 1990. It proved to be crucial in the implementation of many of the commission’s 247 other recommendations, such as altering the states’ share of central taxes. Just as importantly, the council helped bridge the trust deficit between the centre and the states. If not always a problem solver, it at least acted as a safety valve.

True, there are other bodies such as the NITI Aayog’s Governing Council—it has a similar composition, including the prime minister, chosen cabinet ministers and chief ministers—that could address centre-state issues. But the ISC has constitutional backing, as against the NITI Aayog which only has an executive mandate. This puts the states on more solid footing—an essential ingredient in building the atmosphere of cooperation needed for calibrating centre-state relations.

This latest meet has shown some positive signs. The centre was willing in principle to discuss and implement some of the Punchhi Commission’s recommendations on centre-state relations, broadly falling under legislative, administrative and financial heads. But if the ISC is to be more than a talk shop, it must show that it can follow up. For instance, with regard to legislating on education and forests—both subjects that have been transferred from the state list to the concurrent list—the centre would do well to consult states more extensively and offer them greater flexibility.

The core issues du jour, however, lie elsewhere. Over the decades, the role of governors and, by extension, the relationship between the centre and states headed by rival parties have both come into prominence on occasion. The recent crises in Uttarakhand and Arunachal Pradesh show that we are in the midst of one such phase again. Expectedly, a number of chief ministers had much to say about adventurism by governors at the ISC meeting. And the Punchhi Commission has recommendations here as well—from fixing governors’ tenures to mandatory consultation of chief ministers before the appointment of governors and choosing individuals who have been outside active politics for at least a couple of years.

The centre did not commit to anything, which was expected, given the delicate nature of the issue. But the ISC remains the best venue for addressing such concerns. The Supreme Court’s inconsistent rulings in both instances show that there is no certainty there. And the disruption created by such situations imposes heavy administrative and economic costs on the states affected.

Tax devolution is another crucial issue. The acceptance of the 14th Finance Commission’s recommendation to change the quantum of the funds allocated to the states from 32% to 42% of the tax pool was well received at the council meet, for the most part. This crucial shift in the funding pattern implemented by the Narendra Modi government—the goods and services tax, currently on the threshold of being passed, would change the landscape even more drastically—all but mandates periodic consultation and assessment of the kind the ISC can provide.

The challenges of maintaining a federation are many, but the solution is no mystery: healthy debate and discussion. This is easier said than done, of course. In past decades, the centralized nature of the Indian economy—even after liberalization—made papering over the cracks possible. But Modi, to his credit, has a very different federalist vision—one with an emphasis on decentralizing decision making and encouraging state competition. If that vision is to succeed, the ISC must be a core component of the new cooperative federalism.

Can the Inter-state Council improve centre-state relations?

Liberalizing India’s urban thinking

Liberalizing India’s urban thinking
Socialist-era thinking has been discarded elsewhere in the economy, but not in how Indian cities are planned
A quarter of a century ago, India threw off the shackles of Nehruvian socialism and embarked on economic liberalization. Since 1991, socialist-era thinking has been steadily discarded in a growing number of areas such as foreign policy, but it remains firmly embedded in how Indian cities are planned. This is the ultimate source of dissonance between the cities we build and the cities that 21st century India aspires to.

It may come as a surprise to many readers that ideology plays an important role in how cities develop. The fact is that every city is a living embodiment of some philosophy. What is now called Old Delhi, for instance, was a reflection of the hierarchical feudal order prevailing in the 17th century when Emperor Shah Jahan built it. It was a city of grand palaces and miserable slums. French traveller François Bernier, who visited the city just a few years after it was built, tells us, “A man must be of the highest rank or live miserably”. At the top of the urban hierarchy was the Red Fort where the royal family lived.

When the British decided to build New Delhi a century ago, they conceived of it as a city of grand imperial parades and a racially coded hierarchy. The city’s early plans marked the most spacious bungalows as “fat white” and lesser dwellings as “thin white” and “thin black”. As no senior Indians officials were envisaged, the plans do not mark “fat black”. At the pinnacle of this city was a palace for the Viceroy, now Rashtrapati Bhavan.

After independence, Delhi became a city of civil servants brought in to run the socialist economy. Thus Delhi evolved into a bureaucratic ladder made up of housing rungs called C-I, C-II, D-I, D-II and so on. The ideal city was seen as a giant machine designed by “wise” urban planners. They imposed rigid master-plans that neatly zoned different urban activities and strictly controlled urban evolution. The similarity with P.C. Mahalanobis’s economic planning is not a coincidence. They are both outcomes of the same Nehruvian thinking.

French architect Le Corbusier was the urban planning equivalent to Mahalanobis. Just as Mahalanobis saw the economy as a mechanical input-output model, Le Corbusier saw buildings as “machines for living”. The “wise” planner created a detailed master-plan and success was all about meticulously implementing it. Innovation was allowed only if planners approved it, otherwise it was looked on with suspicion. It was not about managing an evolving ecosystem.

A large number of cities and urban extensions were built using Le Corbusier’s thinking, but not one succeeded. After two generations of trying, Durgapur, Dispur and Navi Mumbai can hardly be called successes. Even Chandigarh, Le Corbusier’s poster child, is really a subsidized housing colony for serving and retired civil servants. Despite the deployment of enormous resources by two state governments and the national government, Chandigarh has not produced anything of economic or cultural value. Whatever buzz it produces comes from the suburb of Mohali that is outside Corbusier’s plan. Even Nek Chand’s famous rock garden was built illegally.

Despite his obvious failures, Le Corbusier is still held in high esteem in India and his ideas are deeply embedded in urban codes. Any attempt to tamper with Chandigarh’s plan is met with howls of protest. This is ironical because, in the rest of the world, his ideas were discredited long ago by the likes of Lewis Mumford and Jane Jacobs. With post-independence planning stuck in a quagmire, 21st century India continues to rely on colonial-era urban cores. New cities such as Gurgaon develop by ignoring official master-plans.

So what should be done? The first step is to stop thinking of the city as a machine and start thinking of it as an evolving ecosystem. Thus, success is about flexibility and managing change rather than implementing brilliant master-plans.

Indians often mistake Singapore’s success as that of outstanding planning but the reality is that the city-state is really a great example of flexibility and constant tinkering. Since it became independent in 1965, Singapore has gone from British naval base to shipping and manufacturing cluster, then to financial centre and more recently to education and entertainment hub. Each step needed radical urban surgery. During the same period, Indians have faithfully preserved Chandigarh’s original master-plan.

Every 15 years or so, Singapore completely re-evaluates its overall economic and urban strategy. The last time this happened was in 2002-03 in the aftermath of the Asian Crisis. The rethink led to new university campuses, entertainment hubs, Formula One racing and so on. The government has just initiated a new round. It’s all about new ideas, tinkering, feedback loops and managing transitions. Having personally participated in the process, it is eye-opening how fundamentally different this approach is from urban discussions in India.

A quarter century ago, India’s economic thinking broke away from socialist planning. Now India’s urban thinking needs liberalization. Even if we did our very best on Chandigarh, the best we can hope for is Canberra or Brasilia. On the other hand, if we managed Gurgaon better, we could get Singapore or Hong Kong.

Why not a Common Civil Code for all?

A set of laws to govern personal matters of all citizens irrespective of religion is the cornerstone of true secularism. It would help end gender discrimination on religious grounds and strengthen the secular fabric

The recent progressive decisions of the Shani Shingnapur and Trimbakeshwar temple trusts to allow entry of women in the wake of a series of protests constitute a welcome development in what has been a long march towards gender equality. They also served to rekindle a countrywide debate on ending widespread gender discrimination, especially on religious grounds. It is a matter of concern that close to seven decades after Independence, women continue to battle discrimination in matters of religion even as they march shoulder-to-shoulder with men in various fields.

Perhaps, the time has come for us to take a close, hard look at the Goa Family Law and see if it could be emulated in the rest of the country. The Portuguese Civil Code of 1867 was continued in Goa after its liberation, and it should be the model for other States. The progressive law provides for equal division of income and property regardless of gender between husband and wife and also between children. It is also applicable in the Union Territories of Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu.

Importance of a Common Code

A Common Civil Code that would put in place a set of laws to govern personal matters of all citizens irrespective of religion is perhaps the need of the hour. It is, in fact, the cornerstone of true secularism. Such a progressive reform would not only help end discrimination against women on religious grounds but also strengthen the secular fabric of the country and promote unity. However, it can be implemented only when there is wide acceptance from all religious communities after discussing all the pros and cons as no decision, however reformatory, could be thrust on the people without their acceptance. All misgivings would have to be squarely addressed for progress to be achieved on this count.

In fact, Article 44 of the Constitution declares that the state shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a Uniform Civil Code throughout the territory of India. During the debate in the Constituent Assembly, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, while supporting the need to frame a Uniform Civil Code, expressed the hope that its application might be purely voluntary. He also said: “I personally do not understand why religion should be given this vast, expansive jurisdiction so as to cover the whole of life and to prevent the legislature from encroaching upon that field. After all, what are we having this liberty for? We are having this liberty in order to reform our social system, which is full of inequities, discriminations and other things which conflict with our fundamental rights.” Babasaheb’s pragmatic words are of great relevance to the Indian social context today.

While there is a criminal code which is applicable to all people irrespective of religion, caste, tribe and domicile in the country, there is no similar code when dealing with respect to divorce and succession which are governed by Personal Laws. The Uniform Civil Code seeks to administer the same set of secular civil laws to govern all people.

Repeated judicial reminders

In 1985, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of Shah Bano, who had moved the apex court seeking maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure after her husband divorced her. The then Chief Justice, Y.V. Chandrachud, observed that a Common Civil Code would help the cause of national integration by removing disparate loyalties to law. The Court directed Parliament to frame a Uniform Civil Code.

In the Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995) case, the Supreme Court had observed: “Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru, while defending the introduction of the Hindu Code Bill instead of a uniform civil code, in the Parliament in 1954, said, ‘I do not think that at the present moment the time is ripe in India for me to try to push it through’. It appears that even 41 years thereafter, the Rulers of the day are not in a mood to retrieve Article 44 from the cold storage where it is lying since 1949. The reasons are too obvious to be stated. The utmost that has been done is to codify the Hindu law in the form of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, and the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, which have replaced the traditional Hindu law based on different schools of thought and scriptural laws into one unified code. When more than 80 per cent of the citizens have already been brought under the codified personal law, there is no justification whatsoever to keep in abeyance, any more, the introduction of Uniform Civil Code for all citizens.”

In the John Vallamattom v. Union of India case in 2003, Chief Justice V.N. Khare had observed: “It is a matter of regret that Article 44 of the Constitution has not been given effect to. Parliament is still to step in for framing a common civil code in the country.”

In fact, the Supreme Court in October 2015 said there was total confusion due to various Personal Laws and sought to know if the government was willing to implement a Uniform Civil Code. It observed: “What happened to it? Why don’t you (the government) frame and implement it?” However, the apex court later declined to direct Parliament to bring in a Uniform Civil Code while allowing a PIL filed in this regard to be withdrawn.

A secular project at heart

Several eminent people, representing diverse fields, have put forth different arguments against the introduction of a Common Civil Code. The most common refrain has been that even the British did not try to codify Personal Laws based on religion and any attempt to bring in a common codification of laws would be tantamount to the state’s interference in religious affairs, particularly of the minorities. Nothing can be farther from truth. It would be apt to remember the words of Mahatma Gandhi, who once said: “We should get out of the miasma of religious majorities and minorities.” That, in reality, would be the precise endeavour of such a unified code. If one were to be wedded to rigid and bigoted views, why should there be any statutes and changes in them in sync with the times? As a society evolves, it enacts laws which protect and safeguard the rights and interests of all its citizens.

Contrary to a sustained campaign of misinformation, the whole concept of a Common Civil Code is not aimed against any particular religion or its customs, but to prevent oppression in the name of religion. It would naturally be based on internationally accepted principles of jurisprudence and would go a long way in providing a sense of security to people of various religious denominations.

Noorjehan Safia Niaz and Zakia Soman, co-founders of the Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan, in a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi in November 2015, observed: “From the Shah Bano case in 1985 till date, Muslim women have never been heard in matters concerning their lives thanks to the politics in our country. Certain orthodox and patriarchal males have… stonewalled any attempt towards reform in Muslim personal law. In the process, Muslim women have been denied their Quranic rights as well as their rights as equal Indian citizens. Almost all Muslim countries the world over, such as Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan and even Bangladesh and Pakistan in our neighbourhood, have codified personal laws governing marriage and family matters… Indian Muslims are denied this opportunity. As a result, we see instances of triple talaq and polygamy in our society.” They further stated that they had just published national research findings “with a primary sample of 4710 Muslim women across 10 states. An overwhelming 92.1% women want a total ban on oral/unilateral divorce and 91.7% are opposed to polygamy. 83.3% women said that codification of Muslim family law will help Muslim women get justice”.

It was also mentioned that BMMA had prepared a draft Muslim Family Law based on Koranic tenets concerning the age of marriage, mehr, talaq, polygamy, maintenance, custody of children etc. The important provisions of this draft law include a minimum marriage age of 18 for girls and 21 for boys and that the consent of both parties must be obtained without force or fraud, minimum mehr to be equivalent of one full annual income of the groom to be paid at the time of nikah. Further, it said that Talaq-e-Ahsan should be adopted as the method of divorce requiring mandatory arbitration over a 90-day period, oral unilateral divorce to be declared illegal, polygamy to be declared illegal, daughters to get equal share as sons through hiba or gift deed or will, compulsory registration of marriages, and the qazi to be held accountable for violations during talaq, polygamy and other such matters.

About tolerance

From Shah Bano to Shayara Bano, who recently filed a PIL in the Supreme Court, the focus has been on gender-friendly reforms of Personal Laws. With changing times, the need has arisen for having a Common Civil Code for all citizens, irrespective of religion, ensuring that their fundamental and constitutional rights are protected. Nobody need have qualms on this count. While emphasising that the foundations of secularism would only get further strengthened by introducing a Common Civil Code, I would like to recall the words of Mahatma Gandhi: “I do not expect India of my dreams to develop one religion, i.e., to be wholly Hindu or wholly Christian or wholly Mussalman, but I want it to be wholly tolerant, with its religions working side-by-side with one another.”

With the government seeking the opinion of the Law Commission to examine all aspects pertaining to Uniform Civil Code, the time has come for an enlightened debate in the country to arrive at a consensus at the earliest.

M. Venkaiah Naidu is Minister for Urban Development & Information and Broadcasting, Government of India

One India, one market

The GST will decisively alter the economy for the better besides symbolising Indian politics at its cooperative, consensual best. Parliament should seize this historic opportunity

Hype and hyperbole are temptations to which government officials, in particular, must not succumb. Yet, it is difficult not to view the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Bill as a game-changing reform for the country; and, when it happens, it would be curmudgeonly not to acknowledge its passage as a major, historic achievement. Why is GST important? What can be said about its design? How does it compare with similar tax reform in other countries? Consider each question in turn.

Benefits in the offing

Three major benefits will flow from the GST. First, as the Prime Minister outlined in an interview, the GST will increase the resources available for poverty alleviation and development. This will happen indirectly as the tax base becomes more buoyant and as the overall resources of the Central and State governments increase. But it will also happen directly because the resources of the poorest States — for example, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, and Madhya Pradesh — who happen to be large consumers will increase substantially.

Second, the GST will facilitate ‘Make in India’ by making one India. The current tax structure unmakes India, by fragmenting Indian markets along State lines. These distortions are caused by three features of the current system: the Central Sales Tax (CST) on inter-State sales of goods; numerous intra-State taxes; and the extensive nature of countervailing duty exemptions that favours imports over domestic production. In one fell swoop, the GST would rectify all these distortions: the CST would be eliminated; most of the other taxes would be subsumed into the GST; and because the GST would be applied on imports, the negative protection favouring imports and disfavouring domestic manufacturing would be eliminated.

Arvind Subramanian & Hasmukh Adhia

Third, the GST would improve — even substantially — tax governance in two ways. The first relates to the self-policing incentive inherent to a valued-added tax. To claim input tax credit, each dealer has an incentive to request documentation from the dealer behind him in the value-added/tax chain. Provided the chain is not broken through wide-ranging exemptions, especially on intermediate goods, this self-policing feature can work very powerfully in the GST. The second relates to the dual monitoring structure of the GST — one by the States and one by the Centre. Critics and taxpayers have viewed the dual structure with some anxiety, fearing two sources of interface with the tax department and hence two potential sources of harassment. But dual monitoring should also be viewed as creating desirable tax competition and cooperation between State and Central authorities. Even if one set of tax authorities overlooks and/or fails to detect evasion, there is the possibility that the other overseeing authority may not.

Other benefits such as the boost to investment have been documented in the Report on the Revenue Neutral Rate that was submitted in December last year. Of course, these benefits will only flow through a well-designed GST. The GST should aim at tax rates that protect revenue, simplify administration, encourage compliance, avoid adding to inflationary pressures, and keep India in the range of countries with reasonable levels of indirect taxes.

The fewest flaws at inception
The report also urged that the GST be comprehensive in its coverage, that exemptions from the GST be limited to a few commodities that catered to clear social benefits, and that most commodities be taxed at the standard rate. There is no free lunch here. There is no escaping the fact that the more the exemptions/exclusions, the higher will be the standard rate which could affect poorer consumers.

Some have levelled the charge that the design of the GST is flawed. But the “flawed GST” charge fails to appreciate how reforms actually occur. In no country is the GST — even today after many years of implementation — perfect, and was therefore quite flawed at inception. In complex systems, change is introduced, learning from implementation takes place, leading to further and better change. That is what happened with the implementation of the value-added tax by the States and that is what will happen with the GST. It is far better to start and allow the process of endogenous change to unfold over time than to wait Godot-like for the best time and the best design before it is introduced.

That said, we must also be realistic about the time frame for assessing the GST. The GST is fiendishly, mind-bogglingly complex to administer. Such complexity and lags in GST implementation require that any evaluation of the GST — and any consequential decisions — should not be undertaken over short horizons (say months) but over longer periods, say one-two years.

In understanding GST systems around the world, we have been struck by how ambitious and how under-flawed the Indian GST is. GST-type taxes in large federal systems are either overly centralised, depriving the sub-federal levels of fiscal autonomy (Australia, Germany, and Austria); or where there is a dual structure, they are either administered independently — creating too many differences in tax bases and rates that weaken compliance and make inter-State transactions difficult to tax (Brazil, Russia and Argentina) — or administered with a modicum of coordination which minimises these disadvantages (Canada and India today) but does not do away with them.

The Indian GST will be a leap forward in creating a much cleaner dual VAT which would minimise the disadvantages of completely independent and completely centralised systems. A common base and common rates (across goods and services) and very similar rates (across States and between Centre and States) will facilitate administration and improve compliance while also rendering manageable the collection of taxes on inter-State sales. At the same time, the exceptions — in the form of permissible additional excise taxes on special goods (petroleum and tobacco for the Centre, petroleum and alcohol for the States) — will provide the requisite fiscal autonomy to the States. Indeed, even if they are brought within the scope of the GST, the States will retain autonomy in being able to levy top-up taxes on these goods.

To have achieved this, in a large and complex federal system of multiparty democracy, with a Centre, 29 States and 2 Union Territories of widely divergent interests via a constitutional amendment requiring broad political consensus, affecting potentially 7.5 million tax entities, and marshalling the latest technology to use and improve tax implementation capability, is perhaps breathtakingly unprecedented in modern global tax history.

Sometimes, we are insufficiently appreciative of how much the country has achieved in coming to this point with the GST. As the Prime Minister suggested, credit should go to all stakeholders at the Centre and the States for having worked towards the GST. The time is ripe to collectively seize this historic opportunity; not just because the GST will decisively alter the Indian economy for the better but also because the GST symbolises Indian politics and democracy at its cooperative, consensual best.

Hasmukh Adhia and Arvind Subramanian are, respectively, Revenue Secretary and Chief Economic Adviser to the Government of India.

Archaeological Site of Nalanda Mahavihara (Nalanda University) Gets Inscribed in World Heritage List

Archaeological Site of Nalanda Mahavihara (Nalanda University) Gets Inscribed in World Heritage List

“The Excavated Remains at Nalanda” got included in the Tentative List of World Heritage on 09.01.2009. The nomination dossier for ‘Excavated Remains of Nalanda Mahavihara’ was prepared by the ASI and submitted in January 2015 to the World Heritage Committee for the purpose of its inscription in the year 2016 and on 15 July 2016 it has got inscribed as a World Heritage Site by UNESCO.

The “Excavated remains of Nalanda Mahavihara”, the great monastic-cum-scholastic establishment are located around 88 km away from Patna, state capital of Bihar in India. It presents a key archaeological evidence of a truly international centre for organised learning. Nalanda Mahavihara was founded by Kumargupta I of the Gupta dynasty in 5th century CE. It was patronized by various rulers including King Harshavardhana of Kannauj (7th century CE) and the Pala rulers (8th – 12th century CE) as well as various scholars. Later, number of factors spread over centuries caused the decline of this famed institution. The same region, later, saw emergence of a number of reputed educational institutions like Vikramshila and Odantpuri but the eminence of Nalanda remains unrivaled. About six centuries after Nalanda’s decline, the site was first discovered and reported by Sir Francis Buchanan. The site was systematically excavated and consolidated by Archaeological Survey of India from 1915 to 1937 and again from 1974 to 1982.

Nalanda is a rare combination of outstanding achievements in institution-building, site-planning, art and architecture. Nalanda symbolized the multiplicity of knowledge production, the innovative processes of the organized transmission of ideas through education, and a shared heritage of people living in multiple regions of Asia.

Built ensembles in Nalanda are physical manifestation of influence of ancient Indian pedagogy where planning, architecture and artistic traditions of Indian sub-continent and beyond developed into subsequent architectural and artistic prototypes. Nalanda distinguished itself as the earliest planned university of the Indian subcontinent. Thematic and iconographic assimilation of features from major art-centres of the sub-continent with local practices is evident in art of Nalanda. While Nalanda stucco influenced practices in Thailand, its metal art influenced art of the Malayan archipelago, Nepal, Myanmar and Tibet travelling out through scholars.

Nalanda attracted scholars from the Indian subcontinent and beyond and received patronage of local rulers and foreign kings for unbroken period of 800 years. Students were admitted after rigorous evaluation only. Apart from teaching of topics related to Buddhism, contemporary texts and philosophies, logic, grammar, science, and medicine were also part of the knowledge imparted at Nalanda. Earning the title of ‘Medieval School of Discussion and Logic’, Nalanda`s scholars mastered the art and science of debate developing it into a critical tool for higher learning. Today, the continuity of its systems is also evident in contemporary monasteries in Sri Lanka, Tibet and Nepal. In fact, the term Nalanda has become synonymous with aspired standard of education as evidenced in several 21st century namesake institutions all over the world.

All surviving remains of Nalanda Mahavihara in the proposed property area demonstrate amply the attributes of the property such as its planning and layout, its architectural manifestation and extant building materials and applied ornamental embellishments. Preserved in-situ is structural remains of viharas (residential-cum-scholastic structure) and chaityas (temple-like structure) whose layers of construction show evolution of the respective forms. The positioning of these structures over the length of the site shows the planned layout unique to Nalanda. The viharas retain infrastructure for residential-cum-scholastic functions. The quincuxial or five-fold plan-form characteristic of a Nalanda chaitya is evident in the temple within the property. The site also retains a corpus of moveable and immoveable artefacts and artistic embellishment that shows iconographic development reflecting changes in Buddhist belief system. While stucco and engraved art are conserved in-situ, metal and stone objects are exhibited today at the adjoining Site Museum.

Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi chairs the Inter-State Council meeting

Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi chairs the Inter-State Council meeting

A meeting of the Inter-State Council took place here today. The Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi chaired the meeting. Union Ministers participated in the meeting along with the Chief Ministers and Administrators of States and Union Territories.

This Inter-State Council meeting has many firsts. Notable among them is that, for the first time a meeting of the Inter-State Council has covered a wide ranging topics of common interest to the Centre and the States. Previously Inter-State Council meetings focused on just one or two sectors. It is also important to add here that this meeting has been held after a gap of 10 years.

The Union Home Minister, Shri Rajnath Singh welcomed the Members of the Council and mentioned about the importance of cooperative federalism and how this Government was committed to the ideal of Centre-State cooperation. The completion of all the Zonal Council meetings in 2015 was a reflection of this commitment, he added.

The Prime Minister, in his inaugural address mentioned, that the Inter State Council is the most significant platform for strengthening Centre-State and Inter-State relations. He observed that the Council should discuss matters which are of concern to large segments of our population. It is with that intention that the agenda subjects for discussion in the Council have been chosen. So far 102 crore Aadhaar cards have been distributed and today the Aadhaar card has become a symbol of empowerment. He added that India’s greatest assets are the youth of the country and, therefore, they should be equipped with the skill and ability to think logically and work creatively. He emphasized the need to focus on intelligence sharing and ensure greater coordination among agencies, so as to strengthen the internal security of the country.

Following this, presentations were made by the Secretary of Inter-State Council Secretariat and the Secretaries of the Departments of Electronics and IT, School Education and Literacy and the Ministry of Home Affairs.

The Chief Ministers then presented their views on the agenda items. The recommendations of the Commission on Centre-State relations headed by Justice M.M. Punchhi, retired CJI, will be first referred to the Standing Committee and with their recommendations be placed before the Council. On the issue of Aadhaar enrollment and using Aadhaar as an identifier for direct benefit transfers, the State Governments assured that they will provide maximum support in completing the enrollment and also in setting up DBT (Direct Benefit Transfer) cells. The consensus view that emerged in the Council with regard to improving the quality of education and learning outcomes was that there has to be an improvement in the pupil-teacher ratio and in the training of teachers. Besides, focus also needs to be there on improving classroom processes and in the quality of school infrastructure. All these should be achieved in a time-bound manner. The Council discussed the importance of maintaining internal security by better intelligence sharing between the States and Central agencies. Terrorism should be put down with an iron hand. The need for modernizing the police force with better equipment and training was also emphasized.

Many Chief Ministers lauded the Government of India for convening the meeting of the Inter-State Council and requested that such meetings should be convened more frequently.

In his concluding address the Prime Minister mentioned that Aadhaar seeding should be attempted to the maximum extent possible in the implementation of welfare schemes. While expansion of educational facilities for school education was the only area of priority focus earlier, today we should, in addition focus on the quality of education and learning outcomes also. Technology can greatly help in this. We should proactively take steps to bridge the disparities in the standards between the better endowed and poorly endowed schools.

There should be better coordination and interaction between the police departments of the States and ‘Smart Policing’ should be practiced and in this, technology and focus on training of the police personnel in matters relating to cyber crimes should be important points of emphasis.