May Current Polity: Lokpal Selection, Modi FIR, Kerala Dam row

mrunal.org

1. Prologue Current Affairs May Week1, 2014

2. P1: RPA Section 126-A and 130: Modis Selfi
3. P2: Prasar Bharati Autonomy
4. P3: CBI needs no Prior sanction
5. P4: Lokpal selection rules
6. P5: Chief Justice of India: Fixed tenure or not?
7. P6: Judicial appointment commission
1. Polity (Youre here)
2. History, Culture (done click me)
3. Economy (done click me)
4. Diplomacy (done click me)
Before reading this article further, consider following questions:
GS Mains paper 2 | 200 words | 7 minutes for each question
1. List the salient features of Section 126 and 130 of the Representation of Peoples act 1951.
2. Write a note on the structure of Prasar Bharati and suggest measures to strengthen its autonomy.
3. Supreme court order voiding the Section 6A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act is a
landmark event in the fight against higher level corruption. Comment.
4. What is the present mechanism for search and selection of Lokpal? Why did Supreme Court find
deficiencies in it?
5. The state has no right to impose mother tongue in primary schools. Elaborate.
(Interview)
1. Should CJI have fixed tenure of 2 years- CJI Lodha says no, Ex-CJI Sathasivam says yes. Whats
your stand?
2. What is the controversy surrounding Mullaperiyar dam? What was Kerala dam law? Why has
Supreme Court struck it down?
P1: RPA Section 126-A and 130: Modis Selfi
Topic important because
1. after voting in Ahmedabad, Narendra Modi gave a press conference while brandishing his election
symbol. He was booked under RPA
2. GS Mains paper II syllabus: Salient features of the Representation of Peoples Act (RPA)

RPA Modi Selfi FIR

Representation of Peoples act 1951 provisions

Section 126
Section 130
Prohibits following activities near polling booth
(100 meters distance)
48 hours before conclusion of polls, No person can
canvassing : meaning asking public for
1. hold public meetings / processions
favorable vote
2. display/ publishing any election matter on TV,
asking people not to vote for a particular
radio, theatrical performance, musical shows etc.
candidate
Displaying any election related
sign/symbol.
Non-cognizable offence i.e. Police cannot arrest
without court permission
2 years or fine or both
Modi was booked under this section

Cognizable offence- police can arrest without court

permission
only fine upto Rs.250
Congress demanded that Modi be booked under
this section as well and immediately arrested.

After this incident, Ahmedabad Crime branch investigated and sent a report to EC.
IndiaTV(!) said crime branch gave clean chit to Modi because press conference happened 100m
outside the polling area hence no violation done. Police yet to file any chargesheet.
P2: Prasar Bharati Autonomy
Topic important because:
1. From Modis interview, DD channel edited out some portions related to Priyanka Vadra, allegedly
on the order of Manish Tewari (Ex-Congress minister for information and broadcasting.)
2. GS Mains paper 2 syllabus: Statutory bodies.
Present setup:
Prasar Bharati statutory autonomous body
It is the public service broadcaster of India
It has two arms: DD and AIR.

Prasar Bharati Board includes

1 chairman
6 part time members (eminent persons selected by Union government)
DG of AIR
DG of Doordarshan (IAS Officer. Service controlled by Personnel minstry)
DG of All India Radio (Indian information and broadcasting service. Service controlled by personnel
ministry)
Representative from I&B ministry.
What Reforms needed in Prasar Bharti?
Sam Pitroda Committee (Jan 2014) recommended following:
1. Full autonomy to Prasar Bharati for administration and finance.
2. Include Professionals in the Prasar Bharati Board.
3. Prasar Bharati be allowed to recruit its own officers (instead of importing IAS & other bureaucrats
on deputation
4. Setup Prasar Bahrati connect
1. itll be a Prasar bharati arm
2. independent of Doordarshan and All India Radio
3. will manage social media initiatives
5. Prasar Bharti owns large patches of land across India- for short wave radio transmitters. That
technology is old. Sell such land
6. Setup a parliamentary committee to monitor Prasar Bharati (means, all parties can have a say into
Prasar Bharati affairs.)
7. change funding pattern as following:
Government
20%
Private investment. Especially for developing back infrastructure40%
Commercialize some activities
40%
Total funding
100%
P3: CBI needs no Prior sanction
Syllabus topics
(GSM2): transparency and accountability
(GSM4): challenges of corruption.
Present system
CBI derives powers under Delhi Special Police Establishment Act 1946
But as per Section 6A of this act, CBI cannot conduct preliminary inquiry against Joint Secretary or
higher rank officers without central governments approval.
But government doesnt give approval on time, officers get away scot free.
Two petitions filed against this Section 6A:
1. By Subramanian Swamy (2G fame)

2. By an NGO: Centre for PIL

Supreme Court ruled that Section 6A ___.
Hampers the action against high-level corruption (by senior civil servant).
6A can be used to shield corrupt officers.
6A violates Article 14 of equality before law. Public servants high position doesnt give him
immunity from equal treatment
Therefore 6A is unconstitutional, we declare it null and void.
Besides, under Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA), the investigating agency has to take sanction
from concerned authority before starting prosecution. So, no need to carve out additional and special
protection to senior civil servants
Impact of SC Judgement?
In coalgate, UPA government had rejected rejected preliminary inquiry against former coal
secretary. Now CBI can begin investigation against him.
There are many similar cases pending because central govt. had not granted sanction. But now,
CBI is empowered to act against such senior IAS officials without any delay- be it 2G scam, coal,
common wealth games and Adarsh scam.
Conclusion:
SC judgment will reduce govt. interference in CBI investigation.
But it cannot bear the real fruits until the CBI is granted autonomy in its appointments, finance and
functioning.
P4: Lokpal selection rules
Syllabus topics
(GS2): Statutory, regulatory and various quasi-judicial bodies
(GS2): transparency and accountability
(GS4): challenges of corruption
Timeline / Sequence of events
Lokpal and Lokayukta act passed. Lokpal will consist of
December 2013

one chairman
Four judicial members
Four non-judicial members

2014, January 1 President gave assent to this bill.

2014, May week1NGO-petition against Lokpal selection rules (Rule 10) in SC.
Problem with Existing Provisions (Rule 10)

Lokpal selection rule

Lokpal recruitment involves two Committees

Search Committee
selection Committee
Theyll shortlist the eligible candidates for selection as Lokpal
Will decide the final names.
chairman and members.
Search Committee will have 1 chairman + 7 members from
total five people
following professional categories (total 8 people)
1. administrators
2. representatives of the law enforcement agencies
3. bankers
4. judicial officers
5. legal professionals
6. eminent persons in public life

1. Prime minister
2. Speaker, Lok Sabha
3. Leader of Opposition, Lok Sabha
4. Chief Justice of India CJI OR a judge
nominated by him
5. One Eminent Jurist.

at least 50% members of search Committee will be SC, ST,

no such reservation
OBC, minorities and women.
As per the rules, search Committee can to shortlist
candidates only from the list given by Central
Selection Committee has two options
government!
so there is no freedom in searching!
1. We can Select toppers(!) among the
only those whore in the good books of ruling party,
shortlisted candidates by search
theyll get shortlisted.
Committee.
When Lokpal is selected among such candidates, he
2. we can even select people not
is less likely to be impartial and strict while dealing
shortlisted by the search Committee.
against political corruption.
Thus, entire process is illegal, arbitrary and against
Article 14 of the constitution

Justice KT Thomas: quits the Search Committee

post because selection Committee can pick even
outsiders also. then whats the point of shortlisting?

Govt. chose a practicing lawyer (PP

Rao) as an eminent jurist.
Now, four sitting judges of supreme
court are in race for to be chosen as

Legal expert Fali Nariman: declined to join as

member of search Committee for all these stupid rules

Lokpal.
So, there would be conflict of interest
when a practicing lawyer has to select
a sitting judge of Supreme Court.

No transparency. At least names of eligible

candidates should be put on website one week before
final selection.
Government even reduced Work-experience criteria
for shortlisting candidates.
Outcome of NGO petition?
Supreme court observed

(UPA) government replied

Selection process is made in such way that itll

undermine the independence and autonomy of
the Lokpal.

well re-examine the section rules

in the meantime, Well not appoint any lokpal
chairman or member (this will be done after new
government is elected i.e. Modi).

June 15, 2014: Modi government began reforming search/selection rules of UPA government. Department
of Personnel and Training (DoPT) working on this.
P5: Chief Justice of India: Fixed tenure or not?
At present, CJI is selected on the seniority principle.
Different opinions on fixed tenures
40th CJI-P. Sathasivam
41st CJI R.M.Lodha
recommended 2years fixed term for CJI and Chief justices
no need for fixed tenure to CJI.
of high courts.
A short tenure does not provide space to CJI to
implement any reforms or decisions
no CJI appointed before age of 55. and they retired
at age of 65 they dont have much time left.

Average tenure of Supreme Court

judges is less than four years
if one judge is given two years fixed
term then other judges may not get any
chance to become CJI.

In last 20 years we saw 16 CJI

out of them only 4 had tenure more than 2 years
If law is enacted to make tenure of CJI fixed, itll
some less than one year.(Sathasivam himself only
undermine independence of judiciary
9 months tenure!)
one CJI had even less than a months tenure!!

Since CJI is frequently changed, he cannot implement full

Judicial institutions run on discipline.

scale judicial reforms, which require his personal

supervision for longer period.

if good people with impeccable

character are appointed judges then
everything will work out smoothly.
if the kith and kin of the judges practice in the
same court, then bar council should take action
against them.

P6: Judicial appointment commission

At present, the judges in SC/HC are selected via a collegium method. But this method is opaque,
and lacks accountability. Therefore, Parliamentary Standing Committee on Law and Justice
recommended creating JAC.
In December 2013, UPA cabinet cleared two bills related to this.
Reforming the Judges selection system
Judicial appointments commission Bill
120th Constitutional Amendment bill 2013
2013
New Article 124A: JAC composition will be created
by an ordinary act.
This ordinary bill/Act will define the composition
of JAC
New Article 124B: JAC functions listed here.
Modified Article 124(2) President shall appoint
Chief Justice of India as chairman
judges on recommendation of Judicial appointment
Two Supreme court judges
commission (JAC)
Law minister
will amend 217: Appointment of HC judges
Law Secretary (as convenor)
will amend 222: transfer of HC judges
Two eminent persons (PM+Opposition
will amend 231: common court for two or more
leader+CJI will select them)
states and provision related to judges-transfer in such
case. (e.g Seemandhra and Telangana)
Terms and functions will be defined in Constitution
itself.
so they cannot be amended later on without 2/3rd
majority in parliament.
Rajya Sabha has passed this bill. But with dissolution of
15th Lok Sabha, bill lapsed. (Ref. PRSINDIA link)

Introduced in Rajya Sabha but referred to

standing Committee on law. Current status:
PENDING. (Ref. PRSINDIA Link)

Overall, JAC will have two functions:

1. Will replace the collegium system of appointing SC/HC judges
2. Recommend transfer of judges from one high court to another.
parliamentary panels recommendations

Did UPA cabinet

accept it?

only two eminent

persons

three eminent persons in the commission

At least one out of them should be an SC/ST/OBC/woman/minority, preferably by
rotation.
~800 judges in the highcourt. So, itll be better to have state level JAC for their
appointment.
if judge dies/ steps down then JAC should be informed within a month so new
recruitment can be done
JAC should be informed 6 months in advance about the upcoming retirements and
vacancies in SC/HC

NO
NO
yes
yes

14th Report of the Law Commission (Motilal Staved )

This JAC formation JAC will not bring any change if its basic criterion for selection will be same as
earlier principle of seniority.
CJI selection should be different from the method of selection of other judges of SC and HC
In past, CJIs could not serve their best capacity, because of limited tenure they retired too soon.
Due to seniority principle, many deserving judges retire before they can become CJI
JAC should fix this issue by selecting most competent person in administrative, judicial and
leadership skills; social and constitutional philosophy, instead of just focusing on seniority.
P7: [SC order] Mother tongue education in Karnataka
Newspapers have made a simple matter too complex. Moral of the story is just two points:
1. Karnataka government wants every kid be educated in Non-English medium for class1 to 4.
2. Private school-walla wants English Medium from class1 itself. Supreme Court says theyve right
to do so.
Now lets get into technical details:
1994: Karnataka government orders following
From class 1 to 4: student should be taught Kannada OR Mother tongue (Tulu, Kodagu, Konkani
etc) only.
after class 5, student can shift to English medium or any other medium
Private schools (English medium) did not like this order. NOT ONE BIT.
Matter goes to Karnataka High court
School owners
Class 1 to 4 students (and their parents)
have right to choose medium of instruction in
class1 to 4.
They should be allowed to pick English
medium also.
Hence Karnataka governments order is
constitutionally ultra vires.

Karnataka governments defense

Article 350A: State needs to provide facility for
mother tongue education @primary school.
In a previous case, SC upheld that State
government has right to prescribe medium of
instruction in schools.

Taarikh pe Taarikhfast forward to 2008 Karnataka high court ruled that

Right to carry any occupation. (English medium) school owners have right to carry
occupation (i.e. running English medium school.)
State cannot force them to teach them only in mother tongue (tulu etc.) or Kannada.

19/1/G

Right to free and compulsory education.

But that also implies freedom to choose (English) medium, even in primary school.

21A

Religious freedom=> right to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable
purposes.
Charitable- indirectly includes educational institutions also. (whether minority or majority,
both have this right) so theyre free to pick their medium.

26/A

29/1
29/2

Religious and linguistic minorities have right to setup their own educational institution. theyre also
free to pick their medium.
no citizen can be denied admission to an educational institution only on the grounds of language

Given these Constitutional provisions. Karnataka HC ordered that

for government schools, government funded private
Government recognized private (self-financed) schools
schools
state can order them to teach Kannada as one of Government cannot force them to teach in mother
the languages
tongue or Kannada.
This time, Karnataka State government did not like it. NOT ONE BIT. So they went to Supreme Court.
Again Taarikh pe Taarikh. Finally May 6, 2014 The Supreme Court ordered following: (and Hence the topic
in news for May week1)
Q1. What does Mother tongue mean? Wholl decide a childs mother tongue?
SC order:
Mother tongue doesnt mean the language which the child is comfortable with.
Parent/guardian of the child will decide his mother tongue.
Q2. Does a student or a parent has a right to choose a medium of instruction at primary school?
SC order
Yes, under Article 19/1/a: Freedom of speech and expression. Under this, a child (and his
parent/guardian on his behalf) can chose the medium even at primary school. State cannot impose
any language on them.
Under 19/1/g: right to carry occupation. So (English medium) school owners also have right to run
their business (of running English medium school). State government cannot force them to teach in
mother tongue (tulu etc) or Kannada at primary level.

And Article 21 or 21A is irrelevant here.

Q3. IF state government forces the schools to teach in a specific language, does it affect
fundamental rights Article 14, 19, 29 or 30?
SC order:
yes it affects fundamental rights under those articles
And therefore, an aggrieved citizen can approach court to seek relief.
Q4. What is the meaning of Government recognized school? Only sarkaari schools or private
(Self-financed) schools also counted in it?
SC order: all schools counted in it:
1. government schools
2. government aided private schools
3. Self-financed private schools (if government has granted recognition) to them
Q6. Can government compel linguistic minorities to choose only their mother tongue in
government recognized primary schools?
SC order: No. (Union or state) Government doesnt have such powers.
In other words, Karnataka government cannot order any school to teach only in mother tongue or
Kannada. The said school has freedom to teach in any medium (Even English medium.)
P8: [SC order] Kerala Dam law for Mullaperiyar is void
Gist of the matter is just three points
1. Tamilnadu operates the dam in Kerala. wants to increase water level in it.
2. Kerala worries that dam will get destroyed anytime soon due to old age or earthquake. Hence
enacted a law to decrease water level in it.
3. Supreme court says Kerala law is wrong, Tamilnadu is right.
About the Mullaperiyar dam:
1886

The British (Madras presidency) built Mullaperiyar dam with a lease agreement with Kingdom
of Travancore for 999 years.

1970Governments of Kerala and Tamilnadu ratified this agreement.

Type: a masonry gravity dam.
River: confluence of Periyar river and Mullayar river
place: Thekkady, Kerala. The dam site is in Kerala but is leased to TN
Provides irrigation to South Tamil Nadu (~2 lakh acres)
Periyar river originates from Ananamalai Hills and Joins sea near Ernakulam
TN has right to utilise and maintain the dam.
Why controversy:

In mid-70s, Kerala became worried

about leakage from the dam and wanted
Tamilnadu to repair it.
Kerala govt. communicated with union.
Union government directed Tamilnadu
state government to
Repair this dam.
Keep water level in the dam at 145 feet.
Now, Union believed there is no longer
any danger to the structure.
2006: SC allowed Tamilandu to raise
water height to 152 feet after strengthening
the dam. (Total height of the dam is 176
Map Mullaperiyar dam
feet).
But Kerala passed a law the Kerala Irrigation and Water Conservation (Amendment) Act, 2006, to
prevent the neighboring State (TN) from raising the water level beyond 136 feet.
Tamilnadu challenged Keralas dam height law in Supreme court.
Keralas stand

Graph Mullaperiyar dam height

Tamilnadus
stand

if
Mullaperiyar
dam gets
destroyed, it
will also
damage its
Idduki dam
down the
Without raising
course
water level in
Idduki is the this dam, we
largest source cannot sustain
of
our agriculture
hydroelectricity and drinking
in Kerala
water
The broken requirement.
Mullaperiyar
dam can also
damage
Periyar
National park
and Periyar
tiger reserve.
this 119 year old
dam poses danger
to life and property
nearly 4 million

Weve done
adequate work
to strengthen
the dam

people downstream structure.

There was a minor
earthquake near
Tremors were
dam site. Infact, we
very minor. No
want to reduce water
danger to dam.
level further to 120
feet.
2010: Kerala
Disagreed. For
demanded that
itll take lot time
entire dam be
to setup new
dismantled and we
dam, what
construct a new,
about the farmstronger dam.
irrigation in the
(Kerala was ready to
meantime?
pay entire expense)
2010: Justice Anand Committee says dam is safe. Mullaperiyar dam poses no danger to idduki dam.
May 2014: Supreme Court order
Kerala dam Law of 2006 is unconstitutional and void.
Because Mullaperiyar is a dispute between two states. In such disputes, one state legislature
cannot unilaterally enact law in its own favor.
Besides, in 2006 we had allowed Tamilandu to raise water height. By enacting g this law, Kerala is
interfering with our judicial function.
Permitted Tamilnadu to increase water level upto 142 feet. (present ~136ft)
June 2014:
Union government decided to setup a Committee to supervise this water rising.
Kerala planning to file a review petition in SC.
Kerala assembly requested President of India to refer the matter to the Supreme Court under
Article 143
Mock questions for CSAT
Q1. Under representation of peoples act
1. Canvassing near the polling booth is a non-cognizable offense.
2. No person can publicize election matter through TV, radio etc. 72 hours before the conclusion of
polls.
3. Both A and B
4. Neither A nor B
Q2. Find incorrect statements about Prasar Bharati
1. It is a statutory body under ministry of Ministry of Communications.
2. It overseas the working of doordarshan but not All India radio (AIR)
3. Both A and B

4. Neither A nor B
Q3. Correct statements about Lokpal
1. Its 9 persons body. Four of which, have to be judicial members and among them one must be an
eminent jurist.
2. Eminent jurist in the Lokpal selection panel is nominated by CJI.
3. Law Secretary acts as the convenor cum member Secretary of the Lokpal search Committee.
Answer choices
1. only 1 and 2
2. only 2 and 3
3. only 1 and 3
4. none of them
Q4. Consider following Constitutional amendments
1. 118th: Changes under Article 16 about reservation.
2. 119th: transfer of territories between India and Bangladesh
3. 120th: judicial appointment commission
Which of them are correctly matched?
1. only 1 and 2
2. only 2 and 3
3. only 1 and 3
4. none of them
Q5. Suppose JAC was created then
1. President would appoint CJI and other judges in supreme court, as per JAC recommendations
2. Governor would appoint judges of high court as per JAC recommendations.
3. Both A and B
4. Neither A nor B
Q6. Suppose, PM wants to reduce salaries of the judges of SC, what should he do?
1. get President to declare financial emergency
2. get article 125 amended
3. Either A or B
4. It is not possible because their salaries are charged upon the consolidated fund of India hence
outside parliaments scope.
Q7. Suppose, PM wants that President should appoint judges of SC/HC only from the names
shortlisted by PMO, THEN, which articles will he need to modify?
1. 124 and 125
2. 217 and 218
3. 124 and 217

4. It is not possible because of the collegium system.

Q8 (Again) Suppose, government orders English medium school owners to teach only in
vernacular mother tongues such as Hindi, Tamil etc. then which articles can the school owners
use to get relief from HC or SC?
1. Article 21 and 21A
2. 19/1/a and 19/1/g
3. Article 21A and 19/1/g
4. They cant do anything because government is constitutionally empowered to do so under Article
350A.
Q9. Consider following statements about Mullaperiyar dam
1. its built on the Mullaperiyar river which originates from Annamallai hills
2. At present, Tamilnadu owns and operates the dam
3. Maharaja of Travancore had built this dam by taking a lease from Madras presidency.
The incorrect statements are
1. only 1 and 2
2. only 2 and 3
3. only 1 and 3
4. none of them
Q10. Which of the following is a plausible way to resolve Mullaperiyar dam controversy
1. If Tamilnadu pays electricity tax dues to Kerala state government, for using the hydroelectricity of
Mullaperiyar dam
2. If Tamilnadu pays compensation to displaced Keralites living in the upstream, before increasing
the height of this dam
3. If Tamilnadu agrees to divert part of the water from this dam to Kerala farmers in Idduki and other
downstream regions.
4. None of them
Mains and interview
GS Mains paper 2 | 200 words | 7 minutes for each question
1. List the salient features of Section 126 and 130 of the Representation of Peoples act 1951.
2. Write a note on the structure of Prasar bharati and suggest measures to strengthen its autonomy.
3. Supreme court order voiding the Section 6A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act is a
landmark event in the fight against higher level corruption. Comment.
4. What is the present mechanism for selection of Lokpal? Why did Supreme Court find deficiencies
in it?
5. (GS2) The state has no right to impose mother tongue in primary schools. Elaborate.
(Interview)
1. Should CJI have fixed tenure of 2 years- CJI Lodha says no, Ex-CJI Sathasivam says yes. Whats

your stand?
2. What is the controversy surrounding Mullaperiyar dam? What is SCs latest judgment on it? What is
the permanent solution to this issue?
Correct answers
1. D neither is right
2. C both are wrong
3. D none of them right.
4. B. 119 = India Bangla; 120 = JAC.
5. Answer is A. B is wrong, judges of high court appointed by President and not governor.
6. answer C. it is possible to reduce salary of judges via A or B
7. C. 124=SC judges appointment, 217 =HC. Read the JAC topic again.
8. B. from the SC judgment we saw that itll be 19/1/a and 19/1/g
9. C. 1 and 3 wrong
10. D. none of them. The dam controversy involves different angle altogether.
Visit Mrunal.org/CURRENT for entire Archive weekly current affairs compilations published so far.
[Current]MayW2/P2: Polity- Form20, EVM Totalizer, Pramati Judgement, Code for compulsory
costs, Presidents Vote & Plight of Paramilitary
[Current]May W2/P1: Environment & Biodiversity: Polavaram Project, Kudankulam milestone,
Turtle vs Tortoise, Dancing frog, Elephant shrew, Dwarf Gecko
[Current] May-Week1/P2: History Culture: Tatyas 200th Anniversary, Bogus FIR against Bhagat
Singh, Buddhas Begging bowl, Arab Serai & Role of Cinema
[Current] May-Week1/P3: Economy- Financial resolution authority, Reena Benerjee Committee on
Bancassurance, Minor Bank accounts, Enforcement day