Relevance: GS Paper III (Skill Development, Employment, Manufacturing) | GS Paper II (India–Japan Relations) | APPSC (Human Resource Development)
For Prelims:
APSSDC, Specified Skilled Worker (SSW), Engineer/Specialist in Humanities/International Services (EHI), Kaizen, ITI, Aichi Prefecture
For Mains:
International labour mobility, skill development, India–Japan partnership, demographic transition, manufacturing workforce
Why in News?
The Andhra Pradesh State Skill Development Corporation signed a Letter of Intent with Japan’s Fourth Valley Concierge Corporation (FVCC) to facilitate overseas employment opportunities for Andhra Pradesh youth, particularly in Japan’s automobile manufacturing sector under the Specified Skilled Worker (SSW) and EHI visa categories.
FVCC Partnership Framework
The partnership has been launched under APSSDC’s Skill International Programme to create structured overseas employment pathways for technically trained youth.
Under the arrangement:
- APSSDC will identify, mobilise, and train candidates through its institutional network.
- FVCC will facilitate recruitment, placement, documentation, onboarding, and employer coordination in Japan.
- Dedicated nodal officers will coordinate implementation and monitoring.
The initiative particularly targets ITI and polytechnic students trained in technical trades relevant to industrial manufacturing.
Japan’s Labour Crisis and Skilled Worker Demand
Japan faces severe labour shortages due to:
- Ageing population
- Declining birth rate
- Shrinking working-age population
This demographic transition has created demand for foreign skilled workers in manufacturing, healthcare, construction, and industrial services.
Japan’s automobile manufacturing ecosystem is among the sectors facing acute shortage of shop-floor technical workers.
This explains the increasing recruitment of foreign workers under regulated skill migration frameworks.
Land Titling Systems in India: Conceptual Shift
India traditionally follows a presumptive land titling system, where ownership is
Specified Skilled Worker (SSW) Visa System
Japan introduced the Specified Skilled Worker (SSW) system in 2019 to address labour shortages in selected sectors.
- SSW permits foreign workers in sectors facing manpower shortage.
- Manufacturing and industrial machinery sectors are included.
- Workers must pass skill proficiency and Japanese language tests.
- Unlike earlier trainee programmes, SSW allows limited job mobility within the same sector.
The programme is distinct from Japan’s older Technical Intern Training Programme (TITP), which was more restrictive in labour mobility.
Automobile Sector Linkages and Industrial Geography
The collaboration mainly targets Japan’s automobile and auto-component manufacturing sector.
Key geographical linkage:
- Aichi Prefecture is Japan’s major automobile manufacturing region.
- Toyota Motor Corporation has its headquarters in Toyota City within Aichi Prefecture.
The targeted jobs are technical shop-floor roles such as:
- CNC machine operators
- Welders
- Fitters
- Fabrication workers
- Assembly technicians
- Maintenance personnel
This reflects a sector-specific labour mobility model, unlike Gulf migration which is largely construction-oriented.
Skill Ecosystem and Technical Training in Andhra Pradesh
Andhra Pradesh possesses a growing network of:
- Industrial Training Institutes (ITIs)
- Polytechnics
- Skill development centres
The programme aligns ITI trades with Japanese industrial requirements.
Training modules include:
- Japanese language instruction
- Factory safety communication
- Precision manufacturing standards
- Kaizen practices
Kaizen is an important Japanese industrial concept emphasising continuous efficiency improvement and workplace discipline.
India–Japan Strategic and Economic Linkages
India and Japan maintain a Special Strategic and Global Partnership involving:
- Industrial cooperation
- Infrastructure development
- Skill partnerships
- Supply chain diversification
Japan has previously supported India through:
- Delhi–Mumbai Industrial Corridor (DMIC)
- Mumbai–Ahmedabad High-Speed Rail Project
- Japanese Industrial Townships
The APSSDC initiative reflects growing cooperation in human resource mobility and manufacturing integration.
Way Forward
- Technical education in Andhra Pradesh should increasingly align with international industrial standards.
- Language training and certification systems must be strengthened for overseas employability.
- India can expand bilateral skill mobility partnerships with ageing economies facing workforce shortages.
- Robust safeguards are needed to ensure fair recruitment practices and worker protection abroad.
Conclusion
The APSSDC–Japan partnership represents an important shift from low-skilled overseas migration toward structured global workforce integration in advanced manufacturing sectors. By linking technical education with international labour demand, Andhra Pradesh is positioning itself as a skilled manpower hub in the evolving global industrial economy.
CARE MCQ
Q. Consider the following statements regarding Japan’s Specified Skilled Worker (SSW) system:
- It was introduced to address labour shortages in selected sectors.
- Workers under the SSW system are completely prohibited from changing employers.
- Manufacturing sector jobs are covered under the SSW framework.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 1 and 3 only
(c) 2 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3
Ans: (b)
Explanation:
Statement 1 is correct: Japan introduced the Specified Skilled Worker (SSW) visa system in 2019 to address acute labour shortages in sectors facing workforce constraints.
Statement 2 is incorrect: Workers under the SSW framework are not completely prohibited from changing employers. They may change employers within the same eligible sector, subject to immigration and contractual conditions.
Statement 3 is correct: The manufacturing sector is one of the sectors covered under the SSW system, along with industries such as nursing care, construction, agriculture, and food services.
Q.Consider the following statements regarding the APSSDC–Japan FVCC partnership:
- The collaboration primarily targets managerial roles in Japan’s automobile companies.
- The partnership focuses on shop-floor technical roles such as machinists, welders, and industrial workers.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
Ans: (b)
Explanation:
Statement 1 is incorrect: The APSSDC–Japan FVCC partnership is not primarily aimed at managerial or white-collar positions. Instead, it focuses on addressing labour shortages in Japan’s industrial and manufacturing sectors through skilled technical manpower.
Statement 2 is correct: The programme mainly targets shop-floor and factory-level technical jobs such as machinists, welders, fitters, assembly-line operators, and other manufacturing-related occupations under Japan’s skilled worker framework. These sectors face significant labour shortages due to Japan’s ageing population and shrinking workforce.
The initiative aims to create structured employment pathways for Andhra Pradesh youth under Japan’s Specified Skilled Worker (SSW) and related visa categories.
Q.With reference to automobile sector employment in Japan, consider the following statements:
- Aichi Prefecture is one of Japan’s major automobile manufacturing regions.
- Toyota City is associated with large automobile production clusters.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
Ans: (c)
Explanation:
Statement 1 is correct: Aichi Prefecture is one of Japan’s most important industrial regions and serves as a major hub of the country’s automobile manufacturing industry. It hosts numerous automobile assembly plants, component manufacturers, and engineering facilities.
Statement 2 is correct: Toyota City developed around the operations of Toyota Motor Corporation and is globally recognized as a prominent automobile production cluster with extensive supplier networks and manufacturing infrastructure.
APPSC CARE MAINS:
Q.Discuss the significance of international skill mobility partnerships in addressing employment generation and demographic challenges with reference to the Andhra Pradesh–Japan collaboration. [250 WORDS]
FAQs
Q. What is APSSDC?
Ans: Andhra Pradesh State Skill Development Corporation is the State’s nodal agency for skill development and workforce training.
Q. What is Japan’s SSW visa system?
Ans: It is a visa framework introduced in 2019 to recruit foreign skilled workers in sectors facing labour shortages.
Q. Why is Japan recruiting foreign workers?
Ans: Due to ageing population and shrinking workforce.
Q. Which sector is the main focus of the APSSDC–Japan partnership?
Ans: Automobile and auto-component manufacturing sector.
Relevance: GS Paper II – International Relations | International Institutions | GS Paper III – Environment | Security
For Prelims:
Ecocide, Rome Statute, ICC, ENMOD Convention, IUCN, war crimes, environmental destruction, Council of Europe Convention
For Mains:
environmental security, international humanitarian law, climate justice, environmental governance, armed conflict and ecology, global environmental accountability.
Why in News?
- Lebanon accused Israel of committing “ecocide” during the 2023–24 conflict by allegedly causing massive environmental destruction.
- Iran also alleged ecocide after Israeli strikes on fuel depots reportedly caused toxic “black rain” and severe pollution.
- Several countries and environmental organizations are now demanding formal recognition of ecocide as an international crime under the Rome Statute.
- The Council of Europe adopted a convention in 2025 criminalizing severe environmental destruction.
What is Ecocide?
- Ecocide refers to large-scale destruction or severe damage to ecosystems and the environment caused by human activities.
- It involves actions that result in widespread, long-term, or irreversible environmental harm.
- The concept treats nature and ecosystems as entities deserving independent legal protection, not merely as resources for human use.
- Ecocide can occur during war, industrial disasters, mining, deforestation, oil spills, or large-scale pollution.
Origin and Evolution of the Concept
- The term “ecocide” was coined in 1970 by biologist Arthur W. Galston.
- It emerged during criticism of the environmental destruction caused during the Vietnam War.
- The use of Agent Orange and chemical defoliants devastated forests, biodiversity, and agricultural lands.
- Over time, environmental movements expanded the concept beyond warfare to include peacetime environmental destruction.
Environmental Damage During Wars
Modern wars increasingly damage ecosystems directly and indirectly:
- Destruction of forests and biodiversity hotspots
- Oil spills and toxic contamination of rivers and oceans
- Air pollution from burning fuel depots and industrial facilities
- Soil degradation and radioactive contamination
- Damage to agricultural systems and food security
- Long-term public health consequences due to toxic exposure
Current Position under International Law
- International law currently provides only limited protection against environmental destruction during armed conflict.
- Most existing laws are anthropocentric, meaning they focus primarily on harm to humans rather than harm to ecosystems themselves.
- Environmental destruction is usually addressed only when linked to humanitarian suffering or war crimes.
Rome Statute and Environmental Damage
The Rome Statute is the founding treaty of the International Criminal Court (ICC).
Existing Provision
- Article 8 of the Rome Statute recognizes environmental destruction as a war crime only under very strict conditions.
For prosecution, the attack must:
- Be intentional
- Cause widespread, long-term, and severe environmental damage
- Be clearly excessive compared to anticipated military advantage
Why Existing Laws are Inadequate
- Very High Legal Threshold: Proving “widespread, long-term, and severe” damage simultaneously is extremely difficult.
- Applicable Mainly During War: Current ICC provisions apply largely to wartime situations, not peacetime environmental destruction.
- Human-Centric Approach: Existing frameworks focus more on civilian harm than ecological harm itself.
- Weak Enforcement: Many international environmental treaties lack criminal liability mechanisms.
- Jurisdictional Limitations: Several countries involved in conflicts are not parties to the ICC, limiting prosecution.
Countries Recognising Ecocide
Several countries have incorporated ecocide-related provisions into domestic laws:
- Vietnam
- Russia
- Ukraine
- France
- Belgium
- Chile
These laws vary in scope but generally criminalize severe environmental destruction.
Council of Europe Convention 2025
The Council of Europe is a major European intergovernmental organization established in 1949 to promote human rights, democracy, and the rule of law across Europe. It is separate from the European Union (EU).
In 2025, the Council of Europe remained in focus mainly due to developments related to:
European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
- Several European countries demanded reinterpretation of migration-related rulings of the European Court of Human Rights.
- Debate emerged on balancing national sovereignty with human rights obligations.
Convention for Ukraine Claims Commission (2025)
- In December 2025, under the Council of Europe framework, many countries adopted a convention to establish an International Claims Commission for Ukraine.
- Objective: provide compensation mechanisms for damages caused during the Russia-Ukraine war.
Cybercrime and Digital Governance Conventions
- The Council of Europe continued expanding global cooperation through conventions such as the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime.
Key Facts
- Headquarters: Strasbourg, France
- Members: 46 countries
- Major achievement: European Convention on Human Rights
- Judicial body: European Court of Human Rights
Difference Between Council of Europe and European Union
Council of Europe | European Union |
Human rights organization | Economic and political union |
46 members | 27 members |
Includes non-EU countries | Only EU members |
Runs ECHR | Runs EU institutions |
Environmental Modification Convention (ENMOD)
The Environmental Modification Convention prohibits hostile environmental modification techniques.
It bans deliberate manipulation of:
- Climate
- Atmosphere
- Hydrosphere
- Ecosystems
for military or hostile purposes.
Limitations
- Focuses only on deliberate environmental modification techniques
- Does not adequately address broader wartime environmental destruction
Role of International Organizations
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
- International Union for Conservation of Nature is an international organization established in 1948 for the conservation of nature and sustainable use of natural resources.
- The headquarters of IUCN is located in Gland, Switzerland, and it operates through a global network of governments, NGOs, scientists, and environmental experts.
- IUCN is regarded as the world’s largest environmental knowledge network and plays a major role in global biodiversity conservation efforts.
- The organization provides scientific data, technical expertise, and policy recommendations to countries and international institutions on environmental protection and sustainable development.
- One of the most important contributions of IUCN is the publication of the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, which assesses the extinction risk faced by plant and animal species across the world.
- The IUCN Red List classifies species into categories such as Extinct, Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable, Near Threatened, and Least Concern based on scientific assessment.
- IUCN also develops guidelines for the management and classification of protected areas, including national parks, wildlife sanctuaries, and biosphere reserves.
- The organization works extensively on issues such as climate change, ecosystem restoration, wildlife conservation, forest protection, and marine biodiversity preservation.
- IUCN organizes the World Conservation Congress, which serves as an important global platform for discussions on environmental governance and conservation policies.
- India is an active member of IUCN, and many Indian species such as the Bengal Tiger, Asiatic Lion, Great Indian Bustard, and Gangetic Dolphin are assessed under the IUCN Red List.
- The assessments and reports released by IUCN are widely used by governments, researchers, and international organizations for framing conservation laws and environmental policies.
Challenges in Recognising Ecocide Internationally
- Political Resistance: Many powerful countries fear legal exposure for military or industrial activities.
- Difficulty in Attribution: Determining responsibility during war is often politically and legally complex.
- Definitional Ambiguity: There is no universally accepted legal definition of ecocide.
- Sovereignty Concerns: States worry that international environmental criminal law may interfere with national sovereignty.
- ICC Membership Issues: Non-signatory states cannot easily be subjected to ICC jurisdiction.
Significance of Recognising Ecocide
Environmental Accountability: Creates legal responsibility for large-scale ecological destruction.
Deterrence: Discourages states and corporations from causing irreversible environmental damage.
Climate Justice: Protects vulnerable communities dependent on ecosystems for survival.
Way Forward
- Develop a universally accepted legal definition of ecocide.
- Strengthen international environmental criminal law mechanisms.
- Expand liability beyond wartime destruction to peacetime ecological disasters.
- Improve international cooperation for environmental monitoring and evidence collection.
- Integrate environmental protection into humanitarian and security frameworks.
Conclusion
The growing demand to recognize ecocide reflects the evolving understanding that environmental destruction threatens not only ecosystems but also global peace, public health, and human survival. While current international law provides limited protection, recent initiatives by international organizations and regional institutions indicate a shift toward stronger ecological accountability. Recognizing ecocide under international law could become a major step toward integrating environmental justice with global governance and humanitarian principles.
CARE MCQ
Q. With reference to the concept of “Ecocide”, consider the following statements:
- The Rome Statute currently recognizes ecocide as a separate international crime.
- The term “ecocide” first gained prominence in the context of environmental destruction during the Vietnam War.
- The Environmental Modification Convention prohibits hostile use of environmental modification techniques.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 2 and 3 only
(b) 1 and 2 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3
Ans: (a)
Explanation:
Statement 1 is incorrect: The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) does not currently recognize ecocide as an independent international crime. Discussions and campaigns are ongoing to include it alongside genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and aggression.
Statement 2 is correct: The term ecocide became widely associated with the large-scale environmental destruction caused during the Vietnam War, particularly due to the use of chemical defoliants such as Agent Orange.
Statement 3 is correct: The Environmental Modification Convention (ENMOD), 1977 prohibits the hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting, or severe effects.
Q.Consider the following statements regarding the crimes under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC):
Statement 1: The Rome Statute, in defining the crime of genocide, specifically enumerates national, ethnical, racial, and religious groups as protected categories, thereby explicitly excluding ‘political groups’ from its scope.
Statement 2: The International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression is restricted to acts committed by persons in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State.
Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?
- Both Statement 1 and Statement 2 are correct and Statement 2 is the correct explanation for Statement 1
- Both Statement 1 and Statement 2 are correct and Statement 2 is not the correct explanation for Statement 1
- Statement 1 is correct but Statement 2 is incorrect
- Statement 1 is incorrect but Statement 2 is correct
Ans: (b)
Explanation:
Statement 1 is correct: Article 6 of the Rome Statute defines genocide by specifying ‘national, ethnical, racial or religious group’ as protected categories, consistent with the 1948 Genocide Convention. It does not include ‘political groups’, which has been a point of debate but is the established legal definition within the Statute.
Statement 2 is also correct: Article 8 bis of the Rome Statute, concerning the crime of aggression, specifies that it can only be committed by a person in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State. This reflects the leadership nature of this crime. Both statements are factually correct details about different crimes defined by the Rome Statute.
However, Statement 2, which describes the specific perpetrator requirement for the crime of aggression, does not explain why ‘political groups’ are excluded from the definition of genocide in Statement 1. They are distinct, albeit related, legal provisions within the Rome Statute.
Q. Which one of the following principles best describes the relationship between the International Criminal Court and national jurisdictions, as established by the Rome Statute?
(a) The ICC exercises universal jurisdiction over all crimes irrespective of nationality or location
(b) The ICC operates on the principle of complementarity, intervening only when national courts are unwilling or unable to prosecute
(c) National courts must automatically defer all relevant cases to the ICC
(d) The ICC and national courts simultaneously prosecute the same crimes under concurrent jurisdiction
Ans: (b)
Explanation:
The Rome Statute is based on the principle of complementarity, meaning the ICC acts as a court of last resort. It intervenes only when national judicial systems are unwilling or genuinely unable to investigate or prosecute serious international crimes.
FAQs
Q1. What is ecocide?
Ans: Ecocide refers to large-scale destruction or severe damage to the environment and ecosystems.
Q2. Is ecocide recognized by the ICC?
Ans: No. The Rome Statute does not currently recognize ecocide as a separate crime.
Q3. What is the Rome Statute?
Ans: It is the founding treaty of the International Criminal Court (ICC).
Q4. What is the ENMOD Convention?
Ans: It is an international treaty prohibiting hostile environmental modification techniques.
Q5. Why is ecocide important for UPSC?
Ans: It connects international law, environment, warfare, climate justice, and global governance—important for GS II and GS III.
Relevance: GS Paper II – Judiciary | Governance | Constitutional Provisions
For Prelims:
Article 124, Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act 1956, Collegium System, sanctioned strength, judicial vacancies
For Mains:
judicial reforms, pendency of cases, access to justice, judicial infrastructure, constitutional governance, judicial efficiency
Why in News?
- The Union Cabinet approved a proposal to increase the sanctioned strength of judges in the Supreme Court of India from 34 to 38.
- The government will introduce a Bill to amend the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956 in the next Parliament session.
- The move comes amid rising pendency of cases in the Supreme Court, which currently exceeds 92,000 cases.
Constitutional Basis for Supreme Court Strength
Article 124(1)
- Article 124 establishes the Supreme Court of India.
- It states that the Supreme Court shall consist of:
– The Chief Justice of India (CJI)
– Such number of other judges as Parliament may prescribe by law. - Thus, Parliament has the exclusive authority to increase the number of Supreme Court judges.
What is the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956?
- The Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956 regulates the sanctioned strength of Supreme Court judges.
- The Act was enacted under Article 124(1) of the Constitution.
- It has been amended multiple times to increase the number of judges in response to growing litigation and judicial workload.
Recent Cabinet Decision
- The Union Cabinet approved increasing the number of judges from 34 to 38, including the Chief Justice of India.
- The proposed amendment seeks to strengthen judicial capacity and reduce case backlog.
- The decision also considers upcoming retirements and existing vacancies in the Supreme Court.
Evolution of Supreme Court Strength
Year | Strength (Excluding CJI) | Total Strength |
1950 | 7 | 8 |
1956 | 10 | 11 |
1960 | 13 | 14 |
1977 | 17 | 18 |
1986 | 25 | 26 |
2008 | 30 | 31 |
2019 | 33 | 34 |
2026 (Proposed) | 37 | 38 |
Why the Number of Judges is Being Increased
Rising Case Pendency
- The Supreme Court currently has more than 92,000 pending cases.
- Pendency has increased significantly after the pandemic period.
- Increased use of e-filing and digital accessibility has also increased case inflow.
Judicial Vacancies
- Existing vacancies due to retirements have increased pressure on sitting judges.
- More retirements are expected in 2026, including:
– Justice J.K. Maheshwari
– Justice Pankaj Mithal
– Justice Sanjay Karol
Expanding Scope of Litigation
- The Supreme Court handles constitutional matters, public interest litigations, election disputes, and appeals from across the country.
- Increasing socio-economic complexity has led to a rise in litigation.
Significance of Increasing Judicial Strength
- Faster Disposal of Cases: More judges can reduce pendency and improve case disposal rates.
- Better Access to Justice: Timely hearings improve citizens’ access to justice.
- Reduced Burden on Existing Judges: Existing judges currently face extremely heavy workloads.
- Strengthening Constitutional Governance Constitutional benches can function more efficiently with greater judicial strength.
Challenges Beyond Increasing Judges
- Infrastructure Constraints: Merely increasing judges without improving court infrastructure may not solve delays fully.
- Procedural Delays: Frequent adjournments and lengthy procedures contribute significantly to pendency.
- Vacancy Delays: Delays in appointments continue despite sanctioned posts being increased.
- Limited Use of Technology in Lower Judiciary: Pendency originates largely in subordinate courts, requiring systemic reform
Conclusion
The decision to increase the strength of the Supreme Court reflects the growing complexity and volume of litigation in India. While expanding judicial capacity is an important step toward reducing pendency, meaningful judicial reform also requires improvements in infrastructure, procedural efficiency, and timely appointments. A stronger and more efficient judiciary remains essential for protecting constitutional rights and ensuring effective delivery of justice.
CARE MCQ
Q. With reference to the Supreme Court of India, consider the following statements:
- Parliament has the power to increase the number of Supreme Court judges.
- The Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956 was enacted under Article 124 of the Constitution.
- The President independently appoints Supreme Court judges without judicial consultation.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3
Ans: (a)
Explanation:
Statement 1 is correct: Article 124 of the Constitution empowers Parliament to regulate and increase the strength of judges in the Supreme Court through legislation.
Statement 2 is correct: The Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956 was enacted under the provisions of Article 124 to determine the sanctioned strength of Supreme Court judges.
Statement 3 is incorrect: Although judges are formally appointed by the President, the appointment process involves judicial consultation through the Collegium System, and the President does not act independently in this matter.
Q.Consider the following statements:
- The Chief Justice of India (CJI) is not required to be a part of a Constitution Bench.
- The largest Constitution Bench in the history of the Supreme Court of India was in the A.K Gopalan case, 1950.
- Supreme Court has an exclusive jurisdiction over disputes related to the election of the President.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
a) Only one
b) Only two
c) Only three
d) None
Answer: (b)
Explanation:
Statement A is correct: The Chief Justice of India (CJI) is not required to be a part of a Constitution Bench. The CJI is the Master of the Roster and has the sole discretion to decide which cases will be heard by a Constitution Bench. The Constitution Benches have decided many of India’s most important Supreme Court cases, including: Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala and A. K. Gopalan v. State of Madras.
Statement B is incorrect: The largest Constitution Bench in the history of the Supreme Court of India was the 13-judge bench in the Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala case(1973).
Statement C is correct: According to Article 71 of the Constitution, all doubts and disputes arising out of or in connection with the election of a President or Vice-President shall be inquired into and decided by the Supreme Court.
Q.Regarding the removal of a judge of the Supreme Court or a High Court in India, which of the following statements is correct?
a) The resolution for removal must be passed by a simple majority of the total membership of each House of Parliament.
b) The President can issue the removal order based on a recommendation from the Chief Justice of India after an internal inquiry.
c) An address passed by each House of Parliament, supported by a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting, is required.
d) The grounds for removal are ‘violation of the Constitution’ or ‘gross misconduct’, as determined by the Supreme Court collegium.
Answer: (c)
Explanation:
Article 124(4) of the Indian Constitution specifies the procedure for the removal of a Supreme Court judge, which also applies to High Court judges (Article 217). A judge can be removed by an order of the President only after an address by Parliament has been presented to him in the same session for such removal. This address must be supported by a special majority in each House of Parliament, meaning a majority of the total membership of that House AND a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting. The grounds for removal are ‘proved misbehaviour’ or ‘incapacity’. The Judges Inquiry Act, 1968, regulates the procedure for the investigation and presentation of an address for the removal of a judge.
Q.Consider the following statements regarding the tenure and conditions of service for various constitutional functionaries in India:
- The Comptroller and Auditor General of India holds office for a term of six years or until he attains the age of 65 years, whichever is earlier.
- The Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners hold office for a fixed term of six years or until they attain the age of 65 years, whichever is earlier, and all can be removed only through a process similar to the removal of a Supreme Court Judge.
- The Attorney General of India holds office during the pleasure of the President and his remuneration is fixed by the Parliament.
- A Governor can be removed from office by the President on the grounds of proven misbehavior or incapacity, following an impeachment process by the State Legislature.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
a) Only one
b) Only two
c) Only three
d) None
Answer: (a)
Explanation:
Statement 1 is correct: The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India is appointed for a term of six years or until he attains the age of 65 years, whichever is earlier. This is provided by the CAG’s (Duties, Powers and Conditions of Service) Act, 1971, which is enacted under Article 148(3) of the Constitution.
Statement 2 is incorrect: While the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and other Election Commissioners (ECs) do hold office for a fixed term of six years or until they attain the age of 65 years, whichever is earlier, the removal process is different for the CEC and ECs. The Chief Election Commissioner can be removed from office in the same manner and on the same grounds as a Judge of the Supreme Court. However, other Election Commissioners cannot be removed from office except on the recommendation of the Chief Election Commissioner. The statement incorrectly claims that “all can be removed only through a process similar to the removal of a Supreme Court Judge.”
Statement 3 is incorrect: The Attorney General of India (AG) holds office during the pleasure of the President, as stipulated in Article 76(4) of the Constitution. However, his remuneration is determined by the President, not by the Parliament. Article 76(4) states that the Attorney General shall receive such remuneration as the President may determine.
Statement 4 is incorrect: A Governor holds office during the pleasure of the President (Article 156(1)). There are no specific grounds mentioned in the Constitution for the removal of a Governor, nor is there an impeachment process by the State Legislature for their removal. The President can remove a Governor at any time without assigning any reason or following any specific procedure like impeachment.
FAQs
Q1. Which Article deals with the composition of the Supreme Court?
Ans: Article 124 of the Constitution.
Q2. What is the current proposed strength of the Supreme Court?
Ans: 38 judges including the Chief Justice of India.
Q3. Why is the number of judges being increased?
Ans: To reduce pendency and improve judicial efficiency.
Q4. Who recommends names for Supreme Court appointments?
Ans: The Supreme Court Collegium recommends names.
Q5. Why is judicial pendency a major issue?
Ans: It delays justice delivery and increases burden on litigants and courts.
