Doubt Clearance Thread: UPSC 2021
"When in doubt, observe and ask questions. When certain, observe at length and ask many more questions."
Created this thread as a one stop solution for all members so that all the doubts wherein any conceptual clarification is required can be solved here.
Okay I understand. Thanks!@AzadHindFauzOkay so AG will receive these briefs and only give advice to petitioners about how they can take their case forward?
He may also appear for them if the other litigant is not the government.
I think AG has to take permission if she is defending someone in a criminal case or accepting directorship of a company. And in no case, can she appear or advise against the government. For civil cases, in which government is not the other party, I think government's permission is not needed.AG is not a public servant. He can carry on with his private practice with one rider that in cases concerning government he has to take its permission. Is this right ?
@Usain_bolt@AzadHindFauzBut shouldn't AG, as a lawyer, prepare these legal arguments herself, rather than accept these, presumably from other lawyers?
Bhai these are just procedural aspects of admistration and they happen in every field. This is just one case of judiciary.
You must have seen in newspapers that PM got briefed on XYZ issue by bureaucrats.
I think AG has to take permission if she is defending someone in a criminal case or accepting directorship of a company. And in no case, can she appear or advise against the government. For civil cases, in which government is not the other party, I think government's permission is not needed.AG is not a public servant. He can carry on with his private practice with one rider that in cases concerning government he has to take its permission. Is this right ?
Scroll article says : He has to take permission from Law ministry for defending a private client.
Laxmikant mentions this only.I think AG has to take permission if she is defending someone in a criminal case or accepting directorship of a company. And in no case, can she appear or advise against the government. For civil cases, in which government is not the other party, I think government's permission is not needed.AG is not a public servant. He can carry on with his private practice with one rider that in cases concerning government he has to take its permission. Is this right ?
Scroll article says : He has to take permission from Law ministry for defending a private client.
@sjerngal self regulated😀
You know I can see your name even if you delete the comment, right?? 😂😂
Greater national integration ironically may deepen rather than alleviate stress on the federal system.how?
The simple and straight forward answer to this question is DIVERSITY
But let's try to understand this by comparing USA and Indian freedom struggle.
US freedom struggle was immediately followed by a Civil war on slavery issue. Mainly because their freedom struggle was largely a Political movement fought for economic reasons(" taxation without representation "). They didn't bother about socio-cultural issues of diversity, race and origin. You will be suprised to know that most of their main freedom fighters were absolute beleivers in slavery. George Washington was the largest land owner in the country with most slaves.
Things changed only after Abraham Lincoln. So they tried to create a nation without considering diversity. That is the reason why racism is still a big issue in US. Because of this reason throughout their freedom struggle their states Assembly was stronger than National Assembly. This has manifested in present US constitution also. That is why their states are comparatively stronger than Indian states w.r.t Centre.It is their way of handling diversity.
Now look at India, our approach is completely opposite. Our quest for freedom struggle started from socio religious reforms. Even in Gandhian phase issue of untouchability, dalits representation, women, minorities etc were the most hotly discussed issues. I am not elaborating much on this as you would have already read these things in standard books.
Even if we made a constitution which favours strong centre but after independence we took some major steps that strengthened our federalism(via accomodating diversity).
1. Accomodate linguistic and cultural diversity- States Reorganization Act.
2. Distribution of political power
a) Increased coalition govts after 1967
b) Increased regional parties.
3. Asymmetrical federalism.
Special exemptions to some states like NE.
4. Finance commission allocation.
5. Reservation in public services.
This is our way of handling diversity. One must understand that nations don't accomodate diversity out of their altruism, they do it because they know it is essential for their survival as nation in first place.
So yes excessive national integration puts pressure on federal system because it compermises diversity.
Dionysus,Indian_Human
Are boundaries of Wildlife Sanctuaries fixed? I've read somewhere that boundaries of National Parks are fixed but not that of WS. However, how can WS exist without having fixed boundaries?
No, they are not specifically specified. I live near a local Wildlife Sanctuary and haven't seen any demarcation as such.
ToyotaQualis,
is there any real difference between self sufficiency and self-reliance?
"Going back to "self-sufficiency" that Nehru and Indira Gandhi tried would be a terrible idea
(flopped, India grew at 3.5%) and "self-reliance" is the main idea behind this scheme."
Self-sufficiency is the extreme form of self-reliance. Self reliant is something like "import substitution" where you will export products without needing the imported accessories for them. When you become self-reliant and cut off both import and export through "protectionism", it takes the form of self-sufficient.
Dionysus,
Write your comment…
