Crest Learning UPSC

➡️Undertrials in India Over 70% of India’s prisoners are undertrials, showing a serious breakdown in access to justice. This directly violates the Right to Speedy Trial under Article 21. 1. KEY FACTS • 70.1% of prisoners = undertrials (NCRB). • Only 7.91% used free legal aid (NALSA/NALSAR study). • 67.6% from SC/ST/OBC communities. • 79.8% from the unorganised sector → can’t afford bail. • 58% have some disability (economic, mental, social). • 41.3% had no lawyer, 51% lacked bail documents. • Some spent more time in jail than the maximum punishment. (These are the only numbers UPSC will ever ask. Nothing else.) 2. WHY UNDERTRIAL NUMBERS ARE SO HIGH ⭐ A. Weak Legal Aid System • Most undertrials don’t know legal aid is free. • Bail applications filed mechanically without documents/effort. ⭐ B. Poverty • Cannot pay surety or lawyer fees. • Lack of ID/address proof → bail gets rejected. ⭐ C. Very Slow Judicial Process • 5 crore+ pending cases → delay in trials. • Frequent adjournments + shortage of judges. ⭐ D. Police & Prison Issues • Investigations slow → charge sheets delayed. • Prisons lack staff → case follow-up poor. ⭐ E. Social Vulnerability • Women & mentally ill undertrials remain longer due to no family support. 3. CONSTITUTIONAL & LEGAL POINTS • Article 21 → speedy trial = fundamental right. • Article 22 → right to legal representation. • Article 39A → free legal aid for poor. • CrPC 436A → release if half the maximum sentence served. 4. WAY FORWARD 1. Fix Bail System • Use personal bond bail (no money needed) for poor undertrials. • Implement SC Satender Kumar Antil guidelines for rational bail. 2. Implement Section 436A Properly • Monthly review → release anyone who has completed half the maximum sentence in jail. 3. Strengthen Legal Aid • Paralegal volunteers in every police station + every court. • Explain bail paperwork to undertrials immediately after arrest. 4. Digitise Case Tracking • Automatic alerts when an undertrial is in jail for too long. • Digital monitoring of lawyer performance. 5. Fast-Track Minor Offence Cases • Special courts for offences < 3 years punishment. 6. Fill Vacancies • Quick recruitment in lower judiciary, prosecution & police. 7. Mental Health + Women Support • Dedicated legal & psychological support teams. CONCLUSION India’s undertrial crisis reflects structural injustice, not criminality. Ensuring fair bail, effective legal aid, and faster trials is essential for a justice system that upholds constitutional morality.

➡️Marathwada Heavy Rains 1. Location & Region • Marathwada – drought-prone region of Maharashtra. • Comprises 8 districts → Aurangabad, Jalna, Beed, Osmanabad, Latur, Parbhani, Hingoli, Nanded. 2. Key Data from 2025 Flood Event • 108 deaths due to heavy rains. • Beed district received: • >130% of normal monsoon rainfall this season. • 54 lakh farmers affected (entire Marathwada region). 3. Rivers in News • Manjra River – tributary of Godavari; severe flooding. • Bohbati & Kathkal Rivers – confluence flooded fields. • Godavari – India’s 2nd-longest river (important static). 4. Why This Flood Was Unusual? • Marathwada is chronically drought-prone, known for: • Low rainfall • High variability • Frequent droughts • First time in recorded history → region saw dense, multi-day heavy rainfall causing floods instead of drought. 5. Reasons for Excess Rainfall • Climate change signature: • Concentrated, intense rainfall events • Shift from long dry spells → sudden cloudbursts • Depression movement over central India (IMD factor). 6. Agriculture Impact • Soybean, cotton, and other Kharif crops completely washed away. • Soil erosion severe → top soil lost, long-term productivity decline. • Winter sowing (rabi) delayed due to waterlogging. • Farmers face: • Crop loss • Debt burden • Land degradation • Lack of compensation 7. Government Measures Mentioned • Compensation promised, but delayed. • Loan waiver proposed by 9-member committee. • Demand for complete loan waiver by marginal farmers. 8. Social Impact • 5+ lakh people displaced (estimated). • Many reported: • Loss of cattle • Loss of homes • Increased debt • Psychological trauma (stress, sleepless nights). Important Rivers • Manjra → tributary of Godavari • Godavari → 2nd longest river in India • Bohbati & Kathkal → local rivers in Beed • Marathwada → rain shadow region of Western Ghats

TFFF is a new global forest-finance mechanism that rewards tropical nations for protecting forests, linking climate action with sustainable international financing. A. Why TFFF Matters 1. Forests absorb 25% of global CO₂ (IPCC). 2. Tropical forests face 10 million ha annual loss (FAO 2023). 3. Traditional REDD+ has inconsistent financing → TFFF ensures predictable, performance-based funds. 4. Aligns with global 1.5°C pathway under the Paris Agreement. B. Key Features of TFFF 1. Budget-neutral model • Investor capital → Tropical Forest Investment Fund (TFIF). • Returns on investments repay investors fully. 2. Incentive-based conservation • Countries earn $4 per hectare/year for avoided deforestation. 3. Transparent Monitoring • Uses satellite + remote sensing verification. 4. Supports NDC Ambition • Helps developing countries adopt higher climate commitments. C. India’s Position 1. India joins as an Observer, not a full member. 2. Helps states like Mizoram (84% forest cover) and Arunachal (79%) access forest finance. 3. Supports India’s goals: • 36% reduction in emission intensity (2005–2020) • 2.29 billion tonnes CO₂ additional carbon stock (2005–2021) • Target: 2.5–3 billion tonnes carbon sink by 2030 (Paris NDC). 4. Strengthens India’s Global South leadership in climate diplomacy. D. Concerns 1. Sovereignty concerns over external forest monitoring. 2. Inequitable rewards—high-deforesting nations may earn more. 3. Poor monitoring in dense/cloudy regions. 4. Greenwashing risk by private investors. Way Forward 1. Strengthen Monitoring Systems • Integrate ISRO satellites with global systems for transparent forest-cover verification. 2. Ensure Community Benefit-Sharing • Channel a fixed share of funds to forest-dwelling communities, especially under FRA 2006. 3. Combine TFFF with Domestic Schemes • Synergise with CAMPA, Green Credit Programme, and State Forest Action Plans. 4. Negotiate Equity Mechanisms • Push for a global formula that rewards low-deforestation, high-conservation states like the Northeast. 5. Develop a National TFFF Framework • Create clear rules for measuring carbon sequestration, benefit distribution, and accountability. 6. Corporate Accountability Safeguards • Prevent greenwashing by ensuring third-party auditing of investor claims. 7. Climate-Resilient Local Policies • Encourage agroforestry, natural forest regeneration, and climate-resilient landscape planning. Conclusion TFFF offers a promising path for fair, predictable climate finance. With transparency and equitable local participation, it can become a transformative model for global forest conservation.

➡️KUKI–ZO DEMAND FOR UNION TERRITORY 1. First understand the background • Manipur has two major areas: (a) Valley → Meitei (b) Hills → Kuki–Zo + Naga tribes • In May 2023, very big violence happened between Meitei & Kuki-Zo. • Kuki-Zo people felt: “We cannot live safely with Meiteis anymore.” So they demanded: 👉Make our area a separate Union Territory (UT). 2. What exactly is the demand? (Very Kuki–Zo groups told the Home Ministry: “Make Kuki-Zo inhabited hill districts a Union Territory with Legislature.” Meaning: • Separate administration • Own elected Assembly • Fully outside Manipur Govt control 3. Why did they ask for UT? (a) Safety issue after violence Kuki-Zo say they cannot enter Imphal valley safely since May 2023 violence. (b) Basic services blocked Land papers, certificates, govt offices → all in Imphal, which is unsafe for them. (c) Historical argument They say Kuki-Zo hills were never ruled directly by Manipur kings before 1947. (d) Protection of tribal land They want strong protection for village chiefs, forest rights, customary land. 4. What did the Central Government say? The Home Ministry said NO. Reason in just ONE sentence: “We cannot divide Manipur. Solution must be within the Constitution.” 5. Why Govt rejected the UT demand? (1) Breaking Manipur = more ethnic tension Creating a UT may lead to Meitei protests, more instability. (2) Constitutionally difficult Creating UT requires • Article 3 procedure • President’s recommendation • Parliamentary approval This is a big political decision. (3) Security concerns Hill areas border Myanmar, strategic for India’s security. (4) SoO Peace Agreement (2024) says no division Latest SoO pact clearly says: ➡️ Solution ONLY within Constitution ➡️ Manipur’s territorial integrity must remain 6. What is SoO (Suspension of Operations)? • A peace pact between ✔ Government of India ✔ Manipur state ✔ Kuki-Zo insurgent groups • Signed in 2008, renewed every year till 2024 • After 2023 violence, many disagreements happened.

9 nov….👇

Judeira Village • A West Bank village near Jerusalem. • Located in Area C (full Israeli military + administrative control). 3. Molotov Cocktail • A homemade firebomb (glass bottle + flammable liquid). • Classified as an incendiary weapon.

1. What is Fujian? • China’s third aircraft carrier. • First domestically designed & built (100% indigenous). • Launched after extensive sea trials; commissioned in 2025. 2. Key Features • Uses EMALS (Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System) — same technology used by U.S. Ford-class carriers. • Replaces traditional steam catapult. • Allows: • Higher launch speed • Wider range of aircraft • Less wear on aircraft frames • More precise launch control 3. Comparison with U.S. Carriers • U.S. has 11 aircraft carriers (all nuclear-powered). • China has 3 (all conventionally powered). • Fujian is the most advanced Chinese carrier. 4. First & Second Island Chains • First Island Chain: Japan → Taiwan → Philippines → Borneo. • Second Island Chain: Japan → Guam → Micronesia. • China seeks dominance up to the Second Island Chain. 5. Other Chinese carriers • Liaoning – first carrier (ex-Soviet). • Shandong – second; Chinese-built using Soviet ski-jump design.

8 nov…..👇

1. What are the Abraham Accords? • A U.S.-brokered agreement (2020) to normalise relations with Israel. • Signatory countries (original): UAE, Bahrain, Sudan, Morocco. • Aim: Diplomatic ties, economic cooperation, security collaboration. 2. Kazakhstan in News • Kazakhstan to announce joining the Abraham Accords. • Already maintains informal ties with Israel. 3. Geography • Kazakhstan: • Borders Russia, China, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan. • Access to Caspian Sea (landlocked region). 4. Significance of the Accords • Promoted by U.S. under Trump administration. • Objective: stabilize Middle East via Arab–Israel rapprochement.

First female Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. • Served two major terms as Speaker: 2. U.S. House of Representatives • Lower house of the U.S. Congress (Upper house = Senate). • Speaker = Head of the House + 2nd in presidential line of succession after Vice President. 3. Speaker’s Role • Presides over House sessions. • Influences legislative agenda. • Equivalent comparison: Similar to India’s Lok Sabha Speaker, but politically more partisan. • Compared to India: • India’s Speaker = Constitutional neutrality • U.S. Speaker = Partisan + Party leader

1. Typhoon Kalmaegi • Occurred in Western Pacific. 2. Why typhoons hit the Philippines frequently? • Lies on the Pacific Ring of Fire + Warm Western Pacific Ocean. • Located in the intertropical convergence zone (ITCZ). • Warm SSTs (≥ 26°C) → ideal for cyclogenesis. 3. Naming of Typhoons (Very Important Static) • Named by Typhoon Committee (ESCAP + WMO). • Countries in Asia-Pacific submit names. • “Kalmaegi” – name contributed by North Korea (means “seagull”). 4. Regional Geography • Philippines → archipelago between Philippine Sea (East) and South China Sea (West).

CAG has created two specialised cadres—CRA and CEA—to centralise and professionalise the audit of Union finances, strengthening constitutional accountability under Articles 148–151. A. Why Was This Reform Needed? 1. Fragmentation in Audit Structure • Central receipts & expenditure currently audited by scattered State audit offices, causing non-uniform quality. 2. Rising Complexity of Public Finance • GST, defence procurement, telecom spectrum require specialised skills. • CAG Performance Audit (2021–23) flagged lack of technical capacity. 3. Revenue Efficiency Concerns • India’s tax-to-GDP ratio is 11.7% vs OECD average 34%. • Specialised revenue audit improves leakage detection. 4. ARC & Global Best Practices • 2nd ARC recommended professionalisation of public audit. • INTOSAI emphasises specialised audit streams. B. Key Features of the Two Cadres 1. Central Revenue Audit (CRA) Cadre • Focus: tax + non-tax revenues. • Audit of GST (₹20.18 lakh crore collection in FY 2023–24). • Example: CAG’s past telecom audits (2G, AGR) saved massive public revenue. • Insight: Prevents systemic leakages in revenue mobilisation. 2. Central Expenditure Audit (CEA) Cadre • Focus: scheme expenditure, defence, infra, social sectors. • MGNREGA audit exposed ghost beneficiaries → saved crores. • Insight: Enables shift from “paper compliance” to outcome auditing. C. Benefits of Centralisation 1. Uniform Audit Standards • Removes discrepancies across states. • Aligns with INTOSAI guidelines. 2. Higher Professional Expertise • Domain-focused cadres = better quality reports. • Supports NITI Aayog’s Output-Outcome budget framework. 3. Stronger Parliamentary Oversight • PAC & COPU receive sharper, data-rich audit analysis. • Example: PAC used CAG’s coal block allocation report to recommend reforms. 4. Better Manpower Management • 4,000+ officers consolidated → rapid deployment during major audits. D. Challenges 1. Training & Capacity Gaps • Officers need upskilling in digital audit, forensic analysis & GST analytics. 2. Centre–State Coordination Issues • States may view this as reduction of their audit space. 3. Administrative Resistance • Large cadre restructuring historically faces internal friction. WAY FORWARD 1. National Audit Training Academy • Based on UK National Audit Office (NAO) model. 2. Performance & Outcome Audit Expansion • Supported by 2nd ARC, OECD Public Governance Review. 3. Integrated Digital Audit Platform • Real-time tracking of revenue & expenditure using AI. 4. Strengthen Institutional Autonomy • Ensure cadre centralisation does not dilute CAG’s independence. 4️⃣ CONCLUSION The CRA and CEA cadres represent a shift toward specialised, uniform and higher-quality auditing. They strengthen fiscal transparency and align India with global audit best practices. #mains

➡️CAG • Constitutional authority under Articles 148–151. • Appointed by President; tenure: 6 years or 65 years (whichever earlier). • Removal same as a Supreme Court judge. • Reports submitted to President/Governor, then to Parliament/State Legislature. #prelims

1. What is the Nomination Process? (Super Simple) It is the official step by which a person becomes a candidate in an election 2. Who checks the nomination? 👉 Returning Officer (RO) Appointed by the Election Commission of India (ECI). ❗ RO has the power to: • Accept nomination • Reject nomination • Scrutinise documents 3. Legal Basis ✔ Representation of the People Act, 1951 • Section 33 → Documents candidate must submit • Section 36(2) → RO can reject nomination • Section 125A → False affidavit = criminal offence ✔ Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 • Forms and procedural steps 4. Why can an RO reject a nomination? Under Section 36(2), for: 1. Missing affidavit 2. Missing signature 3. Wrong form 4. Wrong or no proposer (for RS/President) 5. Candidate not qualified (age, etc.) 6. “Defects of substantial character” 5. Supreme Court Judgments ✔ 1. Resurgence India vs ECI (2013) • False details → NOT automatic rejection • Only missing details → rejection ✔ 2. PUCL Case (2003) • Mandatory affidavit on assets, liabilities, criminal cases 6. Data • In 2019 Lok Sabha elections → 2,300+ nominations rejected • Most rejected due to clerical mistakes (ECI report) A nomination was rejected in 2024 because the candidate’s affidavit had one blank column → even though candidate was eligible. #prelims

India’s election nomination process is essential to free and fair elections. Yet, excessive focus on paperwork and arbitrary rejections have made it vulnerable to procedural injustice. 2. WHAT IS THE MAIN PROBLEM? ❗ Problem 1: Too much power with one officer (RO) One RO can reject a nomination → and the candidate cannot contest. 📌 Example: Dadra & Nagar Haveli case – woman’s father’s nomination rejected without hearing. ❗ Problem 2: Minor mistakes → rejection Even small clerical errors result in disqualification. 📌 Example: In Haryana municipal elections, nomination rejected because candidate wrote date in wrong format. ❗ Problem 3: No chance to fix mistakes Candidate cannot correct entries or replace documents. ❗ Problem 4: Bureaucratic complexity Too many forms → Form 2A/2B/2C, affidavit, deposit, party letter. ❗ Problem 5: Voters lose choice If a strong candidate’s nomination is rejected → voters lose democratic right. 3. WHY THIS IS A DEMOCRATIC PROBLEM? • Violates right to contest (part of Article 19, Article 326 principles) • Violates voter choice • Violates free and fair elections (basic structure – SC in Indira Gandhi case) • Opens doors to political misuse 4. SUPREME COURT CLARITY SC says: • Only substantial defects → rejection • Technical errors → should be allowed to correct • False affidavit → punish, but NOT reject automatically This means ROs rejecting for small errors = against SC guidelines. 5. INTERNATIONAL MODELS ✔ UK Candidates get time to correct mistakes. ✔ Germany RO must INFORM candidate about missing documents. ✔ USA Multiple appeal levels before rejection. 📌 “India is one of the few democracies where one officer’s unchecked discretion can eliminate a candidate.” 6. WHAT REFORMS ARE NEEDED? ✔ 1. Digital Nomination System • Auto-fill forms • Auto-check errors • Upload documents online • Reduce human mistakes 📌 Example: Similar to Income Tax portal structure. ✔ 2. 24-hour Correction Window Candidate can fix mistakes and re-submit. ✔ 3. List of ‘Substantial Defects’ ECI should clearly define what is a major/minor defect. ✔ 4. Mandatory Hearing Before Rejection Candidate must be told: • What is wrong • How to respond • Be given a chance to correct ✔ 5. Appeal Against RO Decision Quick appeal to District Election Officer within 24 hours. ✔ 6. Training & Accountability of ROs ROs must be trained in election law.

• EAT–Lancet Commission Report (2024) → Focus on healthy, sustainable, and just food systems. 2. Major Findings • Food systems drive 5 of 6 breached planetary boundaries: 1. Climate change 2. Biodiversity loss 3. Nitrogen overuse 4. Phosphorus overuse 5. Freshwater depletion • Food sector = 30% of global GHG emissions. 3. India-Specific Facts • India has a cereal-heavy diet (rice + wheat). • To meet 2050 diet benchmarks → consumption of pulses, fruits, vegetables, nuts must increase. • Many of these items are import dependent → price shocks. 4. Environmental Facts • Global nitrogen surplus = 2 times the safe limit. • Animal-based foods → main agricultural methane source. • Grain crops → dominate nitrogen, phosphorus & water use.

➡️UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME (UBI) Universal Basic Income (UBI) is a reform proposal advocating a regular, unconditional, universal cash transfer. In the context of inequality, technological disruption, and welfare leakages, UBI is viewed as a structural safety net 📌 Example: Finland’s 2017–18 UBI trial paid €560/month to randomly selected unemployed people without conditions. III. WHY INDIA IS DISCUSSING UBI? 1. Rising Inequality • Top 1% holds 40% of India’s wealth (Oxfam). • GDP growth hasn’t benefited all equally. 2. Automation replacing jobs • By 2030, 28–30 million Indian jobs are at risk from automation (McKinsey). 📌 Example: Clothing factories in Bengaluru replacing sewing lines with automated sewing robots. 3. Gig economy insecurity • 7.7 million gig workers → lack social security. 📌 Example: Ola/Uber drivers face sudden income loss with no safety net. 4. Welfare system complexity & exclusion • Over 1,000+ welfare schemes → overlapping, leakages. 📌 Example: Aadhaar-mismatch exclusion in PDS in Jharkhand (2017 cases). IV. ARGUMENTS IN FAVOUR OF UBI ✔ 1. Reduces poverty directly 📌 Example: The Namibia UBI pilot reduced food insecurity & child malnutrition significantly. ✔ 2. Boosts demand during economic slowdown 📌 Example: U.S. stimulus cheques during COVID increased consumption immediately. ✔ 3. Supports informal workers 📌 Example: Construction labourers during COVID had zero income; UBI would act as buffer. ✔ 4. Removes leakages DBT success shows direct money reduces corruption. 📌 Example: LPG subsidy diversion fell drastically after DBT introduction. ✔ 5. Improves women’s agency 📌 Example: Madhya Pradesh SEWA pilot (2011–13) – women gained financial independence, reduced domestic stress. ✔ 6. Helps during automation era 📌 Example: Amazon warehouses in Hyderabad use automated robots → reducing manual jobs. V. ARGUMENTS AGAINST UBI ✘ 1. High Fiscal Cost Would cost 8–10% of GDP. 📌 Example: Economic Survey 2016–17 → UBI for all Indians = ₹4.9 lakh crore annually. ✘ 2. May reduce workforce participation 📌 Example: In some U.S. trials, a small section of recipients reduced working hours. ✘ 3. Possibility of inflation Large cash injection → price hike. 📌 Example: Zimbabwe’s high inflation after unconditional cash injections. ✘ 4. May dilute targeted schemes UBI may lead to cutting schemes like PDS, MGNREGA. 📌 Example: Some States suggested replacing multiple schemes with a single cash transfer → risk for the very poor. VI. PILOT UBI STUDIES 1. India – SEWA Pilot (Madhya Pradesh, 2011–13) • Better nutrition • Higher school attendance • Women empowerment • Reduced debt dependency 2. Finland (2017–18) • Improved mental well-being • Higher employment search confidence 3. Iran (2011) • Cash transfer to every citizen after fuel subsidy cut • Increased consumption, reduced poverty 4. Kenya (ongoing GiveDirectly experiment) • Improved mental health • Higher savings • Better food security VII. ALTERNATIVES / SUPPLEMENTS ✔ Negative Income Tax (NIT) Govt tops-up income for those earning below threshold. 📌 Example: Milton Friedman’s proposal; experimented in U.S. (1960s). ✔ Conditional Cash Transfers (CCTs) Cash given if certain behaviour is met. 📌 Example: Brazil’s Bolsa Família → school attendance & vaccination conditions. ✔ JAM + DBT strengthening 📌 Example: ₹2 lakh crore annually saved from DBT reduction of leakage.

Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021 Allows ONLY altruistic surrogacy (no money, no commercial surrogacy). 2. Who Can Use Surrogacy Under the Act? A married Indian couple is eligible ONLY IF: ✔ They are medically proven infertile AND ✔ They have no surviving child → biological → adopted → born by surrogacy Exceptions Allowed even if there is a surviving child ONLY IF the child is: • mentally challenged, OR • physically challenged, OR • has a life-threatening disorder These three are the only exceptions in the Act. 3. What Is “Secondary Infertility”? • Couple has one child already • But cannot conceive again Examples: PCOS, endometriosis, lifestyle issues, age, etc. IMPORTANT The Act does NOT clearly talk about secondary infertility. This is why the matter reached Supreme Court. 4. What Happened in the Supreme Court? A couple with secondary infertility wants surrogacy for their second child. They argued: • The Act should allow it because they are infertile now. • Restricting them violates reproductive autonomy (Article 21). Government argued: • Surrogacy is NOT a fundamental right. • It involves another woman’s body, so restrictions are allowed. • Law intentionally allows surrogacy only for childless couples to prevent misuse. SC said: • It will examine whether banning secondary-infertile couples is reasonable or violates reproductive choice. 5. Why Supreme Court Is Reconsidering? Supreme Court recently allowed: • Age relaxation for couples with frozen embryos (those who froze embryos before law came). This shows the Court is willing to expand the interpretation of the Act in genuine cases. So now Court is examining: • Whether excluding secondary-infertile couples is logical OR • Whether the law should apply broadly to all infertile couples, not only childless couples. 6. Why Was the Act Made Restrictive? To prevent: ✔ Commercial surrogacy ✔ Exploitation of poor women ✔ Surrogacy becoming a business (surrogacy tourism) 7. Why the Debate Matters? Because: • India doesn’t restrict number of children a couple can have. • Many States give incentives for a 2-child policy, but no national restriction exists. • So banning surrogacy for second child seems inconsistent. This raises a constitutional question: Does this law restrict personal reproductive choice?

⭐ Digital Census 2027 – Two Mobile Apps + Self-Enumeration Portal 🔹 1. Who launched the apps? ✔ Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India Under Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) 🔹 2. Purpose ✔ Preparation for India’s first fully Digital Census in 2027 ✔ Testing digital tools in Pre-Test 2023–2025 🔹 3. TWO NEW CENSUS APPS (A) Digital Layout Map (DLM) App Used by Enumerators & Supervisors ✔ Creates Digital Census Blocks ✔ Records GPS coordinates (latitude & longitude) ✔ Maps: • Localities • Roads/streets • Building numbers • House type (pucca/kutcha) (B) Census — House-List App Used for House Listing & Housing Operations (HLO) ✔ Asks 30 questions on housing amenities ✔ Data on: • Water • Electricity • Sanitation • Housing material • Digital access ✔ Works on Android & iOS ✔ Only downloadable by authorised personnel 🔹 4. Self-Enumeration Test Portal Website: https://test.census.gov.in/ ✔ Open 1–7 November (test window) ✔ Citizens in pre-test areas can enter details online ✔ Enumerators verify later 🔹 5. Census Pre-Test Period: 10–30 November Purpose: ✔ Test digital workflow before Census 2027 ✔ Check app usage, server capacity, training efficiency Participants: ✔ BDOs, revenue officials, schoolteachers (trained enumerators) 🔹 6. Key Prelims Facts About Census ✔ India’s Census conducted under Census Act, 1948 ✔ Census happens every 10 years ✔ Census 2021 delayed → Now 2027 (Digital) ✔ India conducts House Listing & Housing Operations (HLO) first, then Population Enumeration ✔ Census is the largest administrative exercise in the world

✔ Right to Vote = Statutory Right (Meaning → Created by a law, NOT by the Constitution) Given by: Section 62, Representation of the People Act, 1951 ✔ Freedom of Voting = Fundamental Right (Meaning → Protected by the Constitution) Comes under: Article 19(1)(a) – Freedom of speech & expression Meaning: Choosing whom to vote for (or NOTA) = expression of opinion. ⭐ 2. What is the Centre arguing? Centre told the Supreme Court: 🌟 “Right to vote” ≠ “Freedom of voting” Because: ✔ Right to vote = A legal right → You get it only if there is an election → Only when > number of candidates than seats → Comes from RPA 1951 ✔ Freedom to vote = A fundamental expression → Choosing candidate → Choosing NOTA → Exercising preference → Comes from Article 19(1)(a) So, fundamental right arises only at the polling stage, not before. ⭐ 3. Important Case Law ✔ PUCL vs Union of India (2003) Supreme Court held: • Right to vote = statutory • But voting for someone = expression → Article 19(1)(a) • Casting a vote = expression of political preference This case was cited in the affidavit. ⭐ 4. Issue before the Supreme Court A petition said: • Section 53(2) of RPA 1951 + Rule 11 of Conduct of Elections Rules causes uncontested elections. • In uncontested elections, candidate is declared elected without polling. • Therefore voters lose chance to express dissatisfaction through NOTA. Petitioners argued: • This violates freedom of voting (Article 19(1)(a)). Centre replied: • NOTA is only possible when polling happens. • When no polling → “freedom of voting” does not arise. ⭐ 5. What is an uncontested election? Under Section 53(2) of RPA 1951: When: • Number of candidates = number of seats → Returning Officer declares them elected without voting. No election is held. ⭐ 6. Why NOTA is not given in uncontested elections? Because NOTA = “None of the above” option available inside polling booth. If there is NO polling → NOTA cannot be exercised. 7. The Centre’s main statement (VERY IMPORTANT) ✔ “Freedom of voting is an incidence of a poll.” Meaning → Freedom of voting (choice, expression, NOTA) exists only when a poll takes place. No poll → no fundamental right invoked.