Editorials/Opinions Analysis For UPSC 20 March 2023
Contents
- 7 States To Get Textile Parks
- The Rameshwar Prasad Case
7 States To Get Textile Parks
Context
A year and a half after the PM Mega Integrated Textile Regions and Apparel (PM MITRA) scheme was unveiled, the Centre has chosen locations in Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, and Uttar Pradesh to establish new textile parks.
Relevance
GS Paper-2: Welfare schemes for vulnerable sections of the population by the Centre and States and the performance of these schemes.
Mains Question
The Indian textile industry is anticipated to change thanks to the PM MITRA scheme. Examine how the programme might affect the textile industry and how it contributes to the expansion of the Indian economy as a whole. (150 words).
PM Mitra
- The parks would “provide cutting-edge infrastructure for the textiles sector, attract investment of crores, and create lakhs of jobs,” according to PM MITRA.
- The parks will be built by 2026–2027, according to the plan, which was announced in October 2021.
- The project’s overall budget is 4,445 crores, despite a 200 crore initial allocation in the 2023–24 Budget.
- In accordance with the 5F (Farm to Fibre to Factory to Fashion to Foreign) vision, PM MITRA mega textile parks will strengthen the textile industry.
- The programme aims to build a world-class industrial infrastructure that will draw cutting-edge technology and encourage FDI and domestic investment in the sector. It would be a great example of the government’s “Make in India” and “Make for the World” policy.
- The plan would also simplify environmental clearances.
- The parks will serve as centres of opportunity to create an integrated textiles value chain, right from spinning, weaving, processing, dyeing and printing to garment manufacturing, all at a single location. The Center anticipates investing nearly 70,000 crores in these parks and creating jobs for about 20 lakh people.
Cluster-Based Approach
- The textile industry in the nation has not been organised. The competitiveness of the nation’s textile industry was impacted by the increased wastage and logistical costs. This cluster-based strategy will address a number of industry issues.
- Center-State cooperation:
- The proposed top-notch industrial infrastructure would draw cutting-edge technology and increase both local and foreign direct investment in the industry.
- The PM MITRA parks’ projects will be carried out under the supervision of the Textiles Ministry.
- For each park, an SPV [Special Purpose Vehicle] owned by the federal and state governments will be established to supervise project execution.
- The park SPV will receive financial assistance from the Ministry of Textiles in the form of Development Capital Support up to 500 crores per park.
- To encourage prompt implementation, Competitive Incentive Support (CIS) up to 300 crores per park will be given to the units in PM MITRA Park.
- Convergence with other Government of India schemes shall also be facilitated to provide Master Developer and investor units with additional incentives.
- State governments have offered to give the parks at least 1,000 acres of land for free in exchange for helping to provide all utilities, including power and water.
- Excellent Industry Infrastructure and Plug-and-Play Facilities:
- The parks will provide the industry with top-notch infrastructure, plug-and-play amenities, and training and research facilities.
- Various factors to simplify approval processes will be taken into consideration, and the use of renewable energy will be strongly promoted in these parks.
- The PM MITRA parks represent a distinctive model where the Central and State Governments will collaborate to boost investment, encourage innovation, create job opportunities, and eventually make India a global hub for textile production and exports.
Conclusion
- The PM MITRA scheme’s selection of seven states to launch new textile parks is a significant step towards advancing the Indian textile industry and generating jobs.
- The programme aims to develop a world-class industrial infrastructure, draw in investment, and establish India as a major hub for the production and export of textiles.
- The creation of the parks is anticipated to address a number of issues in the industry, including increased wastage and logistical costs, increasing India’s textile sector’s competitiveness.
- The programme will aid in advancing the Indian economy by bolstering the textile industry, which is a significant contributor to the nation’s GDP.
The Rameshwar Prasad Case
Context
- The Supreme Court Bench hearing the Shiv Sena political crisis cases questioned whether the governor could call for a floor test in the event of internal party unrest during an oral observation.
- In response to a query posed by the Supreme Court Bench during the hearing of cases pertaining to the Shiv Sena political crisis, the Solicitor General cited a 2005 Supreme Court decision in Rameshwar Prasad v. Union of India.
Relevance
GS Paper -2: Indian Constitution – historical underpinnings, evolution, features, amendments, significant provisions and basic structure
Mains Question
Describe the Governor’s role and authority in imposing President’s rule in a state under Article 356 of the Indian Constitution. How can the actions of the Governor be challenged in court? (250 words)
Background of the Case
- In February 2005, Bihar’s Legislative Assembly was in a deadlock because neither party nor alliance was able to secure the necessary majority of seats in the House.
- The governor held numerous meetings with political parties and came to the conclusion that due to indecision, neither a party nor an alliance could win a majority.
- In March 2005, the Governor recommended to the President that President’s Rule be imposed in Bihar in accordance with Article 365 and that the Assembly be kept in “suspended animation,” which meant that it could not conduct any business but would not be dissolved.
- Two notifications were released the following day, one imposing President’s Rule on Bihar and the other giving the Governor the President’s authority with the President’s final say and supervision.
- Reports the Governor has sent to the president
- In order to prevent the distortion of democracy, the first report warned of “serious attempts to cobble a majority” in Bihar’s hung Legislative Assembly and recommended holding new elections. The second report, which was sent less than a month later, advised dissolving the current Assembly and holding new elections.
- The reports were swiftly sent to the President for his approval, which is required in order to dissolve an Assembly and hold new elections.
- Political parties organised widespread protests and strikes in the state after the Bihar Assembly was dissolved.
Rameshwar Prasad versus the Union of India Case
- Rameshwar Prasad and three other former members of the House petitioned the Supreme Court to declare the Presidential Proclamation unconstitutional.
- The Election Commission of India announced new elections in Bihar while the petitions were still pending before the Supreme Court. o They requested that the dissolution of the Assembly be deemed “unconstitutional,” and a few other petitions were also filed in the same matter.
- This led to a difficult situation because the Supreme Court hadn’t made a decision yet and the election result might complicate things further.
The Supreme Court Issues a Decision
- The President’s Proclamation dissolving the Bihar Assembly was declared unconstitutional by a Constitution Bench under the direction of the then-Chief Justice of India.
- However, the court decided against reinstating the Assembly because of the upcoming elections.
- The Supreme Court ruled that the Governor should not get involved in disputes over Assembly members’ eligibility.
- The Supreme Court declared that it couldn’t stand by and watch the Constitution be subverted, and that the Union Council of Ministers should have verified the facts before accepting the Governor’s report as a gosp. The SC ruled that Articles 192(2) and 103(2) allow the Governor and Members of Parliament to obtain the opinion of the Election Commission and act in accordance with such opinion in the constitutional scheme of things.
Conclusion
- The SC recently expressed concern over the Maharashtra Governor using his authority to order a floor test that resulted in the resignation of the then-Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray.
- During the proceedings, a five-judge bench led by the Chief Justice of India questioned whether the Governor could intervene by ordering a floor test in the event of internal unrest within a party.
- A Justice on the Bench made the observation that the government in Rameshwar Prasad v. Union of India was never established.
- However, in the current circumstance, the Maharashtra government had been in place for more than three and a half years.
- As a result, the CJI made a distinction between this case and the Rameshwar Prasad ruling.
- “Due to his arbitrary judgement, the Governor cannot reject the establishment of a new government and override the will of the majority. This is a legitimately established government,” he declared.
