Today's Headlines - 02 August 2023
Birth certificate as single document
GS Paper - 2 (Polity)
The Registration of Births and Deaths Act 1969 is likely to be amended for the first time in 54 years of its existence, with the Union Government introducing a Bill in Lok Sabha that allows the use of a birth certificate as a single document for admission in schools and colleges, issuance of driving licence and appointment to a government job.
More about the Bill
The proposed amendments also allow the use of a birth certificate for preparation of voter list, issuance of Aadhaar number and registration of marriage even as critics earlier opposed the government plans citing privacy concerns, infringing states’ rights and claiming that it gives unbridled data about people to the government.
The amendments are needed to keep pace with societal change and technological advancements and to make it more citizen friendly. Consultations were held with state governments, public and other stakeholders.
According to the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Bill, the amendments provides for the use of the birth certificate as a single document to prove the date and place of birth of a person born on or after the date of commencement of the amendments for a variety of things.
The database of births and deaths will be made available to authorities dealing with population register, electoral rolls, Aadhaar number, ration card, passport, driving licence, property registration and other databases notified by the union government.
The Bill also provides for facilitating registration process of adopted, orphan, abandoned, surrendered, surrogate child and child to a single parent or unwed mother, to make it mandatory for all medical institutions to provide a certificate as to the cause of death to the registrar and a copy of the same to the nearest relative.
Special "sub-registrars" can be appointed in the event of disaster or epidemic for speedy registration of deaths and issue of certificates, to collect Aadhaar numbers of parents and informants, if available, in case of birth registration.
The bill will also ensure addressing the grievances of the general public aggrieved by any action or order of the registrar or district registrar and to enhance the penalties provided in the Act.
#upsc #news #headline #birth #certificate #document #polity #goverment #bill #loksabha #schools #colleges #job #amendments #adhaar #number #privacy #electoral #population #ration #passport #driving #disaster #epidemic #mandatory #medical #institutions
Birth certificate as single document
GS Paper - 2 (Polity)
The Registration of Births and Deaths Act 1969 is likely to be amended for the first time in 54 years of its existence, with the Union Government introducing a Bill in Lok Sabha that allows the use of a birth certificate as a single document for admission in schools and colleges, issuance of driving licence and appointment to a government job.
More about the Bill
The proposed amendments also allow the use of a birth certificate for preparation of voter list, issuance of Aadhaar number and registration of marriage even as critics earlier opposed the government plans citing privacy concerns, infringing states’ rights and claiming that it gives unbridled data about people to the government.
The amendments are needed to keep pace with societal change and technological advancements and to make it more citizen friendly. Consultations were held with state governments, public and other stakeholders.
According to the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Bill, the amendments provides for the use of the birth certificate as a single document to prove the date and place of birth of a person born on or after the date of commencement of the amendments for a variety of things.
The database of births and deaths will be made available to authorities dealing with population register, electoral rolls, Aadhaar number, ration card, passport, driving licence, property registration and other databases notified by the union government.
The Bill also provides for facilitating registration process of adopted, orphan, abandoned, surrendered, surrogate child and child to a single parent or unwed mother, to make it mandatory for all medical institutions to provide a certificate as to the cause of death to the registrar and a copy of the same to the nearest relative.
Special "sub-registrars" can be appointed in the event of disaster or epidemic for speedy registration of deaths and issue of certificates, to collect Aadhaar numbers of parents and informants, if available, in case of birth registration.
The bill will also ensure addressing the grievances of the general public aggrieved by any action or order of the registrar or district registrar and to enhance the penalties provided in the Act.
#upsc #news #headline #birth #certificate #document #polity #goverment #bill #loksabha #schools #colleges #job #amendments #adhaar #number #privacy #electoral #population #ration #passport #driving #disaster #epidemic #mandatory #medical #institutions
Today's Headlines - 04 August 2023
Report on ‘sub-categorisation’ of OBCs
GS Paper - 2 (Polity)
The long awaited report of a commission set up to examine the sub-categorisation of Other Backward Classes (OBCs) was submitted to President Droupadi Murmu. The four-member commission headed by Justice G Rohini, a retired Chief Justice of Delhi High Court, was appointed on 2 October 2017, and received as many as 13 extensions to its tenure.
Why was this Commission set up?
The commission was set up in recognition of the perceived distortions in the affirmative action policy, which was seen as leading to a situation in which a few castes cornered the bulk of benefits available under the 27% quota for OBCs, and tasked with suggesting corrective actions.
The report of the commission is widely expected to be politically sensitive and the contents of the report have not been made public as yet.
What is the need for sub-categorisation of OBCs?
OBCs get 27% reservation in central government jobs and admission to educational institutions.
There are more than 2,600 entries in the Central List of OBCs, but over the years, a perception has taken root that only a few affluent communities among them have benefited from the quota.
Therefore, there is an argument that a “sub-categorisation” of OBCs — quotas within the 27% quota — is needed in order to ensure “equitable distribution” of the benefits of reservation.
Even as the Justice Rohini Commission was examining the matter, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in August 2020 intervened in the sub-categorisation debate, ruling that the 2005 decision of another five-judge Bench in ‘E V Chinnaiah vs State of Andhra Pradesh’ must be revisited.
‘Chinnaiah’ had held that no special sub-quota can be introduced within the quota for SCs and STs for the benefit of castes or tribes that were more backward than the others on these lists.
The 2020 verdict of the SC referring ‘Chinnaiah’ to a larger Bench was passed in ‘State of Punjab vs Davinder Singh’ in which the court examined the validity of a 2006 Punjab law that created sub-classification within the SCs, and sought to reserve half the SC quota for certain identified castes.
The commission’s brief was originally to:
Examine the extent of inequitable distribution of benefits of reservation among the castes or communities included in the broad category of OBCs with reference to such classes included in the Central List.
Work out the mechanism, criteria, norms and parameters in a scientific approach for sub-categorisation within such OBCs.
Take up the exercise of identifying the respective castes or communities or sub-castes or synonyms in the Central List of OBCs and classifying them into their respective sub-categories.
It was set up with tenure of 12 weeks ending 3 January 2018, but was given repeated extensions.
On 30 July 2019, the commission wrote to the government that it had “noted several ambiguities in the list… [and] is of the opinion that these have to be clarified/ rectified before the sub-categorised central list is prepared”.
Thus, on 22 January 2020, a fourth item was added to the terms of reference: “To study the various entries in the Central List of OBCs and recommend correction of any repetitions, ambiguities, inconsistencies and errors of spelling or transcription.”
#upsc #news #headline #report #subcategorisation #OBC #polity #commission #president #droupadimurmu #justice #rohini #commission #distortion #castes #institutions #supremecourt #chinnaiah #andhrapradesh #synonyms #transcription
Report on ‘sub-categorisation’ of OBCs
GS Paper - 2 (Polity)
The long awaited report of a commission set up to examine the sub-categorisation of Other Backward Classes (OBCs) was submitted to President Droupadi Murmu. The four-member commission headed by Justice G Rohini, a retired Chief Justice of Delhi High Court, was appointed on 2 October 2017, and received as many as 13 extensions to its tenure.
Why was this Commission set up?
The commission was set up in recognition of the perceived distortions in the affirmative action policy, which was seen as leading to a situation in which a few castes cornered the bulk of benefits available under the 27% quota for OBCs, and tasked with suggesting corrective actions.
The report of the commission is widely expected to be politically sensitive and the contents of the report have not been made public as yet.
What is the need for sub-categorisation of OBCs?
OBCs get 27% reservation in central government jobs and admission to educational institutions.
There are more than 2,600 entries in the Central List of OBCs, but over the years, a perception has taken root that only a few affluent communities among them have benefited from the quota.
Therefore, there is an argument that a “sub-categorisation” of OBCs — quotas within the 27% quota — is needed in order to ensure “equitable distribution” of the benefits of reservation.
Even as the Justice Rohini Commission was examining the matter, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in August 2020 intervened in the sub-categorisation debate, ruling that the 2005 decision of another five-judge Bench in ‘E V Chinnaiah vs State of Andhra Pradesh’ must be revisited.
‘Chinnaiah’ had held that no special sub-quota can be introduced within the quota for SCs and STs for the benefit of castes or tribes that were more backward than the others on these lists.
The 2020 verdict of the SC referring ‘Chinnaiah’ to a larger Bench was passed in ‘State of Punjab vs Davinder Singh’ in which the court examined the validity of a 2006 Punjab law that created sub-classification within the SCs, and sought to reserve half the SC quota for certain identified castes.
The commission’s brief was originally to:
Examine the extent of inequitable distribution of benefits of reservation among the castes or communities included in the broad category of OBCs with reference to such classes included in the Central List.
Work out the mechanism, criteria, norms and parameters in a scientific approach for sub-categorisation within such OBCs.
Take up the exercise of identifying the respective castes or communities or sub-castes or synonyms in the Central List of OBCs and classifying them into their respective sub-categories.
It was set up with tenure of 12 weeks ending 3 January 2018, but was given repeated extensions.
On 30 July 2019, the commission wrote to the government that it had “noted several ambiguities in the list… [and] is of the opinion that these have to be clarified/ rectified before the sub-categorised central list is prepared”.
Thus, on 22 January 2020, a fourth item was added to the terms of reference: “To study the various entries in the Central List of OBCs and recommend correction of any repetitions, ambiguities, inconsistencies and errors of spelling or transcription.”
#upsc #news #headline #report #subcategorisation #OBC #polity #commission #president #droupadimurmu #justice #rohini #commission #distortion #castes #institutions #supremecourt #chinnaiah #andhrapradesh #synonyms #transcription