Indian Polity & Constitution for UPSC Prelims

I. Foundational Concepts of Indian Polity

  1. Evolution of Constitutional Framework
  2. Making of the Constitution
  3. Philosophy of the Constitution
  4. Key Features of the Indian Constitution
  5. Preamble: Vision and Ideals
  6. The Union and Its Territory
  7. Citizenship: Provisions and Policies

II. Fundamental Rights, Duties, and Principles

  1. Fundamental Rights: Scope and Limitations
  2. Directive Principles of State Policy
  3. Fundamental Duties of Citizens
  4. Doctrine of Basic Structure
  5. Constitutional Amendments

III. Central Government

  1. President: Powers and Functions
  2. Vice-President: Role and Responsibilities
  3. Prime Minister: Role and Powers
  4. Union Council of Ministers
  5. Cabinet Committees

IV. State Government

  1. Governor: Role and Powers
  2. Chief Minister: Executive Head of the State
  3. State Council of Ministers
  4. State Legislatures: Composition and Functions

V. Local Governance

  1. Panchayati Raj System
  2. Urban Local Bodies: Municipalities and Corporations

VI. Parliamentary System and Processes

  1. Indian Parliament: Structure and Powers
  2. Parliamentary Committees: Roles and Relevance
  3. Indian Parliamentary Group (IPG)

VII. Federalism and Inter-Governmental Relations

  1. India’s Quasi-Federal System
  2. Centre-State Relations
  3. Inter-State Relations
  4. Emergency Provisions

VIII. Judiciary

  1. Supreme Court: Powers and Jurisdiction
  2. High Courts: Role and Structure
  3. Subordinate Courts

IX. Judicial Mechanisms

  1. Judicial Review
  2. Judicial Activism
  3. Public Interest Litigation (PIL)

X. Alternative Dispute Resolution

  1. Tribunals: Scope and Authority
  2. Consumer Forums
  3. Lok Adalats and Alternative Mechanisms

XI. Union Territories and Special Provisions

  1. Administration of Union Territories
  2. Scheduled and Tribal Areas

XII. Constitutional Bodies

  1. Election Commission of India
  2. Union Public Service Commission (UPSC)
  3. State Public Service Commissions
  4. Finance Commission
  5. Goods and Services Tax (GST) Council
  6. Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG)
  7. Attorney General of India
  8. Advocate General of States

XIII. Special Commissions

  1. National Commission for Scheduled Castes
  2. National Commission for Scheduled Tribes
  3. National Commission for Backward Classes
  4. Special Officer for Linguistic Minorities

XIV. Non-Constitutional Bodies

  1. NITI Aayog: Policy Think Tank
  2. Central Vigilance Commission (CVC)
  3. Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)
  4. Lokpal and Lokayuktas
  5. National Human Rights Commission (NHRC)
  6. State Human Rights Commissions
  7. National Commission for Women (NCW)
  8. National Commission for Protection of Child Rights
  9. National Commission on Minorities
  10. Central and State Information Commissions

XV. Political Dynamics and Elections

  1. Political Parties: National and Regional
  2. Coalition Governments: Evolution and Impact
  3. Electoral Process and Laws
  4. Electoral Reforms and Innovations
  5. Anti-Defection Law
  6. Voting Behavior and Trends
  7. EVMs and Election Technology

XVI. Societal Structures and Advocacy

  1. Pressure Groups and Their Influence
  2. Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs)

XVII. Cooperative Societies and Public Administration

  1. Cooperatives and Cooperative Movement

XVIII. Public Administration

  1. Public Services: Recruitment and Administration

XIX. Languages and Special Provisions

  1. Official Language and Regional Language Policies
  2. Special Provisions for Certain States and Classes

XX. Miscellaneous Topics

  1. National Integration and Unity
  2. Foreign Policy Principles and Challenges
  3. Landmark Judicial Verdicts
  4. Significant Doctrines in Indian Law
  5. Constitutions of Other Nations: A Comparative Study
  6. Rights and Liabilities of the Government

Judicial Reforms

Judicial Reforms

Over 14,000 courts throughout the country handle about four crores of cases, with the working strength of about 12,500 judge, each judge has to decide on nearly 4,000 cases. Is it not a sufficient ground for initiating judicial reforms in the country? Working on the judicial management system, our National Judicial Academy is doing its job remarkably well. Though there is large a number of cases before the courts, the fact is that only about 40 per cent of the cases are one-year old, while 90 per cent of the delayed cases lay in subordinate courts.

A series of long-term and short-term reforms may be suggested, long-term reforms are:

(i) Removal of the bottlenecks which adversely affect the adjudication,

(ii) Strengthening the bar,

(iii) Encouraging legal education,

(iv) Enhancing the power of judges to control judicial pressures, so to ensure just and efficient outcomes, and

(v) Providing for a satisfactory framework for judicial accountability.

Short-term reforms, may be:

(i) With administrative reforms, a large number of cases pending in courts can be reduced. In most cases, the government should take firm, and impartial measures.

(ii) The revenue administration needs to be streamlined and every one is given proper title and deeds. Consequently, a large number of land disputes could be avoided.

(iii) A large number of financial institutions, in their efforts to recover money through criminal proceedings make use of the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The courts have become collecting agents for these financial institutions. Because of these types of cases, the ordinary criminal cases get hampered. The government needs to build its own infrastructure and in the process reduce the number of cases in the courts.

(iv) A large number of motor accident claims are pending in various tribunals. In some States, it takes more than four to five year to settle a claim despite the fact that the large number of cases are settled through the Lok Adalats. The Insurance Companies should have proper settlement procedure through which they need to settle their cases and disburse the amount to the claimants as early as possible.

(v) In many land acquisition cases, the amount awarded by land acquisition officers are not reasonable or proper, driving parties to resort to litigation. If there were district-level high power committees to fix compensations at reasonable amount, most of the claimants might possibly not move the courts.

(vi) Most of the criminal cases get delayed intentionally. Inept policing and weak prosecution are largely responsible for such cases.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Archives