List of Current Affairs

Why in News?

Multiple petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court of India challenging the decision of the Patna High Court to uphold the Bihar Government's caste-based survey.

The Petitions are filed in following cases:

• Ek Soch Ek Paryas v. Union of India
• Akhilesh Kumar v. State of Bihar
• Youth for Equality v. State of Bihar

Background

• The matter pertains to the fact that the State of Bihar began the exercise in January 2023 when it conducted a physical count of all households in the state.
• The real issue arose when 3,20,000 enumerators spread out across the state to ask people their caste and 17 other socio-economic indicators, this exercise began on April 15 and was scheduled to end on May 15.
• The Government contended that the survey was voluntary and was merely for the purpose of compiling information.
• The High Court temporarily halted Bihar's ongoing survey on the ground that present is a census in the garb of a survey and census is exclusively a subject of Parliament under Census Act, 1948.
• The State Government thereafter filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court that the High Court has stayed the caste-based survey when it is almost on verge of completion. This is causing irreparable loss to the state and would adversely affect the entire exercise.
• The Supreme Court thereafter refused to interfere with High Court's stay on Bihar Caste Survey in the case of State of Bihar and Ors. v. Youth for Equality and Ors.
• Against the above backdrop, after specifically holding that the State Government is competent to conduct such a survey, the Court noted that since the executive authority is found to be within its competence to frame a policy for better administration of the State and the policy framed is not arbitrary.
• The Patna High Court further stated that it cannot and should not overstep the limits and tinker with the policy.

Difference Between Census and Survey

• The Patna High Court differentiated the two in following manner:
  • Census: A survey that collects facts and verifiable details.
  • Survey: It collects and analysis, opinions and perceptions.
• A caste-based survey comes under the category of a Census.
• The Legislation that deals with Census is Census Act, 1948.
  • The bill for this Act was drafted by Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel, the then Home Minister of India.
• The population census is a Union subject under Article 246 of India Constitution.
  • Census is listed at serial number 69 of the Union List, Seventh schedule of the constitution of India.

Seventh Schedule

• It deals with the division of powers between the Union government and State governments on specific subject matters. Following three kinds of the list are mentioned in the seventh schedule:
  • Union List: List I
  • State List: List II
  • Concurrent List: List III

Constitution of India – Article 246 - Subject-Matter of Laws made by Parliament and by the Legislatures of States. —

(1) Notwithstanding anything in clauses (2) and (3), Parliament has exclusive power to make laws with respect to any of the matters enumerated in List I in the Seventh Schedule in this Constitution referred to as the “Union List”.

(2) Notwithstanding anything in clause (3), Parliament, and, subject to clause (1), the Legislature of any State also, have power to make laws with respect to any of the matters enumerated in List III in the Seventh Schedule (in this Constitution referred to as the “Concurrent List”).

(3) Subject to clauses (1) and (2), the Legislature of any State has exclusive power to make laws for such State or any part thereof with respect to any of the matters enumerated in List II in the Seventh Schedule (in this Constitution referred to as the “State List”).

(4) Parliament has power to make laws with respect to any matter for any part of the territory of India not included [in a State] notwithstanding that such matter is a matter enumerated in the State List.

Why in News?

The Allahabad High Court allowed the scientific survey of the Gyanvapi Masjid premises, Varanasi in the matter of Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Varanasi v. Rakhi Singh and 8 Others.

Background

• The present order came on the plea moved by the Anjuman Mosque Committee challenging the Varanasi Court's 21st July 2023 order of Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) under Article 227, wherein the District Judge had directed the Director of the ASI to conduct a “scientific survey” of the Gyanvapi mosque except for the area that was sealed earlier (wuzukhana).
• Thereafter the Supreme Court directed that the order passed by the Varanasi District Court for the ASI survey of the mosque should not be enforced till 26^th July 2023.
• The Apex Court while passing the abovementioned order granted petitioners the liberty to move the High Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to challenge the order of the District Judge, Varanasi.

Court’s Observations

• The Bench of Chief Justice Pritinker Diwaker, has restored the order of the District Judge Varanasi and the parties have been directed to comply with the said order.
• The Court has also vacated its interim order staying the survey in question.

Gyanvapi Mosque Dispute

• It is believed that the Gyanvapi Mosque was built in 1669 by the Mughal ruler Aurangzeb by demolishing the ancient Vishweshwar temple (devoted to the Hindu deity Lord Shiva built by Todar Mal).
• The case of Gyanvapi mosque has been in dispute since 1991, when three persons, including Pandit Somnath Vyas, a descendant of the priests of the Kashi Vishwanath temple, filed a suit in the court of the civil judge of Varanasi claiming that Aurangzeb had demolished the temple of Lord Vishweshwar.
• In 2021, in the same court in Varanasi, a petition was filed demanding to worship in the temple of Shringar-Gauri.
• The court had asked the commission appointed in this matter to give the survey report by video graphing the idol of Shringar Gauri and the Gyanvapi complex.
• There has been a controversy over the survey and videography of this basement.
• Under Section 3 of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, it is prohibited to convert a place of worship, even its clause, into a place of worship of a different religious denomination or a different class of the same religious denomination.
• Several petitions pertaining to the matter of Gyanvapi Mosque were pending and all have been ordered to have a combined hearing under Order 4A of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (UP Act 57 of 1976) on previous occasion.
• The Allahabad High Court has previously directed the ASI to conduct a scientific survey (using modern techniques) of the 'Shiva Linga' that has purportedly been found inside the Gyanvapi Mosque premises in Varanasi to ascertain its age.

Constitution of India, 1950

• The present petition was filed in the High Court of Allahabad under the power granted by Article 227 of the Indian Constitution.

Article 227 - Power of superintendence over all courts by the High Court -

(1) Every High Court shall have superintendence over all courts and tribunals throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provision, the High Court may—

(a) call for returns from such courts;

(b) make and issue general rules and prescribe forms for regulating the practice and proceedings of such courts; and

(c) prescribe forms in which books, entries and accounts shall be kept by the officers of any such courts.

(3) The High Court may also settle tables of fees to be allowed to the sheriff and all clerks and officers of such courts and to attorneys, advocates and pleaders practicing therein.

Provided that any rules made, forms prescribed or tables settled under clause (2) or clause (3) shall not be inconsistent with the provision of any law for the time being in force and shall require the previous approval of the Governor.

(4) Nothing in this article shall be deemed to confer on a High Court power of superintendence over any court or tribunal constituted by or under any law relating to the Armed Forces.

Archaeological Survey of India (ASI)

• It is an Indian Government agency that is responsible for archaeological research and the conservation and preservation of cultural historical monuments in the country.
• The agency was founded in 1861 and is headquartered at New Delhi.
• The parent organization of the agency is Ministry of Culture, Government of India.
• The first Director-General of the agency was Alexander Cunningham whereas Mr. V. Vidyavathi holds the post at present.

Why in News?

National Green Tribunal (NGT) panel to probe illegal mining done by BJP MP Brij Bhushan Saran Singh in District Gonda, Uttar Pradesh in the matter of Raja Ram Singh v. State of UP.

Background

• The plea filed by the petitioner against Brij Bhushan Singh raised allegations of illegal mining.
• It was alleged that in villages like Majharath, Jaitpur, Nawabganj, Tehsil Tarbganj, and District Gonda everyday over 700 overloaded trucks of extracted minor minerals were illegally transported.
• It was further contended that alleged storing and illegally selling minor minerals was to the tune of about 20 lakh cubic meters.
• Patpar Ganj Bridge and Road were also damaged by overloaded trucks carrying illegally mined minerals.

Court’s Observations

• Taking a serious view on the allegations NGT observed that, “Prima facie, the averments made in the application raise questions relating to environment arising out of the implementation of the enactments specified in Schedule I to the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.”
• The NGT bench constitutes a Joint Committee comprising of representatives from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Central Pollution Control Board, National Mission for Clean Ganga, UP Pollution Control and District Magistrate, Gonda.
• The Tribunal also directed the Committee to meet within one week and undertake visits to the site and look into the grievances of the applicant.

Illegal Mining

• Illegal mining is a mining activity undertaken without state permission particularly in absence of land rights, mining licenses, and exploration or mineral transportation permits.
• It may also include the violation of environmental, labor, and safety standards.
• Mining scams in India are widespread scams in various ore-rich states of India.
• Such issues span to encroachment of forest areas, underpayment of government royalties, and conflict with tribals regarding land rights.
• Illegal mining may involve the use of hazardous chemicals such as mercury and cyanide, which pose serious health risks to miners and nearby communities.

Laws Related to Mining in India

• The entry at Serial No. 23 of List II (State List) of the Constitution of India mandates the state government to own the minerals located within their boundaries.
  • Entry 23 - Regulation of mines and mineral development subject to the provisions of List I with respect to regulation and development under the control of the Union.
• The Entry at serial No. 54 of List I (Union List) mandates the central government to own the minerals within the Exclusive Economic Zone of India (EEZ).
  • Entry 54 - Regulation of mines and mineral development to the extent to which such regulation and development under the control of the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be expedient in the public interest.
    • EEZ is an area of the ocean, generally extending 200 nautical miles (230 miles) beyond a nation's territorial sea.
• The Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act (MMRD Act), 1957 mainly deals with general restrictions on prospecting licenses and mining operations and the rules and procedures for regulating grants of prospecting licenses and mining leases.