Polity & Governance: July 2021 Current Affair Current Affairs Notes | EduRev

Current Affairs & Hindu Analysis: Daily, Weekly & Monthly

Current Affairs : Polity & Governance: July 2021 Current Affair Current Affairs Notes | EduRev

 Page 1


 
3                                                                                                                                                        
Tentative recommendations of the commission for sub-
categorization of OBCs: 
Category 1 1,674 caste groups- largely 
those who have not 
benefited from the quota. 
2% reservation 
Category 2  534 caste groups 6% reservation 
Category 3 328 caste groups 9% reservation 
Category 4 97 caste groups- mostly 
considered dominant OBCs 
with large population 
10% reservation 
 
 
1. POLITY AND GOVERNANCE 
1.1. SUB-CATEGORISATION OF OTHER BACKWARD CLASSES 
Why in news? 
Union Cabinet has approved an extension by six months of the term of Justice Rohini Commission examining the 
possibility of sub-categorisation within the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in the Central list. 
Background 
• The Union Government constituted a four-
member commission headed by Justice G. 
Rohini in 2017 under Article 340 with an 
aim to improve the equitability of sharing 
of benefits among OBCs. 
o The article 340 of the Indian 
Constitution lays down conditions for 
the appointment of a Commission to 
investigate the conditions of backward 
classes. 
• Mandate of the Commission:  
o Examining the extent of inequitable 
distribution of benefits of reservation 
(i.e. 27 percent reservation in jobs and 
education) among the castes or communities with reference to the central OBC list.  
o Work out the mechanism, criteria, norms and parameters in a scientific approach for sub-categorization 
of OBCs. 
Need for sub-categorization of OBCs 
• Benefits of reservations have reached only 
limited sections: The Rohini commission 
highlighted that from about 2,633 central list 
OBCs, about 1900 castes have not 
proportionately benefitted.  
o Half of these 1900 castes have not 
availed the benefits of reservation at 
all, and the other half include those that 
have availed less than 3 per cent share in the OBC quota. 
o The commission highlighted that 25% of benefits from OBC reservations have been availed by only 10 
sub-castes.  
o According to the committee, the communities that have got almost no benefits of reservations include 
profession-based castes such as Kalaigars, a community that traditionally polishes tins; and Sikligars and 
Saranias, communities that traditionally sharpen knives; apart from several other marginalised groups. 
• Benefits are tilted towards economically stronger sub-sections: Research suggests that the Mandal 
Commission recommendations helped the economically better positioned OBCs more than the most 
backward castes. 
 
Background: The Mandal Commission  
• In 1990, the then Union government announced that Other Backward Classes (OBCs) would get 27 percent 
reservation in jobs in central government services and public sector units (under Article 16(4) of the Constitution). 
• The decision was based on Mandal Commission Report (1980), which was set up in 1979 and chaired by B.P. 
Mandal. The mandate of the Mandal Commission was to identify socially or educationally backward classes to 
address caste discrimination.  
• The recommendation for OBC reservations in central government institutions was implemented in 1992 while the 
education quota came into force in 2006 (under Article 15(4) of the Constitution). 
• To ensure that benefits of the recommendations of the Mandal Commission percolated down to the most backward 
communities, the creamy layer criteria was invoked by Supreme Court in the ruling called the ‘Indira Sawhney 
Who are OBCs?  
• OBC is a collective term used by the Government to classify 
castes which are educationally or socially disadvantaged. 
(OBCs are referred to as Socially and Educationally Backward 
Classes). 
• OBCs are a vastly heterogeneous group. There are various 
jaatis or sub-castes which vary significantly in the societal 
and economic status.  
o For instance, OBCs include land-owning communities in 
both north and south India alongside poorer sections of 
the society living on subsistence labour.  
• There are two lists of OBCs — central and state, with former 
identified by the Union government dealing with the quotas 
in the central jobs, while the state lists are the mandate of 
state governments catering to local reservations. 
 
 
Page 2


 
3                                                                                                                                                        
Tentative recommendations of the commission for sub-
categorization of OBCs: 
Category 1 1,674 caste groups- largely 
those who have not 
benefited from the quota. 
2% reservation 
Category 2  534 caste groups 6% reservation 
Category 3 328 caste groups 9% reservation 
Category 4 97 caste groups- mostly 
considered dominant OBCs 
with large population 
10% reservation 
 
 
1. POLITY AND GOVERNANCE 
1.1. SUB-CATEGORISATION OF OTHER BACKWARD CLASSES 
Why in news? 
Union Cabinet has approved an extension by six months of the term of Justice Rohini Commission examining the 
possibility of sub-categorisation within the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in the Central list. 
Background 
• The Union Government constituted a four-
member commission headed by Justice G. 
Rohini in 2017 under Article 340 with an 
aim to improve the equitability of sharing 
of benefits among OBCs. 
o The article 340 of the Indian 
Constitution lays down conditions for 
the appointment of a Commission to 
investigate the conditions of backward 
classes. 
• Mandate of the Commission:  
o Examining the extent of inequitable 
distribution of benefits of reservation 
(i.e. 27 percent reservation in jobs and 
education) among the castes or communities with reference to the central OBC list.  
o Work out the mechanism, criteria, norms and parameters in a scientific approach for sub-categorization 
of OBCs. 
Need for sub-categorization of OBCs 
• Benefits of reservations have reached only 
limited sections: The Rohini commission 
highlighted that from about 2,633 central list 
OBCs, about 1900 castes have not 
proportionately benefitted.  
o Half of these 1900 castes have not 
availed the benefits of reservation at 
all, and the other half include those that 
have availed less than 3 per cent share in the OBC quota. 
o The commission highlighted that 25% of benefits from OBC reservations have been availed by only 10 
sub-castes.  
o According to the committee, the communities that have got almost no benefits of reservations include 
profession-based castes such as Kalaigars, a community that traditionally polishes tins; and Sikligars and 
Saranias, communities that traditionally sharpen knives; apart from several other marginalised groups. 
• Benefits are tilted towards economically stronger sub-sections: Research suggests that the Mandal 
Commission recommendations helped the economically better positioned OBCs more than the most 
backward castes. 
 
Background: The Mandal Commission  
• In 1990, the then Union government announced that Other Backward Classes (OBCs) would get 27 percent 
reservation in jobs in central government services and public sector units (under Article 16(4) of the Constitution). 
• The decision was based on Mandal Commission Report (1980), which was set up in 1979 and chaired by B.P. 
Mandal. The mandate of the Mandal Commission was to identify socially or educationally backward classes to 
address caste discrimination.  
• The recommendation for OBC reservations in central government institutions was implemented in 1992 while the 
education quota came into force in 2006 (under Article 15(4) of the Constitution). 
• To ensure that benefits of the recommendations of the Mandal Commission percolated down to the most backward 
communities, the creamy layer criteria was invoked by Supreme Court in the ruling called the ‘Indira Sawhney 
Who are OBCs?  
• OBC is a collective term used by the Government to classify 
castes which are educationally or socially disadvantaged. 
(OBCs are referred to as Socially and Educationally Backward 
Classes). 
• OBCs are a vastly heterogeneous group. There are various 
jaatis or sub-castes which vary significantly in the societal 
and economic status.  
o For instance, OBCs include land-owning communities in 
both north and south India alongside poorer sections of 
the society living on subsistence labour.  
• There are two lists of OBCs — central and state, with former 
identified by the Union government dealing with the quotas 
in the central jobs, while the state lists are the mandate of 
state governments catering to local reservations. 
 
 
 
4                                                                                                                                                        
Judgment’ (1992).  
o A household with an annual income of Rs 8 lakh or above is classified as belonging to the ‘creamy layer’ among 
OBCs and hence is not eligible for reservations. 
Evolution of the idea of sub-categorization  
• The First Backward Class Commission report of 1955 had proposed sub-categorization of OBCs into backward and 
extremely backward communities.  
• In the Mandal Commission report of 1979, a dissent note by member L R Naik proposed sub-categorization in 
intermediate and depressed backward classes. 
• In 2015, the NCBC had proposed that OBCs be divided into the following three categories: 
a. Extremely Backward Classes (EBC-Group A) facing social, educational and economic backwardness even within 
the OBCs, consisting of aboriginal tribes, nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes who have been carrying on with 
their traditional occupations; 
b. More Backward Classes (MBC-Group B) consisting of vocational groups carrying on with their traditional 
occupations; and 
c. Backward Classes (BC-Group C) comprising of those comparatively more forward.  
• According to the NCBC, 11 states/UTs (Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Puducherry, Karnataka, Haryana, Jharkhand, 
West Bengal, Bihar, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu) have subcategorized OBC for reservations in state-
government-owned institutions.  
Challenges in implementation of OBC sub-categorisation  
• Political sensitivity of the issue: The move to sub-categorize OBCs may create agitation in some sections of 
OBCs as the benefits get redistributed.  
o OBC reservations have caused political turmoil in the past. 
• Use of older and unreliable estimates: The commission has based its recommendations on quota within 
quota on the population figures from the 1931 Census, and not on the more recent Socio-Economic Caste 
Census (SECC) 2011.  
o Since the implementation of the Mandal 
Commission report, over 500 new castes have 
been added to the Central list of OBCs. The 1931 
Census does not have the population for these 
new additions.  
o The 1931 census also does not have population of 
princely states that were not ruled by the British.  
• Information unavailability on social and educational 
status: There is lack of availability of information 
regarding the social and educational backwardness of 
various castes.  
• It could be a very difficult exercise statistically due to 
following reason: Apart from a large number of castes, there are significant variations within castes from 
state to state which implies data collection needs to be larger and more robust.  
Way forward 
• Sub-categorization to be based on relative benefits among the OBCs and not on social backwardness, this 
may help deprived sections to be able to avail of their fair share of the quota.  
• Revising the creamy layer ceiling: National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) demanded that the 
income ceiling be further revised as the current limit is not in up to date with the associated purchasing 
power.  
 
Related developments with regard to 102nd Amendment Act 
• The 102nd amendment inserted Articles 338B and 342A in the Constitution. 
o Article 338B deals with the structure, duties and powers of the National Commission for Backward Classes 
commission (NCBC), and  
o Article 342A (with two clauses), gives the President the power to notify a class as SEBC and the power of 
Parliament to alter the central SEBC list. 
• Recently, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment has framed an amendment to Article 342A to introduce a 
third clause - Article 342A (3) to restore power of states to identify OBCs to be included on the respective state lists. 
o Until now, state governments were free to decide which castes would be part of the OBC list in their own state. 
The central government had no role in these decisions. The OBC lists of many states have such castes and 
National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) 
• The NCBC was set up as a statutory body under 
the NCBC Act, 1993. 
• 102
nd
 Constitutional Amendment Act made it a 
constitutional body as per Article 338B of the 
Constitution. 
• Key functions performed by the panel:  
o In the case of grievances related to non-
implementation of reservations, economic 
grievances, violence, etc. people will be able 
to move the Commission. 
o To inquire into complaints of deprivation 
of rights and safeguards. 
Page 3


 
3                                                                                                                                                        
Tentative recommendations of the commission for sub-
categorization of OBCs: 
Category 1 1,674 caste groups- largely 
those who have not 
benefited from the quota. 
2% reservation 
Category 2  534 caste groups 6% reservation 
Category 3 328 caste groups 9% reservation 
Category 4 97 caste groups- mostly 
considered dominant OBCs 
with large population 
10% reservation 
 
 
1. POLITY AND GOVERNANCE 
1.1. SUB-CATEGORISATION OF OTHER BACKWARD CLASSES 
Why in news? 
Union Cabinet has approved an extension by six months of the term of Justice Rohini Commission examining the 
possibility of sub-categorisation within the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in the Central list. 
Background 
• The Union Government constituted a four-
member commission headed by Justice G. 
Rohini in 2017 under Article 340 with an 
aim to improve the equitability of sharing 
of benefits among OBCs. 
o The article 340 of the Indian 
Constitution lays down conditions for 
the appointment of a Commission to 
investigate the conditions of backward 
classes. 
• Mandate of the Commission:  
o Examining the extent of inequitable 
distribution of benefits of reservation 
(i.e. 27 percent reservation in jobs and 
education) among the castes or communities with reference to the central OBC list.  
o Work out the mechanism, criteria, norms and parameters in a scientific approach for sub-categorization 
of OBCs. 
Need for sub-categorization of OBCs 
• Benefits of reservations have reached only 
limited sections: The Rohini commission 
highlighted that from about 2,633 central list 
OBCs, about 1900 castes have not 
proportionately benefitted.  
o Half of these 1900 castes have not 
availed the benefits of reservation at 
all, and the other half include those that 
have availed less than 3 per cent share in the OBC quota. 
o The commission highlighted that 25% of benefits from OBC reservations have been availed by only 10 
sub-castes.  
o According to the committee, the communities that have got almost no benefits of reservations include 
profession-based castes such as Kalaigars, a community that traditionally polishes tins; and Sikligars and 
Saranias, communities that traditionally sharpen knives; apart from several other marginalised groups. 
• Benefits are tilted towards economically stronger sub-sections: Research suggests that the Mandal 
Commission recommendations helped the economically better positioned OBCs more than the most 
backward castes. 
 
Background: The Mandal Commission  
• In 1990, the then Union government announced that Other Backward Classes (OBCs) would get 27 percent 
reservation in jobs in central government services and public sector units (under Article 16(4) of the Constitution). 
• The decision was based on Mandal Commission Report (1980), which was set up in 1979 and chaired by B.P. 
Mandal. The mandate of the Mandal Commission was to identify socially or educationally backward classes to 
address caste discrimination.  
• The recommendation for OBC reservations in central government institutions was implemented in 1992 while the 
education quota came into force in 2006 (under Article 15(4) of the Constitution). 
• To ensure that benefits of the recommendations of the Mandal Commission percolated down to the most backward 
communities, the creamy layer criteria was invoked by Supreme Court in the ruling called the ‘Indira Sawhney 
Who are OBCs?  
• OBC is a collective term used by the Government to classify 
castes which are educationally or socially disadvantaged. 
(OBCs are referred to as Socially and Educationally Backward 
Classes). 
• OBCs are a vastly heterogeneous group. There are various 
jaatis or sub-castes which vary significantly in the societal 
and economic status.  
o For instance, OBCs include land-owning communities in 
both north and south India alongside poorer sections of 
the society living on subsistence labour.  
• There are two lists of OBCs — central and state, with former 
identified by the Union government dealing with the quotas 
in the central jobs, while the state lists are the mandate of 
state governments catering to local reservations. 
 
 
 
4                                                                                                                                                        
Judgment’ (1992).  
o A household with an annual income of Rs 8 lakh or above is classified as belonging to the ‘creamy layer’ among 
OBCs and hence is not eligible for reservations. 
Evolution of the idea of sub-categorization  
• The First Backward Class Commission report of 1955 had proposed sub-categorization of OBCs into backward and 
extremely backward communities.  
• In the Mandal Commission report of 1979, a dissent note by member L R Naik proposed sub-categorization in 
intermediate and depressed backward classes. 
• In 2015, the NCBC had proposed that OBCs be divided into the following three categories: 
a. Extremely Backward Classes (EBC-Group A) facing social, educational and economic backwardness even within 
the OBCs, consisting of aboriginal tribes, nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes who have been carrying on with 
their traditional occupations; 
b. More Backward Classes (MBC-Group B) consisting of vocational groups carrying on with their traditional 
occupations; and 
c. Backward Classes (BC-Group C) comprising of those comparatively more forward.  
• According to the NCBC, 11 states/UTs (Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Puducherry, Karnataka, Haryana, Jharkhand, 
West Bengal, Bihar, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu) have subcategorized OBC for reservations in state-
government-owned institutions.  
Challenges in implementation of OBC sub-categorisation  
• Political sensitivity of the issue: The move to sub-categorize OBCs may create agitation in some sections of 
OBCs as the benefits get redistributed.  
o OBC reservations have caused political turmoil in the past. 
• Use of older and unreliable estimates: The commission has based its recommendations on quota within 
quota on the population figures from the 1931 Census, and not on the more recent Socio-Economic Caste 
Census (SECC) 2011.  
o Since the implementation of the Mandal 
Commission report, over 500 new castes have 
been added to the Central list of OBCs. The 1931 
Census does not have the population for these 
new additions.  
o The 1931 census also does not have population of 
princely states that were not ruled by the British.  
• Information unavailability on social and educational 
status: There is lack of availability of information 
regarding the social and educational backwardness of 
various castes.  
• It could be a very difficult exercise statistically due to 
following reason: Apart from a large number of castes, there are significant variations within castes from 
state to state which implies data collection needs to be larger and more robust.  
Way forward 
• Sub-categorization to be based on relative benefits among the OBCs and not on social backwardness, this 
may help deprived sections to be able to avail of their fair share of the quota.  
• Revising the creamy layer ceiling: National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) demanded that the 
income ceiling be further revised as the current limit is not in up to date with the associated purchasing 
power.  
 
Related developments with regard to 102nd Amendment Act 
• The 102nd amendment inserted Articles 338B and 342A in the Constitution. 
o Article 338B deals with the structure, duties and powers of the National Commission for Backward Classes 
commission (NCBC), and  
o Article 342A (with two clauses), gives the President the power to notify a class as SEBC and the power of 
Parliament to alter the central SEBC list. 
• Recently, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment has framed an amendment to Article 342A to introduce a 
third clause - Article 342A (3) to restore power of states to identify OBCs to be included on the respective state lists. 
o Until now, state governments were free to decide which castes would be part of the OBC list in their own state. 
The central government had no role in these decisions. The OBC lists of many states have such castes and 
National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) 
• The NCBC was set up as a statutory body under 
the NCBC Act, 1993. 
• 102
nd
 Constitutional Amendment Act made it a 
constitutional body as per Article 338B of the 
Constitution. 
• Key functions performed by the panel:  
o In the case of grievances related to non-
implementation of reservations, economic 
grievances, violence, etc. people will be able 
to move the Commission. 
o To inquire into complaints of deprivation 
of rights and safeguards. 
 
5                                                                                                                                                        
communities that haven’t found a place in the central government’s OBC list for those states. 
o However, the Supreme Court ruling on the Maratha reservation held that only the President can declare any 
community as OBC and that too only on the recommendation of the National Commission for Backward Classes 
(NCBC).  
• Additionally, Supreme Court have also remarked about there being in future a “single list” of OBCs that should be 
issued by the President on the recommendations of the National Commission for Backward Classes. 
Related news 
Other Backward Classes (OBC) And Economically Weaker Section (EWS) Get Quotas Under All India Quota (AIQ) 
Scheme For Medical Courses 
• Union Health Ministry has announced 27% reservation for OBCs and 10% quota for EWS in AIQ scheme for 
undergraduate (UG) and postgraduate (PG)state-run Medical and Dental colleges. 
• AIQ scheme was introduced in 1986 for domicile-free, merit-based opportunities to students from any state to 
study in a good medical college in any other state. 
o It comprises 15% of UG seats and 50% of PG seats in government medical colleges. 
o Initially, there was no reservation in the AIQ scheme up to 2007. 
? In 2007, reservation for SCs (15% of AIQ seats) and STs (7.5% of AIQ seats) was made under the scheme. 
1.2. JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN) 
AMENDMENT BILL  
Why in news? 
Parliament passed Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Amendment Bill, 2021, which seeks to 
amend the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. 
Brief Background 
• A juvenile is a person less than 18 years of age.  The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 
2015 addresses children in conflict with law and children in need of care and protection. It provided for the 
trial of juveniles in conflict with law in the age group of 16-18 years as adults in certain cases. 
• The Act was brought to replace the Juvenile Delinquency Law and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection 
of Children Act) 2000. 
• It fulfils India's commitment as a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the rights of the child, the 
Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in respect of Inter-country Adoption (1993), 
and other related international instruments. 
• The recent amendment has been brought based on a report filed by the NCPCR in 2018-19 in which the over 
7,000 Child Care Institutions (or children’s homes) were surveyed and several inadequacies prevailing in the 
system were highlighted. 
Changes made by the Bill 
 Related Provisions in JJ Act,2015 Features of Bill 
Adoption • Adoption of a child is final once a civil 
court issues an adoption order. 
• District Magistrates, including Additional District 
Magistrates, can issue adoption orders (both for intra-
country and intercountry adoptions) in order to ensure 
speedy disposal of cases and enhance accountability. 
• Additional functions of DM: 
o Empowers the DM including ADM to effectively 
coordinate and monitor the functions of various 
agencies responsible for implementation of the 
provision of the principal act.  
o They have been empowered to supervise the 
District Child Protection Units and Special 
Juvenile Protection Units, and conduct a quarterly 
review of the functioning of CWC, JJ Boards. 
Appeals • There will be no appeal for any order 
made by a Child Welfare Committee 
concluding that a person is not a child in 
need of care and protection.  The Bill 
removes this provision. 
• The Bill removes this provision. 
• Any person aggrieved by an adoption order passed by 
the district magistrate may file an appeal before the 
Divisional Commissioner, within 30 days of such 
order.  Such appeals should be disposed within four 
weeks from the date of filing of the appeal. 
Page 4


 
3                                                                                                                                                        
Tentative recommendations of the commission for sub-
categorization of OBCs: 
Category 1 1,674 caste groups- largely 
those who have not 
benefited from the quota. 
2% reservation 
Category 2  534 caste groups 6% reservation 
Category 3 328 caste groups 9% reservation 
Category 4 97 caste groups- mostly 
considered dominant OBCs 
with large population 
10% reservation 
 
 
1. POLITY AND GOVERNANCE 
1.1. SUB-CATEGORISATION OF OTHER BACKWARD CLASSES 
Why in news? 
Union Cabinet has approved an extension by six months of the term of Justice Rohini Commission examining the 
possibility of sub-categorisation within the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in the Central list. 
Background 
• The Union Government constituted a four-
member commission headed by Justice G. 
Rohini in 2017 under Article 340 with an 
aim to improve the equitability of sharing 
of benefits among OBCs. 
o The article 340 of the Indian 
Constitution lays down conditions for 
the appointment of a Commission to 
investigate the conditions of backward 
classes. 
• Mandate of the Commission:  
o Examining the extent of inequitable 
distribution of benefits of reservation 
(i.e. 27 percent reservation in jobs and 
education) among the castes or communities with reference to the central OBC list.  
o Work out the mechanism, criteria, norms and parameters in a scientific approach for sub-categorization 
of OBCs. 
Need for sub-categorization of OBCs 
• Benefits of reservations have reached only 
limited sections: The Rohini commission 
highlighted that from about 2,633 central list 
OBCs, about 1900 castes have not 
proportionately benefitted.  
o Half of these 1900 castes have not 
availed the benefits of reservation at 
all, and the other half include those that 
have availed less than 3 per cent share in the OBC quota. 
o The commission highlighted that 25% of benefits from OBC reservations have been availed by only 10 
sub-castes.  
o According to the committee, the communities that have got almost no benefits of reservations include 
profession-based castes such as Kalaigars, a community that traditionally polishes tins; and Sikligars and 
Saranias, communities that traditionally sharpen knives; apart from several other marginalised groups. 
• Benefits are tilted towards economically stronger sub-sections: Research suggests that the Mandal 
Commission recommendations helped the economically better positioned OBCs more than the most 
backward castes. 
 
Background: The Mandal Commission  
• In 1990, the then Union government announced that Other Backward Classes (OBCs) would get 27 percent 
reservation in jobs in central government services and public sector units (under Article 16(4) of the Constitution). 
• The decision was based on Mandal Commission Report (1980), which was set up in 1979 and chaired by B.P. 
Mandal. The mandate of the Mandal Commission was to identify socially or educationally backward classes to 
address caste discrimination.  
• The recommendation for OBC reservations in central government institutions was implemented in 1992 while the 
education quota came into force in 2006 (under Article 15(4) of the Constitution). 
• To ensure that benefits of the recommendations of the Mandal Commission percolated down to the most backward 
communities, the creamy layer criteria was invoked by Supreme Court in the ruling called the ‘Indira Sawhney 
Who are OBCs?  
• OBC is a collective term used by the Government to classify 
castes which are educationally or socially disadvantaged. 
(OBCs are referred to as Socially and Educationally Backward 
Classes). 
• OBCs are a vastly heterogeneous group. There are various 
jaatis or sub-castes which vary significantly in the societal 
and economic status.  
o For instance, OBCs include land-owning communities in 
both north and south India alongside poorer sections of 
the society living on subsistence labour.  
• There are two lists of OBCs — central and state, with former 
identified by the Union government dealing with the quotas 
in the central jobs, while the state lists are the mandate of 
state governments catering to local reservations. 
 
 
 
4                                                                                                                                                        
Judgment’ (1992).  
o A household with an annual income of Rs 8 lakh or above is classified as belonging to the ‘creamy layer’ among 
OBCs and hence is not eligible for reservations. 
Evolution of the idea of sub-categorization  
• The First Backward Class Commission report of 1955 had proposed sub-categorization of OBCs into backward and 
extremely backward communities.  
• In the Mandal Commission report of 1979, a dissent note by member L R Naik proposed sub-categorization in 
intermediate and depressed backward classes. 
• In 2015, the NCBC had proposed that OBCs be divided into the following three categories: 
a. Extremely Backward Classes (EBC-Group A) facing social, educational and economic backwardness even within 
the OBCs, consisting of aboriginal tribes, nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes who have been carrying on with 
their traditional occupations; 
b. More Backward Classes (MBC-Group B) consisting of vocational groups carrying on with their traditional 
occupations; and 
c. Backward Classes (BC-Group C) comprising of those comparatively more forward.  
• According to the NCBC, 11 states/UTs (Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Puducherry, Karnataka, Haryana, Jharkhand, 
West Bengal, Bihar, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu) have subcategorized OBC for reservations in state-
government-owned institutions.  
Challenges in implementation of OBC sub-categorisation  
• Political sensitivity of the issue: The move to sub-categorize OBCs may create agitation in some sections of 
OBCs as the benefits get redistributed.  
o OBC reservations have caused political turmoil in the past. 
• Use of older and unreliable estimates: The commission has based its recommendations on quota within 
quota on the population figures from the 1931 Census, and not on the more recent Socio-Economic Caste 
Census (SECC) 2011.  
o Since the implementation of the Mandal 
Commission report, over 500 new castes have 
been added to the Central list of OBCs. The 1931 
Census does not have the population for these 
new additions.  
o The 1931 census also does not have population of 
princely states that were not ruled by the British.  
• Information unavailability on social and educational 
status: There is lack of availability of information 
regarding the social and educational backwardness of 
various castes.  
• It could be a very difficult exercise statistically due to 
following reason: Apart from a large number of castes, there are significant variations within castes from 
state to state which implies data collection needs to be larger and more robust.  
Way forward 
• Sub-categorization to be based on relative benefits among the OBCs and not on social backwardness, this 
may help deprived sections to be able to avail of their fair share of the quota.  
• Revising the creamy layer ceiling: National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) demanded that the 
income ceiling be further revised as the current limit is not in up to date with the associated purchasing 
power.  
 
Related developments with regard to 102nd Amendment Act 
• The 102nd amendment inserted Articles 338B and 342A in the Constitution. 
o Article 338B deals with the structure, duties and powers of the National Commission for Backward Classes 
commission (NCBC), and  
o Article 342A (with two clauses), gives the President the power to notify a class as SEBC and the power of 
Parliament to alter the central SEBC list. 
• Recently, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment has framed an amendment to Article 342A to introduce a 
third clause - Article 342A (3) to restore power of states to identify OBCs to be included on the respective state lists. 
o Until now, state governments were free to decide which castes would be part of the OBC list in their own state. 
The central government had no role in these decisions. The OBC lists of many states have such castes and 
National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) 
• The NCBC was set up as a statutory body under 
the NCBC Act, 1993. 
• 102
nd
 Constitutional Amendment Act made it a 
constitutional body as per Article 338B of the 
Constitution. 
• Key functions performed by the panel:  
o In the case of grievances related to non-
implementation of reservations, economic 
grievances, violence, etc. people will be able 
to move the Commission. 
o To inquire into complaints of deprivation 
of rights and safeguards. 
 
5                                                                                                                                                        
communities that haven’t found a place in the central government’s OBC list for those states. 
o However, the Supreme Court ruling on the Maratha reservation held that only the President can declare any 
community as OBC and that too only on the recommendation of the National Commission for Backward Classes 
(NCBC).  
• Additionally, Supreme Court have also remarked about there being in future a “single list” of OBCs that should be 
issued by the President on the recommendations of the National Commission for Backward Classes. 
Related news 
Other Backward Classes (OBC) And Economically Weaker Section (EWS) Get Quotas Under All India Quota (AIQ) 
Scheme For Medical Courses 
• Union Health Ministry has announced 27% reservation for OBCs and 10% quota for EWS in AIQ scheme for 
undergraduate (UG) and postgraduate (PG)state-run Medical and Dental colleges. 
• AIQ scheme was introduced in 1986 for domicile-free, merit-based opportunities to students from any state to 
study in a good medical college in any other state. 
o It comprises 15% of UG seats and 50% of PG seats in government medical colleges. 
o Initially, there was no reservation in the AIQ scheme up to 2007. 
? In 2007, reservation for SCs (15% of AIQ seats) and STs (7.5% of AIQ seats) was made under the scheme. 
1.2. JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN) 
AMENDMENT BILL  
Why in news? 
Parliament passed Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Amendment Bill, 2021, which seeks to 
amend the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. 
Brief Background 
• A juvenile is a person less than 18 years of age.  The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 
2015 addresses children in conflict with law and children in need of care and protection. It provided for the 
trial of juveniles in conflict with law in the age group of 16-18 years as adults in certain cases. 
• The Act was brought to replace the Juvenile Delinquency Law and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection 
of Children Act) 2000. 
• It fulfils India's commitment as a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the rights of the child, the 
Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in respect of Inter-country Adoption (1993), 
and other related international instruments. 
• The recent amendment has been brought based on a report filed by the NCPCR in 2018-19 in which the over 
7,000 Child Care Institutions (or children’s homes) were surveyed and several inadequacies prevailing in the 
system were highlighted. 
Changes made by the Bill 
 Related Provisions in JJ Act,2015 Features of Bill 
Adoption • Adoption of a child is final once a civil 
court issues an adoption order. 
• District Magistrates, including Additional District 
Magistrates, can issue adoption orders (both for intra-
country and intercountry adoptions) in order to ensure 
speedy disposal of cases and enhance accountability. 
• Additional functions of DM: 
o Empowers the DM including ADM to effectively 
coordinate and monitor the functions of various 
agencies responsible for implementation of the 
provision of the principal act.  
o They have been empowered to supervise the 
District Child Protection Units and Special 
Juvenile Protection Units, and conduct a quarterly 
review of the functioning of CWC, JJ Boards. 
Appeals • There will be no appeal for any order 
made by a Child Welfare Committee 
concluding that a person is not a child in 
need of care and protection.  The Bill 
removes this provision. 
• The Bill removes this provision. 
• Any person aggrieved by an adoption order passed by 
the district magistrate may file an appeal before the 
Divisional Commissioner, within 30 days of such 
order.  Such appeals should be disposed within four 
weeks from the date of filing of the appeal. 
 
6                                                                                                                                                        
Serious 
Offences 
• Offences committed by juveniles are 
categorised as: 
o Heinous offences (those with 
minimum punishment of seven 
years of imprisonment under IPC or 
any other law),  
o Serious offences (three to seven 
years of imprisonment), and  
o Petty offences (below three years 
of imprisonment). 
• Juvenile Justice Board will inquire about 
a child who is accused of a serious 
offence.  
• Redefines 'serious offences' to include such offences 
for which the punishment is:  
o Minimum imprisonment for a term of 3-7 years; 
o Maximum imprisonment for a term more than 7 
years but no minimum imprisonment or minimum 
imprisonment of less than 7 years. 
• This has been done to give effect to recommendation 
of Supreme court in Shilpa Mittal v. State of NCT of 
Delhi case. 
Designate
d Court 
• Offences against children that are 
punishable with imprisonment of more 
than seven years, will be tried in the 
Children’s Court (equivalent to a 
Sessions Court).  
•  Other offences (punishable with 
imprisonment of less than seven years) 
will be tried by a Judicial Magistrate. 
• Provides that all offences under the Act will be tried in 
the Children’s Court.  
Offences 
against 
children 
• An offence under the Act, which is 
punishable with imprisonment 
between three to seven years will be 
cognizable (where arrest is allowed 
without warrant) and non-bailable.  
• Such offences will be non-cognizable and non-bailable. 
Child 
Welfare 
Committe
es (CWCs) 
• States must constitute one or more 
CWCs for each district for dealing with 
children in need of care and protection. 
• Provides certain criteria for the 
appointment of members to CWC.  For 
instance, a member should be:  
o involved in health, education, or 
welfare of children for at least 
seven years, or  
o a practising professional with a 
degree in child psychology, 
psychiatry, law, or social work. 
• Stipulate certain additional criteria for appointment of 
CWC members. 
• No person shall be eligible for selection as a member of 
the CWC, if he: 
o Has any past record of violation of human rights 
or child rights. 
o Has been convicted of an offence involving moral 
turpitude, and such conviction has not been 
reversed or has not been granted full pardon in 
respect of such offence. 
o Has been removed or dismissed from service of 
the Government of India or State Government or 
an undertaking or corporation owned or controlled 
by Government of India or State government. 
o Has ever indulged in child abuse or employment 
of child labour or immoral act. 
o Is part of management of a child care institution 
in a district. 
Benefits of new bill 
• Faster adoption: There is significant delay in finalising adoption cases in courts. Between April 2015 and 
March 2020, about 19,000 children have been adopted, an average of 320 adoptions per month. As on July 
2018, there were 629 adoption cases pending in various courts. The bill will ensure that more orphans in 
need of homes, will be adopted faster.  
o Adoption cases are non-adversarial in nature and can be dealt as per the process laid out. 
• Enhanced Protection of children: Both heinous and serious crimes have been clarified, removing ambiguity 
to ensure that children, as much as possible, are protected and kept out of the adult justice system. 
• Smooth implementation: DMs and ADMs will monitor the functioning of various agencies under the JJ Act 
in every district i.e the Child Welfare Committees, the Juvenile Justice Boards, the District Child Protection 
Units and the Special Juvenile Protection Units. 
o Bill makes DMs responsible for ensuring that CCIs falling in their district are following all norms and 
procedures. 
o National Legal Services Authority (2019) noted that only 17 of 35 states/Union Territories (UTs) had all 
basic structures and bodies required under the Act in place. 
Page 5


 
3                                                                                                                                                        
Tentative recommendations of the commission for sub-
categorization of OBCs: 
Category 1 1,674 caste groups- largely 
those who have not 
benefited from the quota. 
2% reservation 
Category 2  534 caste groups 6% reservation 
Category 3 328 caste groups 9% reservation 
Category 4 97 caste groups- mostly 
considered dominant OBCs 
with large population 
10% reservation 
 
 
1. POLITY AND GOVERNANCE 
1.1. SUB-CATEGORISATION OF OTHER BACKWARD CLASSES 
Why in news? 
Union Cabinet has approved an extension by six months of the term of Justice Rohini Commission examining the 
possibility of sub-categorisation within the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in the Central list. 
Background 
• The Union Government constituted a four-
member commission headed by Justice G. 
Rohini in 2017 under Article 340 with an 
aim to improve the equitability of sharing 
of benefits among OBCs. 
o The article 340 of the Indian 
Constitution lays down conditions for 
the appointment of a Commission to 
investigate the conditions of backward 
classes. 
• Mandate of the Commission:  
o Examining the extent of inequitable 
distribution of benefits of reservation 
(i.e. 27 percent reservation in jobs and 
education) among the castes or communities with reference to the central OBC list.  
o Work out the mechanism, criteria, norms and parameters in a scientific approach for sub-categorization 
of OBCs. 
Need for sub-categorization of OBCs 
• Benefits of reservations have reached only 
limited sections: The Rohini commission 
highlighted that from about 2,633 central list 
OBCs, about 1900 castes have not 
proportionately benefitted.  
o Half of these 1900 castes have not 
availed the benefits of reservation at 
all, and the other half include those that 
have availed less than 3 per cent share in the OBC quota. 
o The commission highlighted that 25% of benefits from OBC reservations have been availed by only 10 
sub-castes.  
o According to the committee, the communities that have got almost no benefits of reservations include 
profession-based castes such as Kalaigars, a community that traditionally polishes tins; and Sikligars and 
Saranias, communities that traditionally sharpen knives; apart from several other marginalised groups. 
• Benefits are tilted towards economically stronger sub-sections: Research suggests that the Mandal 
Commission recommendations helped the economically better positioned OBCs more than the most 
backward castes. 
 
Background: The Mandal Commission  
• In 1990, the then Union government announced that Other Backward Classes (OBCs) would get 27 percent 
reservation in jobs in central government services and public sector units (under Article 16(4) of the Constitution). 
• The decision was based on Mandal Commission Report (1980), which was set up in 1979 and chaired by B.P. 
Mandal. The mandate of the Mandal Commission was to identify socially or educationally backward classes to 
address caste discrimination.  
• The recommendation for OBC reservations in central government institutions was implemented in 1992 while the 
education quota came into force in 2006 (under Article 15(4) of the Constitution). 
• To ensure that benefits of the recommendations of the Mandal Commission percolated down to the most backward 
communities, the creamy layer criteria was invoked by Supreme Court in the ruling called the ‘Indira Sawhney 
Who are OBCs?  
• OBC is a collective term used by the Government to classify 
castes which are educationally or socially disadvantaged. 
(OBCs are referred to as Socially and Educationally Backward 
Classes). 
• OBCs are a vastly heterogeneous group. There are various 
jaatis or sub-castes which vary significantly in the societal 
and economic status.  
o For instance, OBCs include land-owning communities in 
both north and south India alongside poorer sections of 
the society living on subsistence labour.  
• There are two lists of OBCs — central and state, with former 
identified by the Union government dealing with the quotas 
in the central jobs, while the state lists are the mandate of 
state governments catering to local reservations. 
 
 
 
4                                                                                                                                                        
Judgment’ (1992).  
o A household with an annual income of Rs 8 lakh or above is classified as belonging to the ‘creamy layer’ among 
OBCs and hence is not eligible for reservations. 
Evolution of the idea of sub-categorization  
• The First Backward Class Commission report of 1955 had proposed sub-categorization of OBCs into backward and 
extremely backward communities.  
• In the Mandal Commission report of 1979, a dissent note by member L R Naik proposed sub-categorization in 
intermediate and depressed backward classes. 
• In 2015, the NCBC had proposed that OBCs be divided into the following three categories: 
a. Extremely Backward Classes (EBC-Group A) facing social, educational and economic backwardness even within 
the OBCs, consisting of aboriginal tribes, nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes who have been carrying on with 
their traditional occupations; 
b. More Backward Classes (MBC-Group B) consisting of vocational groups carrying on with their traditional 
occupations; and 
c. Backward Classes (BC-Group C) comprising of those comparatively more forward.  
• According to the NCBC, 11 states/UTs (Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Puducherry, Karnataka, Haryana, Jharkhand, 
West Bengal, Bihar, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu) have subcategorized OBC for reservations in state-
government-owned institutions.  
Challenges in implementation of OBC sub-categorisation  
• Political sensitivity of the issue: The move to sub-categorize OBCs may create agitation in some sections of 
OBCs as the benefits get redistributed.  
o OBC reservations have caused political turmoil in the past. 
• Use of older and unreliable estimates: The commission has based its recommendations on quota within 
quota on the population figures from the 1931 Census, and not on the more recent Socio-Economic Caste 
Census (SECC) 2011.  
o Since the implementation of the Mandal 
Commission report, over 500 new castes have 
been added to the Central list of OBCs. The 1931 
Census does not have the population for these 
new additions.  
o The 1931 census also does not have population of 
princely states that were not ruled by the British.  
• Information unavailability on social and educational 
status: There is lack of availability of information 
regarding the social and educational backwardness of 
various castes.  
• It could be a very difficult exercise statistically due to 
following reason: Apart from a large number of castes, there are significant variations within castes from 
state to state which implies data collection needs to be larger and more robust.  
Way forward 
• Sub-categorization to be based on relative benefits among the OBCs and not on social backwardness, this 
may help deprived sections to be able to avail of their fair share of the quota.  
• Revising the creamy layer ceiling: National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) demanded that the 
income ceiling be further revised as the current limit is not in up to date with the associated purchasing 
power.  
 
Related developments with regard to 102nd Amendment Act 
• The 102nd amendment inserted Articles 338B and 342A in the Constitution. 
o Article 338B deals with the structure, duties and powers of the National Commission for Backward Classes 
commission (NCBC), and  
o Article 342A (with two clauses), gives the President the power to notify a class as SEBC and the power of 
Parliament to alter the central SEBC list. 
• Recently, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment has framed an amendment to Article 342A to introduce a 
third clause - Article 342A (3) to restore power of states to identify OBCs to be included on the respective state lists. 
o Until now, state governments were free to decide which castes would be part of the OBC list in their own state. 
The central government had no role in these decisions. The OBC lists of many states have such castes and 
National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) 
• The NCBC was set up as a statutory body under 
the NCBC Act, 1993. 
• 102
nd
 Constitutional Amendment Act made it a 
constitutional body as per Article 338B of the 
Constitution. 
• Key functions performed by the panel:  
o In the case of grievances related to non-
implementation of reservations, economic 
grievances, violence, etc. people will be able 
to move the Commission. 
o To inquire into complaints of deprivation 
of rights and safeguards. 
 
5                                                                                                                                                        
communities that haven’t found a place in the central government’s OBC list for those states. 
o However, the Supreme Court ruling on the Maratha reservation held that only the President can declare any 
community as OBC and that too only on the recommendation of the National Commission for Backward Classes 
(NCBC).  
• Additionally, Supreme Court have also remarked about there being in future a “single list” of OBCs that should be 
issued by the President on the recommendations of the National Commission for Backward Classes. 
Related news 
Other Backward Classes (OBC) And Economically Weaker Section (EWS) Get Quotas Under All India Quota (AIQ) 
Scheme For Medical Courses 
• Union Health Ministry has announced 27% reservation for OBCs and 10% quota for EWS in AIQ scheme for 
undergraduate (UG) and postgraduate (PG)state-run Medical and Dental colleges. 
• AIQ scheme was introduced in 1986 for domicile-free, merit-based opportunities to students from any state to 
study in a good medical college in any other state. 
o It comprises 15% of UG seats and 50% of PG seats in government medical colleges. 
o Initially, there was no reservation in the AIQ scheme up to 2007. 
? In 2007, reservation for SCs (15% of AIQ seats) and STs (7.5% of AIQ seats) was made under the scheme. 
1.2. JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN) 
AMENDMENT BILL  
Why in news? 
Parliament passed Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Amendment Bill, 2021, which seeks to 
amend the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. 
Brief Background 
• A juvenile is a person less than 18 years of age.  The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 
2015 addresses children in conflict with law and children in need of care and protection. It provided for the 
trial of juveniles in conflict with law in the age group of 16-18 years as adults in certain cases. 
• The Act was brought to replace the Juvenile Delinquency Law and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection 
of Children Act) 2000. 
• It fulfils India's commitment as a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the rights of the child, the 
Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in respect of Inter-country Adoption (1993), 
and other related international instruments. 
• The recent amendment has been brought based on a report filed by the NCPCR in 2018-19 in which the over 
7,000 Child Care Institutions (or children’s homes) were surveyed and several inadequacies prevailing in the 
system were highlighted. 
Changes made by the Bill 
 Related Provisions in JJ Act,2015 Features of Bill 
Adoption • Adoption of a child is final once a civil 
court issues an adoption order. 
• District Magistrates, including Additional District 
Magistrates, can issue adoption orders (both for intra-
country and intercountry adoptions) in order to ensure 
speedy disposal of cases and enhance accountability. 
• Additional functions of DM: 
o Empowers the DM including ADM to effectively 
coordinate and monitor the functions of various 
agencies responsible for implementation of the 
provision of the principal act.  
o They have been empowered to supervise the 
District Child Protection Units and Special 
Juvenile Protection Units, and conduct a quarterly 
review of the functioning of CWC, JJ Boards. 
Appeals • There will be no appeal for any order 
made by a Child Welfare Committee 
concluding that a person is not a child in 
need of care and protection.  The Bill 
removes this provision. 
• The Bill removes this provision. 
• Any person aggrieved by an adoption order passed by 
the district magistrate may file an appeal before the 
Divisional Commissioner, within 30 days of such 
order.  Such appeals should be disposed within four 
weeks from the date of filing of the appeal. 
 
6                                                                                                                                                        
Serious 
Offences 
• Offences committed by juveniles are 
categorised as: 
o Heinous offences (those with 
minimum punishment of seven 
years of imprisonment under IPC or 
any other law),  
o Serious offences (three to seven 
years of imprisonment), and  
o Petty offences (below three years 
of imprisonment). 
• Juvenile Justice Board will inquire about 
a child who is accused of a serious 
offence.  
• Redefines 'serious offences' to include such offences 
for which the punishment is:  
o Minimum imprisonment for a term of 3-7 years; 
o Maximum imprisonment for a term more than 7 
years but no minimum imprisonment or minimum 
imprisonment of less than 7 years. 
• This has been done to give effect to recommendation 
of Supreme court in Shilpa Mittal v. State of NCT of 
Delhi case. 
Designate
d Court 
• Offences against children that are 
punishable with imprisonment of more 
than seven years, will be tried in the 
Children’s Court (equivalent to a 
Sessions Court).  
•  Other offences (punishable with 
imprisonment of less than seven years) 
will be tried by a Judicial Magistrate. 
• Provides that all offences under the Act will be tried in 
the Children’s Court.  
Offences 
against 
children 
• An offence under the Act, which is 
punishable with imprisonment 
between three to seven years will be 
cognizable (where arrest is allowed 
without warrant) and non-bailable.  
• Such offences will be non-cognizable and non-bailable. 
Child 
Welfare 
Committe
es (CWCs) 
• States must constitute one or more 
CWCs for each district for dealing with 
children in need of care and protection. 
• Provides certain criteria for the 
appointment of members to CWC.  For 
instance, a member should be:  
o involved in health, education, or 
welfare of children for at least 
seven years, or  
o a practising professional with a 
degree in child psychology, 
psychiatry, law, or social work. 
• Stipulate certain additional criteria for appointment of 
CWC members. 
• No person shall be eligible for selection as a member of 
the CWC, if he: 
o Has any past record of violation of human rights 
or child rights. 
o Has been convicted of an offence involving moral 
turpitude, and such conviction has not been 
reversed or has not been granted full pardon in 
respect of such offence. 
o Has been removed or dismissed from service of 
the Government of India or State Government or 
an undertaking or corporation owned or controlled 
by Government of India or State government. 
o Has ever indulged in child abuse or employment 
of child labour or immoral act. 
o Is part of management of a child care institution 
in a district. 
Benefits of new bill 
• Faster adoption: There is significant delay in finalising adoption cases in courts. Between April 2015 and 
March 2020, about 19,000 children have been adopted, an average of 320 adoptions per month. As on July 
2018, there were 629 adoption cases pending in various courts. The bill will ensure that more orphans in 
need of homes, will be adopted faster.  
o Adoption cases are non-adversarial in nature and can be dealt as per the process laid out. 
• Enhanced Protection of children: Both heinous and serious crimes have been clarified, removing ambiguity 
to ensure that children, as much as possible, are protected and kept out of the adult justice system. 
• Smooth implementation: DMs and ADMs will monitor the functioning of various agencies under the JJ Act 
in every district i.e the Child Welfare Committees, the Juvenile Justice Boards, the District Child Protection 
Units and the Special Juvenile Protection Units. 
o Bill makes DMs responsible for ensuring that CCIs falling in their district are following all norms and 
procedures. 
o National Legal Services Authority (2019) noted that only 17 of 35 states/Union Territories (UTs) had all 
basic structures and bodies required under the Act in place. 
 
7                                                                                                                                                        
Concerns regarding bill  
• Overburdening DMs: The Bill 
puts entire onus of children's 
welfare on DMs, ignoring the 
fact that the DMs are over-
burdened authorities, with the 
charge of entire district and 
other multifarious duties. 
Centralizing all powers with 
respect to children 
rehabilitation in one authority 
(DMs) may lead to delays, and 
may have wider repercussions 
on child welfare. 
• Inadequate Competency: 
District magistrates and 
divisional commissioners are 
trained to be administrators 
and perform functions of the 
government. Specific training in 
child protection rules will need 
to be imparted, as they usually 
are not trained or equipped to 
deal with these specific laws.  
o In countries such as United 
Kingdom, Germany, France, 
and several states in the 
United States of America, 
adoption orders are issued 
only by the court.  
• Concerns regarding separation 
of powers: The Grievance 
redressal powers have been 
given to the executive. This has 
serious implications on the 
doctrine of separation of 
powers. 
Conclusion 
Notwithstanding concerns mentioned 
above, new bill is expected to address 
difficulties faced in implementation of Act 
by increasing power and responsibilities 
of DMs and providing clarity on scope of 
certain provisions of the Act.  
To further increase protection of 
children, following steps can be taken: 
• Transparency: Proper record keeping and documentation must be carried out by all agencies to ensure 
transparency in various areas like finances, compliance with procedures etc. 
• Sensitization of officials:  Officials need to be properly trained to sensitively and efficiently deal with 
children and their issues, needs, problems, concerns and safety. Vacant positions must be filled, and where 
required, extra staff must be employed to ensure due care and protection to children. 
• Networking and Coordinating: Linkages with external agencies and individuals who are experts in various 
areas of child care must be encouraged and made mandatory (where applicable). 
Issues with implementation of JJ Act 
• Child-care institutions (CCIs): The Committee on review exercise of CCIs 
(2018) noted that many CCIs fail to provide even the basic services to 
the children including individual bedding, and proper nutrition and diet. 
Despite registration being mandatory under the 2015 Act, only 32% of 
total CCIs across the country were registered. 
o NCPCR report in 2018-19 found that 1.5 per cent CCIs do not 
conform to rules and regulations of the JJ Act and 29 per cent of 
them had major shortcomings in their management. Not a single 
CCI in the country was found to be 100 per cent compliant to the 
provisions of the JJ Act. 
• Limited Capacity of institutions: The Standing Committee on Human 
Resource Development (2015) noted that CWCs and JJBs lack authority 
to manage their financial and human resources and are dependent on 
the state or district administration.  Due to lack of infrastructure or 
specific funds, action taken by them was limited and delayed. It 
recommended greater financial allocation, training and cadre-building 
for various bodies.   
• Juveniles in conflict with the law: The total number of children arrested 
rose from 33,642 in 2009 to 38,685 in 2019, an increase of 15%. Children 
in the 16-18 years’ age group account for majority of children arrested. 
o Pendency of cases of juveniles in conflict with law has increased 
over the years from 43% in 2009 to 51% in 2019. The total number 
of convictions decreased from 52% in 2009 to 43% in 2019, whereas 
acquittals remained below 10%. 
 
 
Read More
Offer running on EduRev: Apply code STAYHOME200 to get INR 200 off on our premium plan EduRev Infinity!

Related Searches

Polity & Governance: July 2021 Current Affair Current Affairs Notes | EduRev

,

study material

,

Extra Questions

,

Polity & Governance: July 2021 Current Affair Current Affairs Notes | EduRev

,

Previous Year Questions with Solutions

,

video lectures

,

shortcuts and tricks

,

MCQs

,

Summary

,

Polity & Governance: July 2021 Current Affair Current Affairs Notes | EduRev

,

Semester Notes

,

Important questions

,

ppt

,

practice quizzes

,

Sample Paper

,

pdf

,

past year papers

,

Viva Questions

,

Exam

,

mock tests for examination

,

Free

,

Objective type Questions

;