Weekly Current Affairs (22nd to 30th April 2023) Part - 2 | Current Affairs & Hindu Analysis: Daily, Weekly & Monthly - UPSC PDF Download

Governor’s Power over State Bills

Context: Recently, the Supreme Court (SC) have observed that bills sent to the governor for assent must be returned "as soon as possible" and not sit over them, causing Gubernatorial Procrastination and making state Legislative Assemblies wait indefinitely.

• The SC observed as a part of judicial order in a petition filed by the State of Telangana complaining that the Governor has kept pending several important Bills sent.

What are the Governor’s Powers over State Bills?

Article 200:

• Article 200 of the Indian Constitution outlines the process for a Bill passed by the Legislative Assembly of a State to be presented to the Governor for assent, who may either assent, withhold assent or reserve the Bill for consideration by the President.
• The Governor may also return the Bill with a message requesting reconsideration by the House or Houses.

Article 201:

• It states that when a Bill is reserved for the consideration of the President, the President may assent to or withhold assent from the Bill.
• The President may also direct the Governor to return the Bill to the House or Houses of the Legislature of the State for reconsideration.

Options Available with the Governor:

• He may give assent, or he can send it back to the Assembly requesting it to reconsider some provisions of the Bill, or the Bill itself.
• He may reserve the bill for the consideration of the president. The reservation is obligatory where the bill passed by the state legislature endangers the position of the state high court. However, the governor can also reserve the bill if it is of the following nature:
  • Against the provisions of the Constitution
  • Opposed to the DPSP
  • Against the larger interest of the country
  • Of grave national importance
  • Deals with compulsory acquisition of property under Article 31A of the Constitution.
• Another option is to withhold the assent, but this is not normally done by any Governor because it would be an extremely unpopular action.

What is the SC’s Observation?

• While referring to the first proviso to Article 200 of the Constitution, the SC mandated that Governors should not delay over Bills sent to them for assent after they had been passed by Legislative Assemblies.
• They should be returned "as soon as possible" and not sit over them. The expression "as soon as possible" in this article has significant constitutional intent and that constitutional authorities should keep this in mind.

What are Recent Instances of Gubernatorial Procrastination?

• Also Tamil Nadu Assembly passed a resolution urging the President of India, among other things, to fix a timeline for assent to be given to Bills passed by the Assembly.
  • For instance, in the TN Governor forwarded the Bill for exemption from the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) to the President after considerable delay.
• In Kerala, the situation has become a bit curious with the Governor publicly announcing that he would not give assent to the Lokayukta Amendment Bill and the Kerala University Amendment Bill.

What are the Legal Arguments against Delaying Assent?

States’ Constitutional Obligation:

• The Governor's inaction on bills passed by the Assembly creates a situation where the state government is unable to function in accordance with the Constitution.
• If the Governor continues to fail to act in accordance with the Constitution, the State government has a constitutional obligation to invoke Article 355 and notify the President, requesting that appropriate instructions be issued to the Governor to ensure that the process of government is conducted in accordance with the Constitution.

SC Ruling:

• Under Article 361 of the Constitution, the Governor has complete immunity from court proceedings for any act done in the exercise of their powers.
• This provision poses a unique situation when a government may need to challenge a Governor's action of withholding assent to a Bill.
• Hence, the Governor, while declaring that s/he withholds assent to a bill, will have to disclose the reason for such refusal; being a high constitutional authority, s/he cannot act in an arbitrary manner.
• If the grounds for refusal disclose mala fide or extraneous considerations or ultra vires, the Governor’s action of refusal could be struck down as unconstitutional.
• This point has been settled by a constitution bench of the Supreme Court in Rameshwar Prasad and Ors. vs Union Of India and Anr.
• The Court held: “the immunity granted by Article 361(1) does not, however, take away the power of the Court to examine the validity of the action including on the ground of malafides”.

What are the Practices Overseas?

• United Kingdom: The practice of requiring royal assent for a Bill to become law exists in the United Kingdom, but by practice and usage, there is no power of veto exercised by the crown, and refusal of royal assent on controversial grounds is considered unconstitutional.
• United States: In the United States, the President can refuse assent to a Bill, but if the Houses pass it again with two thirds of each House, the Bill becomes law.

Note

The refusal of assent is not followed in other democratic countries, and in some cases, the Constitution provides a remedy so that a Bill passed by the legislature can become law despite the refusal of assent.

Way Forward

• The framers of the Constitution did not anticipate Governors sitting on Bills indefinitely without taking any action under Article 200.
• Gubernatorial Procrastination is a is a new phenomenon that requires a new solution within the framework of the Constitution. Therefore, the Supreme Court should set a reasonable time frame for Governors to make a decision on a Bill passed by the Assembly in the interest of federalism in the country.

World Malaria Day

Context: World Malaria Day is observed every year on 25th April.

• It was established by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2007 to raise awareness about malaria.
• The theme for World Malaria Day 2023 is "Time to deliver zero malaria: invest, innovate, implement".

What is Malaria?

About:

• Malaria is a life-threatening disease caused by the Plasmodium parasite.
• This parasite is transmitted to humans through the bites of infected female Anopheles mosquitoes.
• Malaria is most common in tropical and subtropical regions of the world, including sub-Saharan Africa, Southeast Asia, and South America.
• While Plasmodium falciparum is responsible for more deaths, Plasmodium vivax is the most widespread of all of the malaria species.

Symptoms:

• Once inside the human body, the parasites multiply in the liver and then infect red blood cells, causing symptoms such as fever, chills, headache, muscle aches, and fatigue.
• In severe cases, malaria can lead to organ failure, coma, and death.

Vaccine:

• Till now, no malaria vaccine has shown the benchmark efficacy of 75% set by WHO. Still, WHO gave a go-ahead for the first malaria vaccine called RTS,S to be rolled out in high transmission African countries understanding the urgency of malaria control and prevention.
• It has relatively low efficacy somewhere between 30-40%.
• This vaccine has been developed by a collaborative effort of several organisations including GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation etc.
• In India, Bharat Biotech has been granted license to manufacture this vaccine.
• Similar to RTS,S vaccine the Oxford University has developed a vaccine called R21 which is still waiting for the WHO’s approval.
• Ghana and Nigeria have approved this vaccine for use in their countries.
• It is also being manufactured by Serum Institute of India.

Malaria Cases:

• As per the World Malaria Report 2022, the disease claimed the lives of an estimated 6,19,000 people in 2021.
• The report also highlighted that India has shown a significant decline in malaria cases and deaths in past 10 years.

What are the Efforts Made to Contain Malaria?

Globally:

• Global Malaria Program: It was launched by WHO and is responsible for coordinating WHO's global efforts to control and eliminate malaria. Its work is guided by the "Global technical strategy for malaria 2016–2030”. The strategy aims to reduce malaria case incidence and mortality rates by at least 40% by 2020, at least 75% by 2025 and at least 90% by 2030 against a 2015 baseline.
• Malaria Elimination Initiative: It was launched by Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. This initiative focuses on eliminating malaria in certain regions of the world through a combination of strategies, including increasing access to effective treatments, reducing the mosquito population, and developing new tools and technologies to combat the disease.
• E-2025 initiative: In 2021, WHO launched the E-2025 initiative to halt the transmission of malaria in 25 identified countries by 2025.

India’s efforts:

• National Vector-Borne Disease Control Programme: It is an umbrella programme for prevention and control of vector borne diseases viz. Malaria, Japanese Encephalitis (JE), Dengue, Chikungunya, Kala-azar and Lymphatic Filariasis.
• National Malaria Control Programme (NMCP): Launched in 1953, it is built around three key activities:
  • Insecticidal residual spray (IRS) with DDT
  • Monitoring and surveillance of cases
  • Treatment of patients
• National Framework for Malaria Elimination 2016-2030:
• Based on WHO Global Technical Strategy for Malaria 2016–2030 (GTS), the goals of the NFME are:
  • Eliminate malaria (zero indigenous cases) throughout the entire country by 2030
  • Maintain malaria–free status in areas where malaria transmission has been interrupted and prevent re-introduction of malaria.
• High Burden to High Impact (HBHI) Initiative: It was started in four states (West Bengal, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh) in July 2019.
  • Distribution of Long-Lasting Insecticidal Nets (LLINs) to high burden areas has led to a reduction in endemicity in these 4 very high endemic states.
• Malaria Elimination Research Alliance-India (MERA-India): It has been established by Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) with the conglomeration of partners working on malaria control.

Conclusion

India’s aim is to be malaria-free by 2027 and to eliminate the disease by 2030. Through various measures, the country has made stupendous progress in thwarting malaria, by reducing the disease by 66% between 2018 and 2022.

National Security Act 1980

Context: Recently, the Supreme Court heard a plea by an accused for clubbing the FIRs against him in Bihar with those in Tamil Nadu.

• The accused was allegedly spreading fake news about laborer from Bihar getting attacked in Tamil Nadu, under the stringent National Security Act (NSA), 1980

What is the National Security Act, 1980?

About:

• The NSA is a preventive detention law enacted in 1980 to maintain public order and national security.
• Preventive Detention involves the detainment (containment) of a person in order to keep him/her from committing future crimes and/or from escaping future prosecution.
• Article 22 (3) (b) of the Constitution allows for preventive detention and restriction on personal liberty for reasons of state security and public order.
• Article 22(4) states that no law providing for preventive detention shall authorize the detention of a person for a longer period than three months.

Powers to the Government:

• The NSA empowers the Centre or a State government to detain a person to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to national security.
• The government can also detain a person to prevent him from disrupting public order or for maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community.

Period of Confinement:

• The maximum period for which one may be detained is 12 months.
• Establishment of National Security Council:
• The act also provides for the constitution of a National Security Council, which advises the Prime Minister on matters relating to national security.

What is the National Security Council (NSC)?

About:

• The NSC in India is a high-level body that advises the Prime Minister of India on matters related to national security, strategic policy, and defense.
• It is a three-tiered organization that oversees political, economic, energy and security issues of strategic concern.
• The NSC is chaired by the Prime Minister.
• It was formed in 1998, where all aspects of national security are deliberated upon.

Members:

• National Security Advisor (NSA)
• Chief of Defence Staff (CDS)
• Deputy National Security Advisors
• Ministers of Defence
• Ministers of External Affairs
• Ministers of Home Affairs
• Minister of Finance
• Vice Chairman of the NITI Aayog

Functions:

• NSC advises the PM on issues of national security, strategic policy, and defense, providing strategic direction to the country's security and defense policies and ensuring their implementation.
• It also conducts regular reviews of the country's security situation and makes recommendations to the PM on policy changes, if needed.
• It coordinates the activities of various agencies involved in the country's security, including the armed forces, intelligence agencies, and law enforcement agencies.
• It analyses emerging security threats and provides early warning to the govt and preparing contingency plans for various security scenarios.

What is the Criticism of the National Security Act?

• Misuse of Power: One of the major challenges of the NSA is its potential misuse by the authorities. The law grants the government the power to detain individuals without trial for up to a year.
  • This power can be easily misused by the authorities to suppress dissent or target political opponents.
• Violation of Human Rights: The NSA, if misused, can lead to a violation of human rights.
  • The law provides for preventive detention without trial, which can be seen as a violation of the right to a fair trial, the right to freedom of expression, and the right to personal liberty.
• Lack of Transparency: Another challenge with the NSA is the lack of transparency in the detention process.
  • Detainees are often not informed of the grounds for their detention, and the detention orders are not made public. This lack of transparency can lead to abuse of power by the authorities.
• Legal Challenges: Critics have argued that the law is unconstitutional and violates fundamental rights guaranteed under the Indian Constitution.
  • The Supreme Court of India has also struck down several detention orders issued under the NSA.
• Limited effectiveness: While the NSA is intended to prevent threats to national security, its effectiveness is limited.
  • Detaining individuals without trial may not necessarily prevent the threat, and in some cases, it may even exacerbate the problem by radicalizing individuals.

Way Forward

• Ensure Transparency: The government should ensure transparency in the detention process by informing detainees of the grounds for their detention and making detention orders public. This will help prevent abuse of power by the authorities.
• Strict Implementation: The authorities must ensure that the NSA is implemented strictly in accordance with the law and is not misused to target political opponents or suppress dissent.
• Strengthen Judicial Oversight: The judicial oversight of preventive detention orders under the NSA should be strengthened to ensure that they are not arbitrary or unconstitutional.
• Focus on Intelligence Gathering: The government should focus on intelligence gathering and other measures that can help prevent threats to national security without resorting to preventive detention.

Inter-State Water Dispute

Context: Odisha has complained to the Ministry of Jal Shakti under the Inter-State River Water Disputes (ISRWD) Act 1956 accusing Chhattisgarh of misleading the Mahanadi Water Disputes Tribunal (MWDT) by releasing water in Mahanadi river in the Non-Monsoon Season.

• The MWDT was formed in March 2018. The tribunal has been asked to submit its report by December 2025 by the Ministry of Jal Shakti.
• There is no inter-state agreement between Odisha and Chhattisgarh regarding Mahanadi basin water allocation.

What is the Concern of Odisha?

• Chhattisgarh has opened 20 gates at Kalma Barrage through which 1,000-1,500 cusecs of water is flowing into Mahanadi’s low catchment area during the non-monsoon season.
• Chhattisgarh’s reluctance to release water during non-monsoon seasons has often resulted in the non-availability of water in the lower catchment of Mahanadi.
• This also affects the Rabi crops and aggravates the drinking problem in Odisha.
• However, this time Chhattisgarh has released water without any intimation, which raised concerns over its management of Mahanadi River water.
• The state faced flood in upper catchment during monsoon and thus, opened gates without any intimation to Odisha.

What are the Inter-State River Disputes in India?

About:

• The Inter-State River Water Disputes are one of the most contentious issues in Indian federalism today.
• The recent cases of the Krishna Water Dispute, Cauvery Water Dispute and the Satluj Yamuna Link Canal are some examples.
• Various Inter-State Water Disputes Tribunals have been constituted so far, but they had their own problems.

Constitutional Provisions:

• Entry 17 of the State List deals with water i.e., water supply, irrigation, canal, drainage, embankments, water storage and hydro power.
• Entry 56 of the Union List empowers the Union Government for the regulation and development of inter-state rivers and river valleys to the extent declared by Parliament to be expedient in the public interest.

According to Article 262, in case of disputes relating to waters:

• Parliament may by law provide for the adjudication of any dispute or complaint with respect to the use, distribution or control of the waters of, or in, any inter-State River or river valley.
• Parliament may, by law, provide that neither the Supreme Court nor any other court shall exercise jurisdiction in respect of any such dispute or complaint as mentioned above.

What is the Mechanism for Inter-State River Water Disputes Resolution?

As per Article 262, the Parliament has enacted the following:

• River Board Act, 1956: This empowered the GoI to establish Boards for Interstate Rivers and river valleys in consultation with State Governments. To date, no river board has been created.
• Inter-State Water Dispute Act, 1956: In case, if a particular state or states approach the Centre for the constitution of the tribunal, the Central Government should try to resolve the matter by consultation among the aggrieved states. In case, if it does not work, then it may constitute the tribunal.

Note: Supreme Court shall not question the Award or formula given by tribunal, but it can question the working of the tribunal.

• The Inter-State Water Dispute Act, 1956 was amended in 2002, to include the major recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission.
• The amendments mandated a one-year time frame to set up the water disputes tribunal and also a 3-year time frame to give a decision.

What are the Issues with Interstate Water Dispute Tribunals?

• Protracted proceedings and extreme delays in dispute resolution. Water disputes such as the Godavari and Cauvery disputes in India have faced long delays in resolution.
• Opacity in the institutional framework and guidelines that define these proceedings; and ensuring compliance.
• The composition of the tribunal is not multidisciplinary, and it consists of persons only from the judiciary.
• The absence of water data that is acceptable to all parties currently makes it difficult to even set up a baseline for adjudication.
• The growing nexus between water and politics has transformed the disputes into turfs of vote bank politics.
  • This politicisation has led to increasing defiance by states, extended litigations and subversion of resolution mechanisms.

What Measures can be taken to Resolve Water Disputes?

• Bring Inter-state water disputes under interstate council constructed by the president under article 263 and need for consensus-based decision making.
• States must be motivated for water use efficiency in every domain and water harvesting and water recharging to reduce the demand on river water and in situ water source.
• Need of a single water management agency for both ground and surface water on scientific basis and also for technical advice on union, river basin, state and district level for water conservation and water management.
• Tribunals must be fast track, technical and also have a verdict enforceable mechanism in a time bound manner.
• A central repository of water data is necessary for informed decision making. It is important for the central government to take a more active role in resolving inter-state water disputes.

Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act 2010

Context: The plan to build six nuclear power reactors in Maharashtra's Jaitapur, which is currently the world's biggest nuclear power generation site under consideration, has been delayed for over a decade due to issues related to India's nuclear liability law.

What are the Laws on Civil Nuclear Liability?

About:

• Laws on civil nuclear liability ensure that compensation is available to the victims for nuclear damage caused by a nuclear incident or disaster and set out who will be liable for that damage.

International Conventions:

• The IAEA serves as depositary for several international legal instruments on civil liability for nuclear damage, these include the Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage and the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage.
• The umbrella Convention on Supplementary Compensation (CSC) was adopted in 1997 with the aim of establishing a minimum national compensation amount.
• India has ratified CSC in 2016.

India’s Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act (CLNDA) of 2010:

Objective:

• India enacted the CLNDA in 2010 to put in place a speedy compensation mechanism for victims of a nuclear accident.

Liability on Operator:

• The CLNDA provides for strict and no-fault liability on the operator of the nuclear plant, where it will be held liable for damage regardless of any fault on its part.
• It specifies the amount the operator will have to pay in case of damage caused by an accident at ₹1,500 crore.
• It also requires the operator to cover liability through insurance or other financial security.

Government’s Role:

• In case the damage claims exceed ₹1,500 crore, the CLNDA expects the government to step in.
• It has limited the government liability amount to the rupee equivalent of 300 million Special Drawing Rights (SDRs).
• Supplier Liability Clause: Having realised that the defective parts were partly responsible for the Bhopal gas tragedy in 1984, the govt went beyond the provisions of CSC to provide for supplier liability over and above that of the operator in CLNDA.
• Under this provision, the operator of the nuclear plant can seek recourse from suppliers in the event of a nuclear incident caused by supplier actions, including the supply of equipment or materials with defects, sub-standard services, or the actions of supplier employees.

Note: The CSC provides for “only” two conditions under which the national law of a country may provide the operator with the “right of recourse”, where they can extract liability from the supplier:

• if it is expressly agreed upon in the contract or
• if the nuclear incident “results from an act or omission done with intent to cause damage”.

Why is the Supplier Liability Clause an Issue in Nuclear Deals?

• Deters Foreign and Domestic Suppliers: Foreign as well as domestic suppliers of nuclear equipment have been wary of operationalizing nuclear deals with India as it has the only law where suppliers can be asked to pay damages.
• Makes Suppliers Vulnerable: The suppliers have raised concerns about potentially getting exposed to unlimited liability under CLNDA as the compensation amount is not fixed under the law as it has been fixed for the operator.
  • Moreover, they also have highlighted the ambiguity over how much insurance is to be set aside in case of damage.
• Lack of Clarity involves Other Laws: In the absence of a comprehensive definition on the types of ‘nuclear damage’, the act potentially allows civil liability claims to be brought against the operator and suppliers through other civil laws.
• Attracts Criminal Liability: The Act does not prevent a person from bringing proceedings against the operator under any law other than this Act. It allows criminal liability to be pursued against the operator and the supplier wherever applicable.

What are the Other Issues with CLNDA?

• Monetary Capping on Compensation: The act fixes the liability to a certain monetary limit (for operators: ₹1,500 crore, for government: rupee equivalent of 300 mn SDRs). The biggest problem with such capping is the situations when the damage exceeds the limit.
  • The Act does not expressly provide for any provision with respect to cost of damages exceeding the limit.
• Burden on Taxpayers: In India, these plants are state owned and operated through NPCIL and so ultimately the responsibility for such disasters will be borne by common taxpayers.
• Neglect of the Additional Costs: Past incidents such as Chernobyl have shown that the party at fault for a nuclear incident must bear additional costs such as cleaning up and safe disposal of nuclear waste, which are expensive and require caution.
  • However, the Act does not provide any provision for these additional costs.
• No Foreign Jurisdiction: India takes supplies from many foreign suppliers which are foreign entities to Indian Law. Indians can’t move to a foreign court to seek compensation.

Way Forward

• Provisions for extra territorial jurisdiction should be made to get access to foreign courts in case compensation is to be sought from a foreign supplier. International Agreements or a robust dispute resolution mechanism could be way out.
• To take suppliers into confidence, a cap on their liability should also be put and a maximum limit on the insurance amount should also be put.
• Law should be amended to resolve the ambiguity and provisions for criminal liability must be eased or scope of criminal proceedings must be clarified.
• Explore alternative funding mechanisms, such as insurance or a dedicated fund, to ensure that the burden is not solely on taxpayers.

CGTMSE Scheme

Context: The Union Minister for MSME recently launched the revamped Credit Guarantee Fund Trust for Micro and Small Enterprises (CGTMSE) Scheme.

What is the CGTMSE Scheme?

About:

• It was launched in 2000 by the Government of India (GoI) to make available collateral-free credit to the micro and small enterprise sector.

Scope:

• Both the existing and the new enterprises are eligible to be covered under the scheme.

Funding:

• The corpus of CGTMSE is contributed by the GoI and SIDBI in the ratio of 4:1 respectively.
• The Ministry of MSMEs, and Small Industries Development Bank of India (SIDBI) established a trust named Credit Guarantee Fund Trust for Micro and Small Enterprises (CGTMSE) to implement the CGTMSE Scheme.

Financial Inclusion for MSMEs:

• While launching the revamp of CGTMSE, it was announced that CGTMSE will collaborate with National Institute for MSME, Hyderabad for setting up a Centre of Financial Inclusion.
• The Centre is expected to provide financial literacy and credit counselling to MSEs, thus helping them to better utilize the benefits of the CGTMSE Scheme.

Note: SIDBI was set up in April 1990 under an Act of the Indian Parliament, acts as the Principal Financial Institution for the Promotion, Financing, and Development of the MSME sector as well as for coordination of functions of institutions engaged in similar activities.

What is the Revamped CGTMSE?

Major Changes:

• The revamped version of the CGTMSE Scheme has been provided with an additional corpus support of ₹9,000 crore in the Union Budget for FY 2023-24 to provide a guarantee for an additional ₹2 lakh crore to MSEs.
• Other major changes made in the revamped version include:
• Reduction in guaranteed fees for loans up to ₹1 crore by 50%.
• Raising of ceiling for guarantee from ₹2 crore to ₹5 crore.
• Raising the bar for claim settlement without taking legal action from the previous limit of Rs. 5 lakhs to Rs. 10 lakhs.

Significance:

• The reduced guaranteed fees will make it easier for MSEs to avail loans.
• The increased ceiling for guarantee and threshold limit for claim settlement will provide better protection to lenders in case of any default by the borrower.
• The scheme is expected to boost credit flow to MSEs, thus creating more employment opportunities in the country.
• These changes have been made to improve the accessibility, affordability and availability of credit to MSEs, especially in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on their businesses.

What are the Other Initiatives Related to MSME Credit?

• Prime Minister’s Employment Generation programme (PMEGP): It is a credit linked subsidy scheme, for setting up of new micro-enterprises and to generate employment opportunities in rural as well as urban areas of the country.
• Scheme of Fund for Regeneration of Traditional Industries (SFURTI): It aims to properly organize the artisans and the traditional industries into clusters and thus provide financial assistance to make them competitive in today's market scenario.
• Interest Subvention Scheme for Incremental Credit to MSMEs: It was introduced by the RBI wherein relief is provided upto 2% of interest to all the legal MSMEs on their outstanding fresh/incremental term loan/working capital during the period of its validity.
• Interest Subsidy Eligibility Certificate (ISEC): Under the scheme, Khadi and Polyvastra producing institutions in mobilizing the capital funds from banking institutions.
• MSME Loan in 59 Minutes: Online portal for quick and hassle-free loans up to Rs. 5 crore. It uses advanced algorithms to analyse data and provide in-principle approval within 59 minutes
• MUDRA Loan Schemes for MSMEs: Provides loans up to Rs. 10 lakh to micro and small enterprises engaged in manufacturing, trading, and services sectors. Collateral-free loans with low interest rates
• National Small Industries Corporation (NSIC): Facilitates MSMEs to obtain credit from various banks and financial institutions by offering competitive interest rates and minimum documentation.
• Credit Link Capital Subsidy Scheme (CLCSS) for Technology Upgradation:
  • Provides capital subsidy of 15% (up to Rs. 15 lakh) to MSEs for upgrading their technology and installing new plant and machinery.
  • Covers more than 50 sub-sectors.
  • Aims to improve the quality, productivity, and competitiveness of MSEs.