Savitribai Phule
Why in News?
Recently, 192nd birth anniversary of Savitribai Phule who was wife of Jyotiba Phule (the pioneer of Satyashodhak Samaj) was celebrated.
Who was Savitribai Phule?
- A Dalit woman from the Mali community, Savitribai was born on January 3, 1831, in Maharashtra’s Naigaon village. Married off at the tender age of 10, her husband Jyotirao Phule is said to have educated her at home.
- Later, Jyotirao admitted Savitribai to a teachers’ training institution in Pune. Throughout their life, the couple supported each other and in doing so, broke many social barriers.
- At a time when it was considered unacceptable for women to even attain education, the couple went on to open a school for girls in Bhidewada, Pune, in 1848. This became the country’s first girls’ school.
Opposition to Phules’ schools
- The Phules opened more such schools for girls, Shudras and Ati-Shudras (the backward castes and Dalits, respectively) in Pune, leading to discontent among Indian nationalists like Bal Gangadhar Tilak.
- They opposed the setting up of schools for girls and non-Brahmins, citing a “loss of nationality”, and believing not following the caste rules would mean a loss of nationality itself.
- The opposition to the couple was so hostile that eventually Jyotirao’s father Govindrao was forced to kick them out of his house.
- Savitribai herself faced great animosity from the upper castes, including instances of physical violence.
- When serving as the headmistress of the first school in Bhide Wada, upper-caste men often pelted stones and threw mud and cow dung on her.
Phule’s role as a social reformer, beyond education
- Along with Jyotirao, Savitribai started the Balhatya Pratibandhak Griha (‘Home for the Prevention of Infanticide’) for pregnant widows facing discrimination.
- Savitribai Phule also advocated inter-caste marriages, widow remarriage, and eradication of child marriage, sati and dowry systems, among other social issues. The Phules also adopted Yashwantrao, the child of a widow, whom they educated to become a doctor.
- In 1873, the Phules set up the Satyashodhak Samaj (‘Truth-seekers’ society’), a platform open to all, irrespective of their caste, religion or class hierarchies, with the sole aim of bringing social equity. As an extension, they started ‘Satyashodhak Marriage’ – a rejection of Brahmanical rituals where the marrying couple takes a pledge to promote education and equality.
- Savitribai became involved in relief work during the 1896 famine in Maharashtra and the 1897 Bubonic plague. She herself contracted the disease while taking a sick child to the hospital, and breathed her last on March 10, 1897.
- The couple also set up ‘Balyata Pratibandak Gruha’, a childcare centre for the protection of pregnant widows and rape victims. Urging women to break free of caste barriers, Savitribai encouraged them to sit together at her meetings.
Savitribai’s literary works
- Savitribai Phule published her first collection of poems, called Kavya Phule (‘Poetry’s Blossoms’), at the age of 23 in 1854.
- She published Bavan Kashi Subodh Ratnakar (‘The Ocean of Pure Gems’), in 1892.
- The speeches and songs of Savitribai Phule, as well as her letters to her husband, have also been published. These works are together known as Matushri Savitribai Phulenchi Bhashane va Gaani.
GS PAPER II NEWS
Supreme Court upholds Centre’s decision on demonetisation
Why in News?
In 4:1 verdict, SC upheld Central government’s 2016 notification of demonetisation of Rs. 1,000 and Rs. 500 denomination notes under Section 26(2) of Reserve Bank of India (RBI) Act 1934.
Supreme Court Observations
- Under Section 26 (2), government has power to demonetise any series of bank notes and it was not limited to one series alone.
- There was consultation between government and RBI six months prior to demonetization.
- Action of demonetisation and time period given for currency exchange were not hit by doctrine of proportionality.
- In 1978, only three days and further extension of five days were given to exchange old notes for new whereas in 2016, 52 days were given to public.
- However, dissenting judge objected to demonetisation process as it was based on a mere notification in official gazette, instead of a plenary legislation in Parliament.
- Demonetisation is act of stripping legal tender status of a currency unit. In 2016, it was carried out to reduce corruption and black money in economy.
- Earlier in 1978, government demonetized Rs 1,000, Rs 5,000, and Rs 10,000 notes under High Denomination Bank Note (Demonetisation) Act, 1978.
| Demonetisation | |
| Pros | Cons |
| Decreased Tax Evasion and Increased Tax Revenue. | Burden of Currency conversion on Citizens |
| Bigger GDP size in long- term due to higher tax revenue and reinvestment. | High cost of conversion in terms of loss of growth and expenditure on conversion. |
| Foster Innovation in Digital Currency and Digital Transaction space. | Negative impact on cash-driven sectors/business. E.g. Micro and Small Units. |
| Reduce crime due to increased transparency and black money. | Increased risk of digital frauds/cybercrimes. |
SECTION 26 (2) OF RBI ACT, 1934
- On recommendation of Central Board (RBI), Central Government may, by notification in Gazette of India, declare that, with effect from such date as may be specified in notification, any series of bank notes of any denomination shall cease to be legal tender save at such office or agency of Bank and to such extent as may be specified in notification.
GS PAPER III NEWS
DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO IT (INTERMEDIARY GUIDELINES AND DIGITAL MEDIA ETHICS CODE) RULES, 2021 IN RELATION TO ONLINE GAMING
Why in News?
- Ministry of Electronics and IT (MeitY) has invited public comments for draft amendments proposed.
- Draft has been prepared to ensure that online games should be offered in conformity with Indian laws.
INDIA’S ONLINE GAMING INDUSTRY
- Revenue of Indian mobile gaming industry is estimated to reach $5 billion by 2025.
- Industry grew at a CAGR (compound annual growth rate) of 38% in India (8% in China and 10% in US) between 2017- 2020.
Key proposals in Draft rules
- Online game: Game that is offered on Internet and is accessible by a user through a computer resource if he makes a deposit with expectation of earning winnings.
- Self-regulatory body (SRB): Only games that have been approved by the self-regulatory body (SRB) are permitted to legally operate in India.
- This body will have a board of directors with five members from diverse fields including online gaming, public policy, IT, psychology and medicine.
- It must ensure that registered games don’t have anything which is not in interest of sovereignty and integrity of India, defence of India, security of state, etc.
Norms for Online gaming companies
- Online gaming companies will not be allowed to engage in betting on the outcome of games.
- online gaming platforms will also have to appoint a compliance officer who will ensure that the platform is following norms, a nodal officer who will act as a liaison official with the government and assist law enforcement agencies, and a grievance officer who will resolve user complaints.
- Mandatory Know Your Customer (KYC) verification of players.
GS PAPER III NEWS
MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, FORESTS AND CLIMATE CHANGE (MOEFCC) REFUSED TO SUSPEND FOREST CONSERVATION RULES (FCR), 2022
Why in News?
- MoEFCC denied National Commission for Scheduled Tribes’ (NCST) request to suspend FCR 2022, claiming that they do not dilute Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006 as determined by tribal panel.
- In October 2022, NCST formed a working group to look into whether rules violated any provisions in FRA and if they infringed upon rights of tribal people.
Forest Conservation Rules, 2022
- Rules have been issued in exercise of powers conferred under Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, and in supersession of Forest (Conservation) Rules, 2003.
- Prescribe procedure to be followed for forest land to be diverted for non-forestry uses.
- Constitution of an Advisory Committee, a regional empowered committee at each of integrated regional offices and a screening committee at state/UT level.
- States given responsibility of settling forest rights of forest dwellers and allowing diversion of forest land.
ABOUT National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST)
- It is a Constitutional body under Article 338A.
- It aims to protect and promote constitutional, socio-economic, legal, and civil rights of STs in country.
- It consists of a chairperson, a vice-chairperson and three other members appointed by President by warrant under his hand and seal.
Concerns raised by National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST)
- Against FRA, 2006 that requires governments to seek consent of forest dwellers before allowing a project on their traditional lands.
- Clause on obtaining Gram Sabha consent is missing from it before diverting forest land for a project, thereby weakening local people say in project.
GS PAPER III NEWS
Kalasa-Banduri project
Why in News?
The long-running dispute between Karnataka and neighbouring Goa over the river Mahadayi has intensified as a result of Karnataka’s decision to move forward with the project.
About the Kalasa-Banduri Nala project
- The Kalasa Banduri Nala project aims to divert water from Mahadayi to satisfy the drinking water needs of Belagavi, Dharwad, Bagalkot and Gadag districts.
- Though the project was first proposed in the early 1980s, it has remained on paper owing to a dispute between Karnataka, Goa and Maharashtra.
- As per plans, barrages are to be built against Kalasa and Banduri streams — tributaries of Mahadayi — and water diverted towards Karnataka’s parched districts.
Why the Dispute?
- Mahadayi originates inside the Bhimgad Wildlife Sanctuary in the Belagavi district of Karnataka and flows into the Arabian Sea in Goa.
- Goa, under its then CM, approached the Centre, urging it to assess the available resources in the river and allocate water to the three basin states — Goa, Maharashtra and Karnataka.
- Due to the protests in Goa and also due to concerns over ecological damage, the project was put on hold by the then NDA government.
- The dispute gained steam in 2006, when the JD(S)-BJP coalition government in Karnataka decided to start work on the project.
- Goa then approached the Supreme Court, seeking the creation of a Tribunal to settle the water sharing dispute.
- A Tribunal was finally set up by the UPA government in November 2010.
Tribunal Award
- The Tribunal in 2018 awarded 13.42 TMC water from Mahadayi river basin to Karnataka, 1.33 TMC to Maharashtra and 24 TMC to Goa.
- In Karnataka’s share, 5.5 TMC was to meet drinking water needs and 8.02 TMC was for hydro-electricity generation.
- Of the 5.5 TMC, 3.8 TMC was to be diverted to Malaprabha basin through Kalasa and Banduri Nalas (canals).
- This was notified by the Central government in February 2020.
Issues raised with Tribunals award
- After the Tribunal award, Goa filed a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court in July 2019, challenging the quantum of allocation.
- Subsequently, in October 2020, it filed a contempt petition before the SC, accusing Karnataka of illegally diverting water from the Mahadayi basin.
- Civil appeals were also filed by Maharashtra over the dispute.