About Us  :  Online Enquiry

MAINS Q/A 05-05-2018

Q1. What factors led to the enactment of Regulating Act 1773.

The chaotic situation brought about by the misgovernment of Bengal forced the British parliament to enquire into the affairs of the East India Company. This revealed gross malpractices of the senior officials of the company. The company was also facing a financial crisis at this time and had applied to the British government for a loan of one million pounds. The British Parliament found it necessary to regulate the activities of the company in India and for this, the Regulating act of 1773 was passed.

This was the first direct interference made by the British government in the affairs of India. Its purpose was to take a step towards removing the political power from the hands of a trading company. The act also provided specific measures to set up a new administrative framework. The president of the company’s Calcutta factory, who used to be the Governor of Bengal, was made the Governor-General of all the Indian territories of the company.

The other two governors of Bombay and Madras were made subordinate to him. He was to have a council of four members. For the administration of justice, the act proposed the setting up of a supreme court at Calcutta. The defects of the regulating act became clear very soon. There were constant quarrels between Warren Hastings, the first Governor General, and the members of his council.

List of Acts after 1857 during British India

The Supreme Court also could not function smoothly as its jurisdiction and its relations with the council were not clear. It was also not clear which law Indian or English was to follow. This court had sentenced to death an Ex-Diwan of Murshidabad, Maharaja Nanda Kumar, and a Brahman by caste, which was charged with committing forgery. But in India a Brahman could not be sentenced to death for such an offence. This matter created much sensation in Bengal. Moreover, the control of the British government over the company remained vague even after the enactment of the Regulating act.

Key Features of the Regulating Act of 1773

  1. It designated the Governor-General of Bengal and created an Executive Council of four members to assist him. Lord Warren Hastings was the first Governor-General of Bengal.
    Governors of Bombay and Madras presidencies subordinate to the Governor-general of Bengal.
    3. It provided for the establishment of a Supreme Court at Calcutta (1774) with one Chiel Justice and three other Judges.
    4. It prohibited the servants of the Company from engaging in any private trade or accepting presents or bribes from the natives.


Q2. What are the Concerns with the Skill India mission?

Concerns with the Skill India mission in the current form:-

  • The government set a target of skilling 400 million persons by 2022, till 2016 it had only skilled 10 million people. At this pace, the 2022 target appears to be a far cry.
  • India faces a severe shortage of trained workers 2.3 per cent of India’s work force has formal skill training compared to 68 per cent in the UK.
  • The targets allocated to them were very high and without regard to any sectoral requirement.Everybody was chasing numbers without providing employment to the youth or meeting sectoral industry needs.
  • CAG :–
  • The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) have pointed out flaws in the design and operations of the NSDC and National Skill Development Fund which has resulted in falling short of skill development goals.
  • Majority of them also could not achieve the placement targets for the trained persons.
  • There is a huge ethics and accountability issueif there is no credible assessment board and when there are too many sector skill councils, each trying to maximise their business.
  • The Sharada Prasad Committee findings:-
    • The NSDC is responsible for poor implementation of the Standard Training Assessment and Reward (STAR) programme. It highlighted that only 8.5 per cent of the persons trained were able to get employment.
    • NSDC has not been able to discharge its responsibilities for setting up sector skill councils (SSCs) owing to lots of instances of serious conflict of interest and unethical practices.
      • Sector skill councils (SSCs) became a hotbed of crony capitalism that have tried to extract maximum benefit from public funds.
    • India has not been able to develop a sound vocational education and training system in the last 70 years. By providing focus on vocational training for only these disadvantaged categories, India has put a stigma on it
    • Mindset issue:-
      • It also has to do with the mindset of employers. They pay poor wages to skilled workers .If a skilled worker gets the same or marginally higher wages than the unskilled person, there is no incentive for him to get skilled.
      • It has also to do with the mindset of the academicians who think that vocational education will dilute value of education
    • Government is conducting vocational training courses without any connect with the actual industry demand. Most of them run short term courses with the result that they do not get employment.
    • Absence of ownership of National Standards:-
      • There are seventeen Ministries in addition to the Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship out of which only eight Ministries have developed their own course curriculum. It has been happening for long, probably, in absence of any national standards.
    • Apprenticeship training is not an integral part of VET:-
      • It has been conducted as a stand alone activity in which ITI graduates as well as fresher from school system can participate. The result has been that it has not been well received either by the trainees or by the employers.
    • Inadequate Financing of VET System
    • Inadequate Training Capacity in the country
    • Poor quality outcomes:-
      • One of the major challenges facing the vocational education/training system in the country is substandard quality leading to non employment. Basic reason for this has been the absence of national standards and national credible assessment and certification system.
    • Large School Drop-outs from schools
    • Huge shortage of qualified trainersin the vocational education/training system. One cannot imagine quality training without a quality trainer
    • Providing Counselling, Guidance and Employment Services to trainees is as important as providing them skills. This work was earlier done by the Employment Exchanges in the country. However, with time they have lost their relevance.
    • National Skill Development Fund (NSDF) meets its objectives through NSDCbut its governance structure is flawed. The NSDF is required to oversee the work of NSDC.NSDF board of trustees consists of the chairman of NSDC as its member.


Q3. What are the recommendation of Justice Bindal committee w.r.t The hague convention on civil aspects of International child abduction.

Justice Rajesh Bindal Committee has questioned the basic principles of the Hague Convention.The Hague convention deals with the on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The Justice Rajesh Bindal Committee was set up in 2017 to suggest a model legislation to safeguard the interest of the child as well those of the parents when an NRI (Non Resident Indian) marriage goes sour and one of the parents flees from one country to another with the child. This is the case of inter-country parental child abduction.

What are the recommendations of Justic Bindal Committee?

  • Justice Rajesh Bindal Committee has questioned one of the basic principles of the Hague Convention.
  • It has proposed that the return of the child to his or her habitual residence may not necessarily be in the best interest of the child.
  • It adds that returning a child to the place of habitual residence may result in sending the child to an inharmonious set-up as well as overlook the fact that a mother is the primary caregiver of the child.
  • There is immense pressure on India from the U.S. to accede to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, which is a multi-national treaty that seeks to protect children wrongfully removed by one of the parents from the custody of the other parent.
  • At the heart of this treaty is the criterion of “habitual residence” of the child, which is used to determine whether the child was wrongfully removed by a parent as well as to seek the return of the child.
  • The panel has also prepared a draft law to safeguard the interest of the children, as well as those of the parents, particularly mothers.
  • The proposed legislation lays down nine exceptions under which a child will not be returned to the country of habitual residence.
  • The report also requires the setting up of an Inter-Country Parental Child Removal Disputes Resolution Authority, which will be the nodal body to decide on the custody of the child, mediate between the warring parties, as well as order the return of the child to the country of habitual residence.
  • Indian family system: Indian Family system offers the best interest of the child: With the older generation of womenfolk being home-makers, the households have great caregivers in terms of grandparents, uncles, aunts, cousins, etc., on either side.


What are the conditions for refusal to return the child?


The important conditions under which a child’s return can be refused are:

  • best interest of the child,
  • domestic violence or mental or physical cruelty or harassment against the parent who fled with the child,
  • the parent claiming the return of the child was not exercising the custody rights at the time of removal, and
  • if there is a grave risk that the child would be exposed to physical or psychological harm.


Should India accede to the Hague convention?


  • In 2016, the government had decided not to be a signatory to the treaty on the ground that it can be detrimental to the interest of the women fleeing an abusive marriage.
  • In most of the NRI marriages, the husband is a green card holder and the wife is dependent on him.
  • Whenever such marriages turn sour or the husband becomes abusive to the wife, then latter tends to return back to India along with the child.
  • Indian law does not automatically recognise foreign judgments. Foreign courts may pass their judgments in the absence of the fleeing parent, which, in most of the cases is a woman.
  • Now by signing the Hague Convention, we will be compelled to recognise a foreign judgment regardless of the justness of the decision on custody under Indian law or whether was delivered ex-parte.
  • India should, first of all pass a law on this issue and set up an authority on Inter-Country Parental Child Removal Disputes Resolution. Then only it should sign the Hague convention.


Q4. What is contempt of court?

The Supreme Court has blamed the Centre for showing sheer contempt of court by not framing the Cauvery draft scheme.


  • Contempt of court is often also referred to as “contempt”.
  • It is the offence of being disobedient towards a court of law and its authorities in the form of behaviour that opposes or defies the dignity of the court.
  • It manifests itself in wilful disregard of the authority of a court of law.
  • There are broadly two categories of contempt:
    • being rude to legal authorities in the courtroom
    • willfully failing to obey a court order
  • When a court decides that an action constitutes contempt, it issues an order called “found” or “held” in contempt which declares a person or organisation is found to have disobeyed the court.
  • This is likely to jeopardise a fair trial.
  • Besides, those found guilty of contempt of court may have to pay a fine or even go to jail.
  • In India contempt of court is of two types:
    • Civil contempt:
      • Under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971, civil contempt has been defined as wilful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court.
    • Criminal contempt:
      • Under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971, criminal contempt has been defined as the publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any other act whatsoever which:
        • Scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any court, or
        • Prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere with the due course of any judicial proceeding, or
        • Interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other manner.

·         Punishment

  • 6 (six) months, or fine up to ₹2000 or both.

Send this to a friend