Chanakya IAS Academy Blog

IAS Blog | Civil Services Preparation | Chanakya IAS Academy Blog
11 July 2016 K2_CATEGORY IAS Blog

General Mukul Rohatgi has claimed in the Supreme Court that big cars cause less pollution than small ones. However, car manufacturers do not share the emissions profile of their vehicles so there is no way to ascertain that.

What is more, technology treatments that allow certain big cars to be cleaner than their smaller compatriots are not available here as they need ultra-low-sulphur diesel that is not yet commercially available in the country.

The Centre claimed that high-end and big diesel cars pollute less than small cars while challenging the court’s blanket ban on fresh registration of SUVs and diesel luxury cars with over 2000 CC engine capacity in Delhi.

Attorney General MukulRohatgi told the court that expensive cars are better equipped against pollution and just because a car is powerful and big, it does not mean that it is more polluting.

Research proves that if a big diesel car employs specific exhaust treatment technologies it can cut down nitrous oxide emissions as compared to a small car. In Europe, cars equipped with Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) module cost about Rs.7,500 more than those with nitrogen trap and Exhaust Gas Recovery (EGR).

Problem is that SCR, which is scheduled to be mandatory for the forthcoming Euro 6 norms in 2020, and even EGR are assumed to be effective only if they employ diesel that has sulphur content less than 50 parts per million. In India, oil companies have yet to put in the infrastructure to produce such diesel.

Norms in India

Diesel engines are now criticized globally for being a source of particulate matter and nitrous oxide which worsen several lung diseases. They can vary in the quantity of particulate matter they emit.

In India, diesel engine cars are required to ensure they emit no more than 0,06gm/km of particulate matter if they are “big” or 2000 cc-and-above and 0.025gm/km if they are “small”.

Again depending upon the weight class, the same cars are allowed to give off roughly 10 times more nitrous oxide emissions. This explains the paradox of pollution by diesel engines. All the same, a diesel engine burns fuel more efficiently as compared to a petrol engine.

While this could mean less particulate matter, but it substantially steps up nitrous oxide levels. Conversely, trying to rein in nitrous oxides will compromise fuel-use efficiency and enhance particulate matter emissions.

Toyota, Mercedes, Volkswagen cars are equipped with particulate filters abroad. But they are not available in their Indian versions.

After mulling over the facts, the claim that big cars are cleaner does not seem to be true, but new inventions to manufacture cars are essential to curb pollution level.

11 July 2016 K2_CATEGORY IAS Blog

The article talks about the bringing of Uniform Civil Code and the various issues which needs to be tackled.

  • Recently the central government, asked the Law Commission to examine the feasibility of bringing about a Uniform Civil Code (UCC).
  • The concept of one nation goes back to the drafting of the Constitution. The issue was hotly debated—some members of the Constituent Assembly argued for a common personal law for marriage, divorce, inheritance and adoption, while others believed that this was a goal to be achieved in stages.
  • The directive principle—“shall endeavor to secure for citizens a uniform civil code”—was a compromise since the time was not right.
  • The time has never been right in the sixty plus years since we adopted the Constitution. Yet, we have a new mood in the country.
  • It’s a mood that is looking with considerable less tolerance at existing gender gaps, particularly where personal laws and religion are concerned.
  • As women threaten to storm male-only mosques and temples, as the courts gird up to examine existing inequities, is it finally time?
  • Historically, the idea of a UCC has received support from two seemingly opposed constituencies: women’s rights groups and right-wing parties and organizations.
  • Yet, the first stage of reform of the personal laws of Hindus—giving women the right to choose or divorce their partners, some rights in the property of their fathers and husbands, abolishing bigamy—faced considerable opposition from the then Jana Sangh—the precursor of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) as well as the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).
  • For many, it’s ironic that the push for a UCC now comes from the BJP.
  • But the Congress’s track record is no better and it will, in all probability, never live down the shame of pushing back the rights of Muslim women by passing the perversely named Muslim Women (Protection of Rights under Divorce) in 1986.
  • The passage of the Act by the Rajiv Gandhi government effectively reversed a Supreme Court judgement that granted maintenance to divorced Muslim women.
  • Several issues:
  • The first of these is the argument that the time is still not right. There is suspicion among the minorities in this country about this government’s true intentions—common law or majoritarianism?
  • Controversies over beef, saffronization of school and college curriculums, love jihad, and the silence emanating from the top leadership on these controversies have done little to instill a feeling of confidence. Can the government build bridges and instill confidence?
  • Second, while a UCC has remained a wonderful principle, nobody has actually spelt out what this common code will look like. Debate over details have never taken place.
  • One argument in favour of a status quo and against a UCC is that the courts have in innumerable cases given secular laws precedence over personal, religious codes.
  • One way forward is to look at the UCC in terms of gender reform, a line favoured by many.
  • In the past 12 months alone, a two-judge bench ruled that Muslim women are entitled to maintenance beyond the iddat(roughly three months) period. It upheld a previous Allahabad high court judgement that “polygamy was not an integral part of religion”.
  • It has questioned why Christian couples must wait for a two-year separation before filing for divorce when it is just one year for others. Earlier still, it gave Muslim women the right to legally adopt children even though this goes against their personal law.
  • The problem with this line of argument is that it looks at justice on a case-by-case basis. It presupposes also that all minority women have access to lawyers and the courts.
  • There is another alternative—change from within. Already social organizations within the realm of religion have begun demanding an end to practices such as triple talaq.
  • The All India Muslim Personal Law Board has not, so far, responded favourably even though an online petition by the Bharatiya Mahila Muslim Andolan demanding a ban has already attracted over 50,000 signatures.
  • And yet, there can be no turning back, no drowning out of voices demanding justice. This Eid, the three-century old Aishbagh Eidgah in Lucknow opened its doors to women to offer prayers for the first time in its history. It was a tiny step towards what could be a new beginning.

Question: A uniform civil code is an idea whose time has come. But there are complex issues that first need to be resolved. Discuss. Suggested Approach

  1. Brief about UCC.
  2. Issues which needs to be tackled.
  3. How to tackle them.


English: Download

Hindi: Download