PROTECTION OF CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, 1955: CASES

Section 3

State of M.P. v. Puranchand, Madhya Pradesh High Court held for the purpose of section 3, the person prevented must either be professing the same religion as other persons to whom the place is open.

The object of Section 3 is not to create any new rights in favour of untouchables but it is intended only to put them at par with other caste Hindus.

Parameswaran Moorthy v. Vasudeo Kurup, the Kerala High Court held that Section 3 does not confer unfettered and absolute rights to perform religious services that are supposed to be performed only by priests according to religious tenets or to enter such places where such

rituals are being conducted.

In Hindu Religious Endowment Board v. L.T Swamiyar, (AIR 1954 282) the Supreme Court held that there is no unregulated and unrestricted right of entry in a public temple or other religious institution for persons who are not connected with religious functions.

In the case of Venkatraman Devaru v. State of Mysore, the SC held that denominations had the religious freedom to manage their own religious affairs and could hence exclude outsiders from temple ceremonies.

Section 4

Benudhas Sahu v. State (ILR(1962)Cut256) the court held that Section 4 (iv) does not apply to private wells because the owner of private well is free to regulate the use of well by co-villagers. If the owner of private well permitted other people in the village to draw water from the well, it does not means that every villager has a right of access to or right to use the well.

Section 7: Punishment for other offences arising out of untouchability.

In M. Lakshminarayana Reddy vs The Union Of India (AIR 1987) considering the issue of Constitutional validity of Section 7, the court held that Rights conferred under Arts. 14, 19 and 21 cannot be considered as superior to other rights and obligations created by other articles of the same Chapter. The court held that the petitioner did not have a right to do any act that was forbidden by the same chapter. 

PROTECTION OF CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, 1955: A LEGISLATIVE HISTORY.

Historical Background. 

People of lower castes for centuries suffered social injustices by the higher castes. Under the traditional Hindu society, people belonging to Scheduled castes and Scheduled tribes communities were treated as the untouchables. They were prohibited from using public places and common provisions such as ponds, pools, parks, wells etc. 

They were debarred from Hindu temples, places of worship and from using roads, vehicles, ferries, schools and public convenience. Their very shadows were considered as imminent pollutants and hence they were branded as untouchables.

These disabilities made life miserable for scheduled castes.

In order to tackle the problem of untouchability, Article 17 of the Constitution was incorporated in the Constitution to rescue the Scheduled Castes from the inhuman atrocities being committed against them by the upper castes society of the country. The untouchability has been abolished and any practice of it is an offence under Article 17 of Indian Constitution.

Article 35(a)(ii) provides that only the Parliament shall have the power to make law for prescribing punishment for those acts which are declared to be offences under Part-III. Thus only Parliament is empowered to make laws in respect of offence of untouchability as mentioned under Article17 which is to ensure uniformly throughout the country.

The Parliament passed the Untouchability (Offences) Act 1955, an improved version of the Untouchability Order,

1950, in order to give effect to provision under Article 17.

Object of the Untouchability (Offences) Act 1955.

1. To give effect to the provision under Article 17 of Indian Constitution under which untouchability in any form has been abolished and any practice of it has been made an offence.
2. To prescribe punishment for preaching and practice of Untouchability, for the enforcement of any disability arising therefrom and for matters connected therewith.

Constitutionality of State Legislations.

Even before the enactment of the Act, a number of states and Union territories had anti-disabilities laws in force between such as the Removal of Disabilities Act, Removal of Social Disabilities Act and Temple Entry Acts.

Many of these Acts were challenged as being unconstitutional on the ground of lack of legislative competency of the states in the light of Article 35 of the Constitution that empowered only the Parliament to enact laws in relation to Part III. 

In State v. Kishan (AIR 1955 MP 207), the Indore Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the powers of state legislatures to make laws prescribing punishment for those acts that were declared to be offences under
Article 17 were withdrawn by Article 35. Such power is now vested only in the Parliament. However the provision has a prospective application and it saved only laws in force in the State before the commencement of the Constitution, until they are altered, repealed or modified or amended by Parliament.
Similarly, state laws have been upheld in P.S Charya v. State of Madras (AIR 1956 Mad. 541) and State of U.P. v. Gulab Singh (AIR 1953 All.483).

Definition of Untouchability.

Neither Article 17 nor the Act defines the term "untouchability". However, broadly speaking, it refers to any social practice, which looks down on certain depressed classes, solely on account of their birth and disables them from having any interaction with people from the so called
higher castes or classes on equal footing.
The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) in its Report on Prevention of Atrocities Against Scheduled Castes (Saxena Committee Report), has defined it as the practices evolved as social restrictions in sharing food, access to public places and denial of access to drinking water sources etc.

Recently, in the case of Indian Young Lawyers Association vs The State Of Kerala (2018 SCC OnLine SC 1690), the honourable apex court expounded the ambit of Article 17 and observed that "the social exclusion of women, based on menstrual status, is but a form of untouchability which is an anathema to constitutional values".

Punishments under the Act.

The Act:

1. provided punishment for enforcing certain religious, social and other kinds of disabilities on grounds of untouchability.  
2. provided penalties for the refusal of rendering services to Scheduled Castes and 
3. made provision for the use of public places by Scheduled Castes without any distinction of caste.

1976 Amendment

The 1976 Amendment was made due to following reasons:

• 
  

  The Act was not very effective in the eradication of untouchability and giving rise to dissatisfaction as the legislation failed to serve the purpose for which it was enacted.
• The punishments awarded under the Act were inadequate. 
• Few cases had been filed under the Act.
• The compoundable nature of the offences resulted in compromises and the punishments were small.
• Mostly the victims were reluctant to lodge complaints for fear of social reprisal and harmful economic consequences at the hands of their landlords, money lenders and rural oligarchies who would not give them work or full wages for the work done by them.

The Government of India, therefore, appointed a committee in 1965 under the chairmanship of Shri Elayaperumal to study, inter alia problems of untouchability vis-à-vis the working of the Act and to suggest changes therein. The Committee found that:

1. when a Scheduled Caste wanted to quit the traditions of performing menial jobs, he was often confronted with social and economic boycott.
2. the punishments imposed under the Act were too light and without any minimum requirements.
3. instances where cases had been purposely delayed to cause hardship to complainants so that they would not have either the energy or the resources to pursue the case.
4. the upper castes enjoyed the support of law enforcement officials like the police and magistrates, and that the Scheduled Castes would not get any protection from them.
5. Apathetic attitude of magistrates who do not trust the evidence of Scheduled Castes on the ground that they are interested witnesses.
6. there was very little awareness and wide ignorance about the provisions of the Untouchability Offences Act. It also found that distribution of copies of the legislation had been faulty. The Committee noted the ignorance of various officials and authorities about the existence of the Act.

The 1955 Act was comprehensively amended in 1976 on the recommendation of the Elayaperumal committee and its name changed to Protection of Civil Rights Act,1955.

Source

Nisha Priya Bhatia v. Union of India: On Sexual Harassment and Legality of Rule 135 of RAW Rules.

The SC in the present judgment dealt with the constitutionality of Rule 135 of the Research and Analysis Wing (Recruitment, Cadre and Services) Rules, 1975.

Rule 135 of the RAW (Recruitment, Cadre and Services) Rules, 1975 gives power to the Central government to voluntary retire RAW Officers whose identity is exposed or compromised.

In the present case, an ex-female employee of RAW was compulsorily retired after she made allegations of sexual harassment against two senior officials of RAW.

Constitutionality of the Impugned Rule.

Appellant argued that Rule 135 is in direct contravention of Article 311 of the Constitution, which deals with “dismissal, removal or reduction in rank of persons employed in civil capacities under the Union or the State”. The court held the Rule 135 of the RAW (Recruitment, Cadre and Services) Rules constitutional, because:

1. Until and unless the action taken against a public servant is in the nature of punishment, the need for conducting an inquiry coupled with the grant of an opportunity of being heard, as envisaged under Article 311, does not arise at all.

1. The Rule has been carved out as a special provision and is premised on the doctrine of necessity. It forms a small subset of the genus of Article 309 deals strictly with cases of “exposure” of “intelligence officers” who become unemployable in the Organisation for reasons of security.”

The Court concluded that the effect of any action taken under Rule 135 does not entail any penal consequence for the employee and, therefore, it cannot be put at the same pedestal as an action of dismissal or removal, and no inquiry or opportunity of hearing as envisaged under Article 311 is required while taking an action under this Rule.

Order for Compensation for Violation of Fundamental Rights.

The bench ordered the Respondent, (Union of India) to pay compensation worth Rs.1,00,000/-­ to the Petitioner for violation of her fundamental rights to life and dignity caused by improper handling of her complaint of sexual harassment.

The bench observed that time taken to process the stated complaint and improper constitution of the first Complaints Committee (intended or unintended) in violation of the Vishaka Guidelines, constituted undignified treatment and violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioner, more particularly Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

Widening the ambit of law regarding sexual harassment, the bench observed that apart from the actual commission of acts of harassment, the approach of law also covers situations wherein the woman employee is subjected to prejudice, hostility, discriminatory attitude and humiliation in day to day functioning at the workplace. 

Important Legal News: May 2019

Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India.

• In petitions, challenging the Scheme, filed by the NGOs Common Cause and Association for Democratic Reforms(ADR) and CPI (M), the SC declined to stay the controversial Electoral Bonds Scheme observing that the question could not be determined on the basis of a short hearing.
• But the bench headed by the then Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi directed all parties to furnish by May 30 information as to the donations received by way of Electoral Bonds (including the identity of the donors, amounts received, details of payments, bank accounts etc) to the Election Commission in sealed covers. 

Satish Chandra Verma v. Union of India.

• The SC held the right to travel abrod as an important basic human right as it nourishes independent and self-determining creative character of the individual, not only by extending his freedoms of action, but also by extending the scope of his experience. 

Important Legal News: April 2019.

• Unregulated Deposit Schemes Ordinance 2019.

• Objective: To ban Unregulated Deposit Schemes and to protect the interest of the depositors.
• It aims to prevent such unregulated deposit schemes (not registered with any government regulators like RBI or SEBI) or arrangements at their inception.
• It also makes soliciting, inviting or accepting deposits pursuant to an unregulated deposited scheme as a punishable offence.

• Wildlife First & Ors. Vs. Ministry of Environment & Forests & Ors. 


• SC ordered eviction of nearly one million persons from forest lands across states, who failed to establish their claims as forest-dwellers under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006(Forests Rights Act).

International Financial Services Centres Authority Bill, 2019.

• Objective: to set up a unified authority to regulate all financial services in IFSCs in the country.
• An IFSC caters to customers outside the jurisdiction of the domestic economy. Such centres deal with flows of finance, financial products and services across borders. 
• The authority will exercise powers and perform functions of RBI, SEBI, IRDAI And PFRDA.

Govt of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India.

• The SC held following: 
1. Control of services: bench differed. Hence decided to refer it to a larger bench.
2. Power of Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB): ACB is under exclusive authority of LG & Delhi government has no power in this regard.
3. Appointment of Special Public Prosecutor: LG is bound by aid and advise of Council of Ministers.

COVID-19: Technology at Service of Justice System

Case Name: IN RE: GUIDELINES FOR COURT FUNCTIONING THROUGH VIDEO. CONFERENCING DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC.

Even as the world is going through turbulent situation, the institution of justice delivery system can never afforded to be brought to a halt. It has been rightly remarked by Martin Luther King Jr., 

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere".

Hence, the current situation calls for a robust justice delivery system across the world. In this regard, the Supreme Court of India has left no stone unturned to ensure speedy justice delivery to every segment of the society.

Guidelines:

Given that social distancing is the need of the hour to prevent communication of COVID-19, the apex court exercised its power under Article 142 (inherent powers) to balance the public health and justice delivery.

It issued a slew of guidelines to streamline functioning of courts via video conferencing during national lockdown.

These guidelines are:

1. The measures that have been and that shall be taken by this Court and by the High Courts, to reduce the need for the physical presence of all stakeholders within court premises and to secure the functioning of courts in consonance with social distancing guidelines and best public health practices shall be deemed to be lawful.
2. The Supreme Court of India and High Courts have been authorized to adopt measures required to ensure the robust functioning of the judicial system through the use of video conferencing technologies;
3. In light of the peculiarities of the judicial system in every state, every High Court is authorised to determine the modalities which are suitable to the temporary transition to the use of video conferencing technologies;
4. The concerned courts shall maintain a helpline to ensure that any complaint in regard to the quality or audibility of feed shall be communicated during the proceeding or immediately after its conclusion. No grievance can be raised afterwards. 
5. The District Courts in each State shall adopt the mode of Video Conferencing prescribed by the concerned High Court.
6. The Court shall duly notify and make available the facilities for video conferencing for such litigants who do not have the means or access to video conferencing facilities. 
7. Until appropriate rules are framed by the High Courts, video conferencing shall be mainly employed for hearing arguments whether at the trial stage or at the appellate stage. 
• But evidence shall not be recorded without the mutual consent of both the parties by video conferencing. 
• If it is necessary to record evidence in a Court room the presiding officer shall ensure that appropriate distance is maintained between any two individuals in the Court.

Wage Code Bill, 2019

• 2017: Introduced in Lok Sabha first.
• Subsumes following 4 Acts:
• Payment of Wages Act, 1926.
• Minimum Wages Act, 1948.
• Payment of Bonus Act, 1965.
• Equal Remuneration Act, 1976.
• Object: To transform old and obsolete labour laws.
• Universalizes the provision of minimum wages and timely payment of wages to employees, irrespective of sectors.
• Central Government will fix floor wages taking into account living standard of workers.
• It may also fix different floor wages for different geographical areas.
• Minimum wages to be fixed higher than floor wages.
• Advisory boards to be constituted by the Central Government and state governments to advise government on issues of fixation of minimum wages, increasing employment opportunities for women etc.
• Prohibits gender discrimination in matters of payment of wages and recruitment.
• Constitutional Provisions:
• Article 43: state shall endeavor to secure to all workers a living wage and conditions of work ensuring a decent standard of life.
• Labour is the subject of Concurrent List.   
• Expert committee headed by Anoop Satpathy, submitted report on Determining the Methodology for Fixation of the National Minimum Wage.

Bihar PCS J 2018 Prelims Law Paper.

Bihar PCS J 2018 Prelims Law by anoopuni4u on Scribd

Mere transfer of vehicle does not end liability to a third person.

In an important judgment, the Honorable Supreme Court has held that, merely by transferring the motor vehicle, the registered owner of the vehicle does not stand absolved of his liability to third persons under the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988.    

So, long as his name continues as owner of vehicle in the records of the RTO, he remains liable to the third persons. 

In the case of Prakash Chand Daga v. Saveta Sharma (2019) 2 SCC 747, the honorable court elaborately discussed the provisions of sections 50 and 2(30).   

Section 50 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

50. Transfer of ownership.—

(1) Where the ownership of any motor vehicle registered under this Chapter is transferred,—

(a) the transferor shall,—

(i) in the case of a vehicle registered within the same State, within fourteen days of the transfer, report the fact of transfer, in such form with such documents and in such manner, as may be prescribed by the Central Government to the registering authority within whose jurisdiction the transfer is to be effected and shall simultaneously send a copy of the said report to the transferee; and

(ii) in the case of a vehicle registered outside the State, within forty-five days of the transfer, forward to the registering authority referred to in sub-clause (i)—

(A) the no objection certificate obtained under section 48; or

(B) in a case where no such certificate has been obtained,—

(I) the receipt obtained under sub-section (2) of section 48; or

(II) the postal acknowledgment received by the transferee if he has sent an application in this behalf by registered post acknowledgment due to the registering authority referred to in section 48, together with a declaration that he has not received any communication from such authority refusing to grant such certificate or requiring him to comply with any direction subject to which such certificate may be granted;

(b) the transferee shall, within thirty days of the transfer, report the transfer to the registering authority within whose jurisdiction he has the residence or place of business where the vehicle is normally kept, as the case may be, and shall forward the certificate of registration to that registering authority together with the prescribed fee and a copy of the report received by him from the transferor in order that particulars of the transfer of ownership may be entered in the certificate of registration.

(2) Where—

(a) the person in whose name a motor vehicle stands registered dies, or

(b) a motor vehicle has been purchased or acquired at a public auction conducted by, or on behalf of, Government, the person succeeding to the possession of the vehicle or, as the case may be, who has purchased or acquired the motor vehicle, shall make an application for the purpose of transferring the ownership of the vehicle in his name, to the registering authority in whose jurisdiction he has the residence or place of business where the vehicle is normally kept, as the case may be, in such manner, accompanied with such fee, and within such period as may be prescribed by the Central Government.

(3) If the transferor or the transferee fails to report to the registering authority the fact of transfer within the period specified in clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (1), as the case may be, or if the person who is required to make an application under sub-section (2) (hereafter in this section referred to as the other person) fails to make such application within the period prescribed, the registering authority may, having regard to the circumstances of the case, require the transferor or the transferee, or the other person, as the case may be, to pay, in lieu of any action that may be taken against him under section 177 such amount not exceeding one hundred rupees as may be prescribed under sub-section (5): Provided that action under section 177 shall be taken against the transferor or the transferee or the other person, as the case may be, where he fails to pay the said amount.

(4) Where a person has paid the amount under sub-section (3), no action shall be taken against him under section 177.

(5) For the purposes of sub-section (3), a State Government may prescribe different amounts having regard to the period of delay on the part of the transferor or the transferee in reporting the fact of transfer of ownership of the motor vehicle or of the other person in making the application under sub-section (2).

(6) On receipt of a report under sub-section (1), or an application under sub-section (2), the registering authority may cause the transfer of ownership to be entered in the certificate of registration.

(7) A registering authority making any such entry shall communicate the transfer of ownership to the transferor and to the original registering authority, if it is not the original registering authority.

Section 2(30) in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

(30) “owner” means a person in whose name a motor vehicle stands registered, and where such person is a minor, the guardian of such minor, and in relation to a motor vehicle which is the subject of a hire-purchase, agreement*, or an agreement of lease or an agreement of hypothecation, the person in possession of the vehicle under that agreement;

Economics Special: Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code Amendment Bill, 2017.

The Bill amends the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016. The bankruptcy code lays down provision for resolving insolvencies.

• Resolution applicant has been defined in code as a person who submits a resolution plan after receiving an invite by the insolvency professional to do so.

• It states that insolvency professional is allowed to invite only those resolution applicants to submit a plan, who fulfil certain criteria laid down by him with approval of committee of creditors and other conditions which may be specified by Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board.

• The bill prohibits certain people from submitting a resolution plan (specifying details of restructuring a defaulter’s debt).  These persons include: (i) wilful defaulters, (ii) disqualified directors, (iii) promoters or management of the defaulting company, and; (iv) any person who has committed these activities abroad.

• The bill prohibits sale of property of a defaulter to such persons who is ineligible to be a resolution applicant during liquidation.

• The bill penalizes contravention of any provisions of IBC, for which no penalty has been specified, with fine ranging between Rs. 1 lakh to Rs. 2 crore.

Journey to our Constitution: Indian Councils Act 1861.

This Act undone effect of the 1833 Act inasmuch as it restored the power of legislation to the Governments of Madras and Bombay. Also it made notable changes in the composition of the Governor General's council for executive & legislative purposes.

Changes brought:

Executive purposes.

Council of the Governor General was expanded and a fifth ordinary member was added. Now it included total 7 members (other two members being the Governor General and the commander in Chief).

Legislative purposes.

For the legislative purposes, not less than 6 and not more than 12 members were additionally to be nominated (comprising of both official and non-official members) by the Governor General and they were to hold the office for two years. Out of these, not less than half were required to be Non-Official. 

Similar provisions were enacted for the Governor's Council in provinces of British India.

Portfolio system:

With the Indian Councils Act for the first time Portfolio system started. Each member of the Council of the Governor General was allocated portfolio of a particular department. Lord Canning (1856-1858 as Governor general, 1858-1862 as Viceroy) was the First to start a Portfolio system.

Before the adoption of the portfolio system in the Government of India, the whole business of the Indian governmental business was carried out by the Governor-General-in Council (earlier name of Cabinet Secretariat), As the amount and complexity of business of the Government increased, the work of the various departments was distributed amongst the members of the Council: only the more important cases were dealt with by the Governor-General or the Council collectively.

Criticism:

1. Though the non-official members were added, the councils were neither a deliberative nor a representative body as these members could only consider the proposals kept before them by the Governor-General. But they could not criticise it.
2. The Governor -General was given overriding powers inasmuch as it enjoyed the powers of prior sanction, without which a bill could not be introduced in the assembly. Also, it enjoyed the ordinance making power in situation of emergency, having the force of Act of the Council. He could also veto a bill after it was passed.

Journey to our Constitution: Charter Act 1853

This was the last Charter Act. It brought about significant changes in the Governor General's Council. It marked the expansion of the Council of the Governor General for legislative purposes. The council for legislative purposes which had 6 members now was expanded to 12 members. The additional 6 members were called Legislative Councellors These 12 members were : 

1. The Governor General (1)
2. The commander in Chief (1) 
3. Members of the Governor General's Council (4) 
4. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (Calcutta) (1) 
5. A regular judge of the Supreme court Calcutta (1) 
6. Representative members drawn from the company's servants with 10 years minimum tenure and appointed by the local governments of Bengal, Madras, Bombay and North Western provinces (4)

The fourth member (Lord Macaulay) was placed at an equal status with other members. He was also made entitled to sit and vote in the meetings of the Executive Council of the Governor General.

Other changes.

Birth of Indian Civil Services (ICS) Examination.

The previous charter act of 1833 had laid down that the Court of Directors should nominate annually 4 times as many candidates as there were vacancies, from whom one should be selected by competitive examination. The charter act of 1833 also provided the Haileybury college of London should make quota to admit the future civil servants. However, this system of an open competition was never effectively operated. 

A The Committee under the chairmanship of Lord Macaulay had prepared the regulations in this context. 

1. The report said that Haileybury should cease to be maintained as higher education college for the ICS.
2. There should be a broad general education rather than specialized education for the ICS recruits.
3. The recruitment should be based upon an open competitive examination to bring out the best candidates and not through mere superficial knowledge.
4. The appointments should be subject to a period of probation. 
5. Charter Act of 1853 deprived the Court of Directors of its right of Patronage to Indian appointments and now it was to be exercised under the regulations. 

This was the Birth of Civil Services which was thrown in 1854 for open competition.

Separate Governor for Presidency of Bengal.

The Charter act of 1853 provided for appointment of a separate Governor for the Presidency of Bengal, distinct from the Governor General. However, the court of Directors and the Board of Control were authorized to appoint a lieutenant governor, till the appointment of a Governor was made. 

However, the Lieutenant governor was appointed in 1854, but no Governor was appointed for Bengal till 1912.

NEXT: Indian Councils Act 1861

Journey to our Constitution: Charter Act 1833

Impact on trade.

The Charter Act of 1833 was the 20 years renewal of the charter in 1813. As per this Charter, the company was asked to close its commercial business. 

• Thus, this time the charter was renewed on the condition that Company should abandon its trade entirely, alike with India and China, and permit Europeans to settle freely in India. 
• The company lost its monopoly in China and also the trade of tea, granted by Charter act of 1813.

Legislative journey of India.

• This act made the Governor General of Bengal the Governor General of British India and all financial and administrative powers were centralized in the hands of Governor General-in-Council. Thus with Charter Act of 1833, Lord William Bentinck became the “First Governor General of British India”. 

• The number of the members of the Governor General's council was again fixed to 4, which had been reduced by the Pitt's India act. However, certain limits were imposed on the functioning of the 4th member. The 4th member was NOT entitled to act as a member of the council except for legislative purposes. 

• First fourth person to be appointed as the member of the Council was Lord Macaulay.

• It deprived the Governor of Bombay and Madras of their legislative powers. The Governor-General was given exclusive legislative powers for the whole of British India.

Enhanced power of Governor-General of India.

He could repeal, amend or alter any laws or regulations including all persons (whether British or native or foreigners), all places and things in every part of British territory in India, for all servants of the company, and articles of war. 
However, the Court of Directors acting under the Board of control could veto any laws made by the Governor-General-in-Council.

Governor-General's Government was referred to as the Government of India for the first time.

Codification of laws.

The charter act of 1833 is considered to be an attempt to codify all the Indian Laws.

• The British parliament as a supreme body, retained the right to legislate for the British territories in India and repeal the acts. 

• The act of 1833 provided that all laws made in India were to be laid before the parliament and were to be known as Acts. 

• In a step towards codifying the laws, the Governor-General-in-Council was directed under the Charter act of 1833, to set up an Indian law Commission.

First Indian Law Commission. 

The first law commission was set up by the Charter act of 1833 and Lord Macaulay was its most important member and Chairman. 

• The other members of this commission were English barrister Cameron, Macleod of Madras service, William Anderson of Bombay Service and Sir William McNaughton of the Calcutta Service. Sir William McNaughton did not accept the appointment. 
• The objectives of the law commission was to inquire into the Jurisdiction, powers and rules of the courts of justice police establishments, existing forms of judicial procedure, nature and operation of all kinds of laws. 
• It was directed that the law Commission shall submit its report to the Governor General-in-council and this report was to be placed in the British parliament.

Indians in the Government service.

The Charter act of 1833 was the first act which provisioned to freely admit the natives of India to share an administration in the country. 

Mitigation of Slavery.

This act also directed the Governor General-in-Council to adopt measures to mitigate the state of slavery, persisting in India since sultanate Era. The Governor General-in-Council was also directed to pay attention to laws of marriage, rights and authorities of the heads of the families, while drafting any laws.

More Bishops.

The number of British residents was increasing in India. The charter act of 1833 laid down regulation of establishment of Christian establishments in India and the number of Bishops was made 3. (Bishop is an ordained or consecrated member of the Christian clergy who is generally entrusted with a position of authority and oversight).

NEXT: Charter Act 1853.

Rivers cleanliness initiatives in India.

Despite being aware of the fact that rivers have served as the cradle of civilisation in most parts of the world, today this globe is witnessing river degradation from various parts of the globe. India is no exception to it. 

Major polluted rivers of the world.

1. Citarum River, Indonesia. Citarum river flows through the Indonesian province of West Java. It plays an important role in serving people great way by supplying water for irrigation and agriculture, industry, fishery and also in the electricity production. There are three hydroelectric power plant dams installed in this river. Despite of being generous, it is filled with tons of harmful substances from the industrial and domestic wastes. 
2. Ganges River, India. Ganges or Ganga, is considered to be the holiest river in Hinduism. It originates from the gangotri glacier in the western Himalayas, flows south and east through the Gangetic plain of north India entering Bangladesh and merges into the Bay of Bengal. It acts as a trans-boundary river of India and Bangladesh. It is the second largest river in the Indian subcontinent and also was ranked as one of the five most polluted rivers in the world. Due to religious practices, this river has numerous pollutants ranging from household garbage in abundance to industrial wastes and toxic. 
3. Mantanza-Riachuelo River, Argentina. Originating in the capital city of Argentina, Buenos Aires, and empties into the Rio de la Plata, this river is known as the “slaughter creek” in English. It is 64 km long and defines the southern boundary of Buenos Aires federal district. This is a foul smelling river filled with toxic substances released from the household and industrial wastes. Millions of chemical wastes are being discharged in the water by petroleum companies resulting into water pollution. 
4. Buriganga River, Bangladesh. This river is one of the most important rivers of Bangladesh and was also one of the main drinking sources along with trade and transportation since the 17th century. Ever since the 20th century, the river turned polluted. Hazardous pollutants like polythene, industrial and household sewage, plastics and even dead man and animals spoiled the river water in a grand scale. 
5. Yamuna River, India. Yamuna, the largest tributary river of the Ganges, originates from the yamunotri glacier in the Lower Himalayas. It passes through several states of north India before merging with the Ganges at the Triveni Sangam. The river meets the need of nearly 57 million people and accounts for 70% of Delhi’s water supplies. But this river is now affected deeply by pollution as millions of household garbage, municipal disposals and soil erosion due to deforestation find their way into the river each day. Even the toxic chemical substances including insecticides, fertilizers, pesticides, etc., are also found, making it the second most polluted river in India after Ganges.
6. Jordan River, Israel. Jordan river originates in west Asia that flows to the Dead sea. The river is bordered by the State of Israel and West Bank to the west with Jordan lying to its east. This river has religious significance, it being the place where Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist. In the year 1964, the Israelis had built a dam on this river to divert its water to National Water Carriers. But the environmentalists say that these dam constructions have largely disturbed the ecosystem. Human consumption of the water is almost 70%-90% resulting in the reduction of flow. The water is now contaminated by huge amount of sewage and wastes. 
7. Yellow River, China. The yellow river which is also called the Huang He, is the second longest river in Asia and the sixth longest river in the world. It finds its origin in the Bayan Har mountains in Qinghai province of western China an empties into the Bohai sea near the city of Dongying in Shadong province. It’s called “yellow” because of the muddy water arising from loess in the lower course of the river making it yellow. Popularly considered as “the cradle of Chinese civilization”, this river was the main source of drinking water and irrigation. Of late, this river has been suffering from pollution that has made it impossible for people to drink. According to the report by UN Environmental Programme, 4.29 billion tons of industrial wastes and sewages was dumped in 1996, making one third of it unusable.
8. Marilao River, Philippines. Marilao river starts from the uplands of Rizal and flows through the Metro of Manila, in the Philippines. This river water is the most polluted, arousing a great concern not only to the government of Philippines but also the whole world. The non-profit environmental facility, known as the Blacksmith Institute, tagged this river as one of the world’s 30 dirtiest river in 2008, confirming the level of contamination as “high level”.
9. Sarno River, Italy. “Sarnus”, as was known to the Romans, this river originates at Mt. Sarno and passes through Pompeii to the south of the Italian city, Naples. The reason that this water body is regarded as the most polluted river in the whole of Europe is because of the dumping of all the industrial and agricultural wastes.
10. Mississippi River, U.S.A. The term Mississippi refers to “big river” or “great river”. It is the main river of the largest drainage system in the entire North America and also acts as the greatest natural and economic resource for the US. This river flows all the way down in the US and rises in the northern Minnesota, meandering slowly. Mississippi river valley is one of the most fertile agricultural region. But since the modern development took its girth in the basin, this cardinal river has started getting polluted with all agricultural sewage making the surrounding areas of the river mouth as a “dead zone”. A recent report by a campaign group in 2012 claimed that in the year 2010, about 12.7 million pounds of toxic materials were disposed in the river including poisonous chemicals such as nitrates, benzene and arsenic.

Initiatives taken in India.

As we have seen above, two of India's major rivers have found place in the list of the 10 most polluted rivers of India. 

Ganges: 

The Ganges River Pollution is now at such a high level that the amount of toxins, chemicals and other dangerous bacteria found in the river are now almost 3000 times over the limit suggested by the WHO as 'safe'. The major causes are:

1. Dumping of raw, untreated sewage on a daily basis. The amount has more than doubled in the last 20 years and experts predict another 100% increase in the following 20 years.
2. The rapid explosion of India's population in the last 25 years coupled with lax regulations on industry has put a huge strain on the river leading to an explosion in Ganges river pollution. 
3. Thousands of bodies are cremated on the banks of the river yearly with many being released into the river with hopes that their souls may have a direct path to heaven. 

To tackle these problems, National Ganga River Basin Authority (NGRBA) was established by the Central Government of India, on 20 February 2009 under Section 3(3) of the Environment Protection Act, 1986. NGRBA declared Ganges as the "National River" of India. It is a financing, planning, implementing, monitoring and coordinating authority for the Ganges River, functioning under the Ministry of Environment of India. The mission of the organization is to safeguard the drainage basin which feeds water into the Ganges by protecting it from pollution or overuse.

Yamuna:

River Yamuna, with a total length of around 1370 km is the largest tributary of the Ganges. Its source is at Yamunotri in the Uttarakhand Himalaya regions. It flows through the state of Uttaranchal, Haryana, Delhi an Uttar Pradesh before merging with the Ganges in Allahabad. It used to be a clear blue river but since the past few decades it has turned into one of the most polluted river in the world, especially Delhi, which dumps about 57% of its waste into the river. Even the Supreme Court justice, B.S chauhan, sitting in a bench had observed that it is no more a, “Maili Yamuna but a Ganda Naalah”.

Increasing pollution of the Yamuna has now become an international issue and a cause of concern for environmentalists. Big industries, Factories, Peoples living in colonies, slums and rural areas everyone pollute this holy river. In addition, the water in this river remains stagnant for almost nine months in a year, aggravating the situation. Agricultural residues, insecticides and pesticides also contribute to the pollution of the river. Also People wash their clothes, utensils and defecate in the river and pollute it. 

There are several authorities which are involved in taking care of pollution in Yamuna. These include:

• Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) 
• Delhi Pollution Control Committee ( DPCC) 
• State Pollution Control Board (SPCB) 
• Delhi Jal Board (DJB) 
• Civil society groups 
• Educomp and Kent RO 
• Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) 

Till date, More than 2158 crores have been spent by the government of India, and the governments of Delhi, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh combined. A few years back when the pollution level of Yamuna increased alarmingly, the Delhi government woke up and launched a number of projects to clean up Yamuna. 

• In 2009 Year Delhi Govt. entered into agreement with Engineers India Limited to clean Yamuna. 
• Delhi Jal Board (DJB) proposed laying down sewers along the three major drains - Najafgarh, Supplementary and Shahadra drains. 
• 17 STPs (Sewage treatment plant) and 10 CEPTs (common effluent treatment plant) were built. Also 30 Kms of trunk sewers were repaired (out of 130Km) and many slums were removed from riverfront and low cost toilets were built. 
• On May19, 2010 the cabinet committee on infrastructure (CCI) approved the project for laying interceptors sewers along the three major drains in Delhi for abatement of pollution in the Yamuna river. 

The Government of India has been implementing Yamuna action plan (YAP) With assistance from Japan international cooperation agency, Government of Japan in a phased manner since 1993. 

• Yamuna Action Plan (YAP -1): YAP-I, which commenced in April, 1993 was completed in February 2003 at a total cost of Rs. 682 crores covering various pollution abatement works, including creation of Sewage Treatment capacity of 753.25 million litres per day (MLD). 
• Yamuna Action Plan (YAP -II): YAP-II was approved in 2003 at an estimated cost of Rs. 624 crores with a completion period of 5 years. The major items of work in YAP -II such as rehabilitation of sewerage network and Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs) and construction of new STPs. 
• Yamuna Action Plan (YAP- III): the YAP III project for Delhi within estimated cost of RS 1656 CRORES HAS BEEN APPROVED IN 2011. 

STPs built under YAP-1, was designed for the 1997 population load, which became insufficient by 2002 because of a tremendous increase in population. 

• Delhi's population has grown at a phenomenal rate of 47percent per decade (as against the national average of 21 percent), but planning and provisioning of infrastructure has not kept pace with the increase in population, resulting in rural villages, shanties and colonies without adequate sewerage infrastructure. 
• Mainly the money provided for the plan was spent on paying wages to the employee’s salary instead of cleaning the river.
• There has not been much public awareness during YAP I & II by the authorities which resulted in rising pollution.

Judicial Stand.

In the year 2012, The Supreme Court sought an explanation from the Central, Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and Haryana governments on the Yamuna continuing to be highly polluted despite a spending of around Rs. 4,400 crore over the last 18 years on cleaning the river.

In 2013,the National Green Tribunal (NGT) invoked the “Polluter Pays” principle to deal with the problem of pollution and dumping of debris on the Yamuna bank.