Indian Express Editorial Summary

Editorial Topic : Why Indian Cities Drown

 GS-3 Mains Exam : Disaster management 

Problem: Inadequate Drainage Systems

• Ancient India had advanced water management systems.
• Modern cities: concrete jungles with poor drainage.
• Stormwater accumulates, flooding roads, homes, and infrastructure.
• Waste clogs drainage systems, exacerbating floods.
• Short, intense rainfall due to climate change overwhelms systems.

Urban Planning Failures

• Delhi: built on elevated plane, allowing natural water flow.
• Modern Delhi: radial/block pattern hinders water drainage.
• Neglect of natural contours and inclines.
• Similar issues in Mumbai, Bengaluru, and other cities.
• Mumbai: built on reclaimed land, prone to flooding.
• 2005 Mumbai floods: a turning point.

Social Impact and Environmental Damage

• Floods disproportionately affect poor and lower-middle class.
• Informal settlements vulnerable to flooding.
• Destruction of natural water bodies (nallahs) worsened the situation.
• Modern drainage systems neglected and inefficient.

Way Forward

• Improve urban planning considering hydrology and climate change.
• Restore natural water bodies for better drainage.
• Invest in robust drainage infrastructure.
• Prioritize flood resilience in urban development.
• Address inequities in flood impact.

 

 

Indian Express Editorial Summary

Editorial Topic : Landmark Judgment on SC/ST Reservations

 GS-3 Mains Exam : Disaster management 

Key Points

• Case: State of Punjab v Davinder Singh (2024)
• Issue: Power of states to sub-divide SC/ST quotas.
• Decision: Supreme Court allows states to sub-classify SC/ST for better targeting of benefits.
• Rationale: Acknowledges heterogeneity within SC/ST communities, with some groups facing greater disadvantage.
• Impact:
  • Fine-tunes social justice policies.
  • Overrules E V Chinnaiah case (2004) which prohibited sub-categorization.
  • Opens door for identifying ‘creamy layer’ within SC/ST.
  • Reinforces Indra Sawhney judgment on affirmative action.

Implications

• Positive: Better targeting of benefits to most marginalized SC/ST groups.
• Negative Potential: Legal challenges, political misuse, dilution of quotas.
• Crucial: Evidence-based identification of most disadvantaged groups.

Overall

Landmark judgment that empowers states to create more equitable distribution of benefits within SC/ST communities. Requires careful implementation to avoid potential pitfalls.