Editorial 1 : At a standstill
Introduction: For more than 15 years now, Indian cities have been failing the monsoon test. Every year the same script is repeated in approximately every city of India.
The status of Indian cities in this monsoon
- This year, several parts of Delhi have been submerged on more than one day, Guwahati has faced a crippling flood, and last week, torrential rains brought lives to a standstill in several parts of Maharashtra, including Pune and Mumbai.
What is common in all these cities?
- All these cities have distinct geographical features.
- However, there are at least three things that are common to their flood-related woes:
- Outdated drainage systems that cannot take the stress of more than normal rainfall,
- planning that does not account for local hydrology and civic agencies whose role seems limited to organising relief and rescue.
- Maximum casualties are caused by overflowing nullahs, incidents of wall or building collapse and electrocution.
- For example:
- In Pune, for instance, three people lost their lives after receiving an electric shock in a waterlogged part of the city.
- On July 22, a 26-year-old civil services aspirant was electrocuted in an inundated street in the national capital — the National Human Rights Commission has asked Delhi’s chief secretary, Commissioner of Police and the head of the city’s power distribution company to submit a detailed report on the incident.
Climate change compounded the miseries of the already relying urban infrastructure
- Climate change, it’s now well known, has increased the intensity of extreme weather events.
- Pune and Mumbai received nearly 45 per cent excess rainfall on Thursday and Friday, last week.
- Maharashtra’s capital does have a Climate Action Plan and a similar project is reportedly underway in the state’s second largest city.
- The problem is that there has been very little conversation on institutional mechanisms to make Indian cities climate resilient.
- Mumbai’s Climate Action Plan does mention the need for a collaborative mechanism involving the industry, academia and civil society organisations.
- However, the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation — the plan’s nodal agency — is yet to get its act going.
- The country’s richest municipality, which administers a city whose climate vulnerabilities have been underlined by more than one IPCC report, has not had elections in the past two years.
A case-study for good flood management system
- Flood-related damage can be reduced if early alert systems are in place.
- Flood prone Buenos Aires, for example, has installed sensors in over 30,000 stormwater drains to issue flood warnings much in advance.
Way forward for Indian cities
- Indian cities will, of course, need to have their own mix of natural and technological solutions.
- They will need to start with the basics: Stormwater drain improvement projects in most Indian cities, including Mumbai and Pune, have progressed in fits and starts.
Conclusion: The country’s latest monsoon woes are a signal that such projects cannot be put off. Above average rainfall, as in Maharashtra, is here to stay. India’s cities need to learn from global experience to check flooding.
Editorial 2 : Needed: Guardrails
Introduction: Last week, a nine-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court ruled on a matter that has been pending in the courts for a quarter of a century, one that will have wide-ranging ramifications on the running of a federal polity.
The Mineral Area Development Authority v M/s Steel Authority of India
- On Thursday, the apex court ruled that states in India have the power to tax mining activities, and that their collecting “royalties” from mining leaseholders is entirely separate from, and does not interfere with, the power to impose taxes.
- As a direct consequence of this judgment (Mineral Area Development Authority v M/s Steel Authority of India), state governments in India can now generate additional revenues from mining activities as well as the land used to conduct these activities.
- The latest judgment upends the 1989 judgment (India Cement Ltd v State of Tamil Nadu) by a seven-judge Bench of the Supreme Court that had ruled that “royalty is a tax” and that states only have the power to collect royalties, not to impose taxes on mining activities.
Whether royalty is a tax or not?
- The heart of the matter before the court was whether royalty is a tax or not.
- This distinction matters because of the division of legislative powers between the Centre and state governments in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution.
- On the one hand, Entry 50 of the State List of the Seventh Schedule gives the states the exclusive power to make laws relating to “Taxes on mineral rights subject to any limitations imposed by Parliament by law relating to mineral development”.
- On the other hand, Entry 54 of the Union List gives the Centre the power over “Regulation of mines and mineral development to the extent to which… is declared by Parliament by law to be expedient in the public interest”.
- There is a central law — the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (MMDRA) — and it requires those who obtain leases to conduct mining activities to “pay royalty in respect of any mineral removed” to the individual or corporation who leased the land to them.
- The question is: If a state government is the entity leasing the land to a leaseholder, do such royalties come under the MMDRA as a form of tax?
- The apex court has ruled that royalty, as envisaged under Section 9 of the 1957 MMDR Act, “is not in the nature of tax”.
The dissenting voice in the judgement raised concern over giving such right to states
- However, the ruling was not unanimous — it was an 8-1 split — and the judicial ruling is unlikely to be the end of the matter when it comes to actual implementation.
- For instance, Justice BV Nagarathna, the sole dissenting voice, pointed out that the verdict could lead to an “unhealthy competition” between states to derive additional revenue and consequently lead to an uncoordinated and uneven increase in cost of minerals that will ultimately have an adverse impact on India’s economy.
Conclusion: Given the fractious nature of politics between the Centre and states, and among states, it is not hard to see why she cautioned that this verdict may lead to the “breakdown of the federal system” in the context of mineral development. What is needed now is for certain policy guardrails to obviate potentially adverse consequences of this verdict.