Daily Editorial Analysis 25 November 2025

The Amplitude of Gubernatorial Discretion

Context

• Walter Bagehot’s reminder that the British monarch has no veto and must even sign her own death-warrant underscores the democratic expectation that the nominal head of state functions without independent political will.
• This principle illuminates the contemporary debate over the role of the Indian Governor under Article 200, where ambiguity about discretion has repeatedly strained Centre–State relations.
• The Supreme Court’s recent advisory opinion attempts clarification, yet its implications reveal deeper tensions between constitutional design and political practice.

Historical Foundations and Constitutional Intent

• The Government of India Act, 1935 vested substantial discretionary power in Governors, including the ability to assent, withhold assent, or return Bills.
• The framers of the Indian Constitution consciously departed from this colonial model.
• During the evolution of draft Article 175, the Constituent Assembly removed references to discretion, signalling a commitment to a parliamentary system in which the Governor acts on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers.
• This intended transformation placed the Governor as a figurehead akin to Bagehot’s constitutional monarch, with no personal political mandate.
• Yet practice has never fully aligned with this vision.
• Shifts in political alliances, party discipline, and the potential for partisan interference have kept the question of gubernatorial authority unresolved and often contentious.

Judicial Interpretation and the Expansion of Discretion

• The Supreme Court recently considered whether the Governor possesses implied discretion under Article 200 and whether timelines can be imposed for decisions on Bills.
• The Court affirmed that discretion exists in assenting, withholding, or reserving Bills, and concluded that mandatory timelines cannot be judicially prescribed. Judicial review is limited to cases of prolonged, unexplained, or indefinite delay.
• This stance reintroduces discretionary space that the framers had consciously excluded. The Court argued that the anti-defection law and strict party whips ensure unified legislative action, making it unlikely that a Bill could pass without cabinet support.
• Therefore, the Governor may need discretion if advice is unconstitutional or contrary to the text.
• However, this reasoning overlooks politically plausible scenarios where coalitions shift, and a new ministry may legitimately reconsider a Bill passed under a previous alliance.
• Constitutional advisor N. Rau noted such situations, cautioning against assumptions of stable legislative intent.
• Moreover, safeguards already exist: a Governor confronted with blatantly unconstitutional advice may act under Article 356 without relying on ministerial recommendation.

Political Realities and Institutional Friction

• Expansive discretion becomes problematic in a political context where Governors are often perceived as extensions of the Union executive.
• Soli Sorabjee’s criticism of the office becoming a consolation prize for burnt-out politicians highlights concerns about impartiality.
• When different parties control the Union and the State, the Governor’s actions, particularly strategic delays or reservations of Bills, can escalate tensions.
• Historical evidence shows repeated misuse of delays. Former Karnataka Chief Minister Ramakrishna Hegde documented that 74 Bills awaited presidential assent for years, with some pending for six to seven years.
• Such delays amount to a de facto veto, despite the Constitution providing none.

Risks of Over-Broad Discretion: Toward Gubernatorial Governance?

• By affirming implied discretion and placing many actions beyond judicial review, the Court’s opinion risks enabling a form of gubernatorial governance where unelected officers influence legislative outcomes.
• This development contradicts the democratic architecture in which the legislature and its accountable executive should dominate policy-making.
• Doctrinal uncertainty also emerges. The advisory opinion diverges from reasoning in the earlier Tamil Nadu case, potentially encouraging broader assertions of discretion unless constitutional amendments define tighter boundaries.
• A system that permits significant delays or unilateral gubernatorial decisions threatens the federal balance and weakens the authority of elected State governments.

A Path Forward: Timelines and Reduced Discretion

• A stable federal structure requires clearer limits on gubernatorial authority.
• Introducing constitutional timelines for assent would prevent obstruction through delay and enhance transparency.
• Reinforcing the principle that discretion exists only in the narrow exceptions envisaged by the framers would restore alignment with parliamentary conventions.
• Additionally, revisiting the mode of appointment, as recommended by multiple commissions, would mitigate perceptions of partisanship and strengthen institutional legitimacy.

Conclusion

• The relationship between the legislature and the constitutional head in a parliamentary system demands clarity, restraint, and respect for democratic accountability.
• Gubernatorial authority under Article 200 remains one of the most significant unresolved constitutional challenges in India.
• Without reforms, especially defined timelines and narrowed discretion, the risk persists that an office intended to be ceremonial will continue to shape legislation in ways neither envisioned by the framers nor conducive to healthy federalism.

The Amplitude of Gubernatorial Discretion FAQs

 Q1. What constitutional issue arises from Article 200 regarding the Governor’s role?
Ans. The issue arises from the ambiguity over the Governor’s discretionary power in assenting to or delaying Bills passed by the State legislature.

Q2. Why did the framers remove references to discretion from the draft Article 175?
Ans. They removed those references to ensure the Governor functions as a ceremonial head who acts on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers.

Q3. What concern is raised by prolonged delays in granting assent to Bills?
Ans. Prolonged delays create a de facto veto that undermines democratic decision-making and disrupts State governance.

Q4. How does political partisanship affect the functioning of the Governor’s office?
Ans. Political partisanship affects the office because Governors are often perceived as aligned with the Union, creating friction when the State is ruled by an opposing party.

Q5. What reform is suggested to reduce conflicts between the State and the Governor?
Ans. A reform suggested is the introduction of clear constitutional timelines for the Governor’s actions on Bills.

Source: The Hindu

Bridging India’s Numeracy Gap

Context

• The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 emphasises Foundational Literacy and Numeracy (FLN) as the basis for all future learning.
• Through the NIPUN Bharat Mission, this vision has shifted from focusing on inputs to prioritising measurable learning outcomes.
• As a result, foundational learning — stagnant for years — is now showing notable improvement, as seen in both government and independent assessments.
• However, a significant challenge remains: numeracy is consistently weaker than literacy. ASER 2024 highlights this gap — while 48.7% of Class 5 students can read fluently, only 30.7% can solve a basic division problem.
• Importantly, no State in India reports higher numeracy scores than literacy. This persistent disparity makes strengthening numeracy essential for achieving comprehensive foundational learning.

Why Numeracy Lags Behind: The Cumulative Nature of Math

• Mathematics is hierarchical — each new concept depends on mastering earlier ones.
• If foundational ideas like place value are not understood in early grades, students struggle later with addition, decimals, and more complex operations.
• Unlike language, partial understanding doesn’t allow progress in math, so gaps expand over time.

• Curriculum Progression vs. Learning Levels

  • Traditional syllabus-driven teaching moves ahead regardless of whether students have understood earlier concepts.
  • Evidence from Teaching at the Right Level (Pratham) shows that instruction must match the child’s learning level, not the textbook.
  • Without such alignment, most learners fall behind, widening learning disparities.

• Real-Life Application Gap

  • Research reveals a disconnect between classroom math and everyday problem-solving.
  • Students who perform well on school math tests struggle with market-based calculations.
  • Children familiar with real-world arithmetic (e.g., shop work) often cannot transfer these skills to classroom-style math problems.
  • This two-way gap underscores the need for integrated, practical learning.

Consequences of Weak Numeracy

• Poor foundational numeracy leads to difficulties in math and science, both of which have higher failure rates in board exams.
• Many students drop out in middle or secondary school not due to lack of interest, but because learning gaps make classroom teaching incomprehensible.
• Fear of math blocks access to higher education for many who cannot clear Class 10 or leave school earlier.

Way Forward

• Extend Foundational Interventions Beyond Class 3

  • The current FLN focus up to Class 3 is insufficient since 70% of Class 5 and over 50% of Class 8 students still cannot do basic division.
  • Extending interventions up to Class 8 — as successfully demonstrated in Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu — is essential to bridge learning gaps, especially after COVID-19 disruptions.

• Introduce FLN+ Skills for Higher Grades

  • Beyond foundational numeracy, upper primary children need fractions, decimals, percentages, ratios and integers to succeed in board exams and progress academically.
  • With most Class 5 students unable to do division, they also lack these higher-level skills — making FLN+ indispensable.

• Reform Pedagogy to Match Learning Levels

  • Teaching must shift from rigid, grade-based syllabi to activity-based, child-friendly methods used in FLN.
  • Instruction should be aligned with students’ learning levels, not just the curriculum, especially at higher grades where gaps widen sharply.

• Integrate Real-Life Problem-Solving

  • Classrooms should embed numeracy and literacy in real-life contexts.
  • Connecting learning to everyday situations strengthens comprehension, improves transfer of skills, and increases student engagement.

Why This Matters: Urgency for India’s Future

• The numeracy gap deepens as students advance through school and leads to:
  • poor learning outcomes,
  • high board exam failure rates,
  • rising dropouts, and
  • weakened employability and equity.
• The NIPUN Bharat Mission has proven that large-scale improvement is possible.
• The next step is to expand this progress to upper primary classes and FLN+, ensuring continuity of learning and preparing students for future academic and economic opportunities.

Bridging India’s Numeracy Gap FAQs

Q1. Why does numeracy lag behind literacy in India?

Ans. Numeracy lags because math is cumulative; missing early concepts like place value blocks progress. Traditional syllabus-based teaching advances too quickly, widening learning gaps over time.

Q2. How does real-life application influence numeracy learning?

Ans. Studies show students often fail to apply school math in real-life situations, while real-world arithmetic skills don’t easily transfer to classroom problems, highlighting a two-way disconnect.

Q3. What are the consequences of weak foundational numeracy?

Ans. Weak numeracy leads to difficulties in math and science, higher board exam failures, rising dropouts, and reduced access to higher education, limiting long-term opportunities.

Q4. Why must foundational interventions extend beyond Class 3?

Ans. Since most Class 5 and half of Class 8 students cannot do basic division, interventions must continue through middle school to close persistent and widening gaps.

Q5. What reforms are essential to strengthen numeracy outcomes?

Ans. India needs FLN+ skills, activity-based teaching aligned to learning levels, and real-life problem-solving integration to improve comprehension and ensure lasting numeracy gains.

Source: TH

‹ ›

Modernising India’s Labour Regulation – Significance of the New Labour Codes

Context

• India has replaced 29 fragmented labour laws with four consolidated Labour Codes—wages, social security, industrial relations, and occupational safety & health.
• The reform seeks to reduce regulatory complexity, encourage formalisation, and enhance ease of doing business, forming an institutional pillar for Viksit Bharat 2047.

Background and Rationale for Reform

• Fragmented regulatory landscape

  • Earlier labour regimes evolved without coordination, resulting in inconsistencies across definitions, thresholds, and state-level rules.
  • This generated ambiguity, compliance burden, and “interpretive fog”.

• Consolidation into four codes

  • Uniform definitions across states.
  • Written appointment letters mandatory.
  • Clearer rules for timely wage payments.
  • Recognition of gig and platform workers.
  • Updated health, safety, and working conditions.
  • National-level simplified compliance architecture.

Transforming the Business Environment

• Closing the “Tax on Scale”

  • Ambiguity earlier acted as a disincentive to growth.
  • Firms stayed small to avoid triggering new compliance thresholds, leading to “missing middle” phenomenon.
  • Uniform rules reduce uncertainty, enabling expansion across states.

• Enhancing ease of doing business

  • Predictability matters more than subsidies.
  • Lower risk of accidental non-compliance will boost investor confidence.
  • Simplified registration, single licence, and unified national returns reduce administrative friction.

Promoting Formalisation and Labour-Market Efficiency

• Strengthening formal employment

  • Appointment letters and clear wage definitions discourage informal arrangements.
  • Improves worker retention, skill development, and productivity.
  • Better workforce planning for firms.

• Digital and platform economy inclusion

  • Recognises gig and platform workers for the first time.
  • By opening pathways to social protection, the Codes reduce the disconnect between the structure of work and the structure of regulation.
  • This brings India in line with many OECD economies, better equipped to sustain innovation.

• Women’s labour-force participation

  • Relaxation of restrictions on night work with safety provisions, expanding economic opportunities and supporting inclusive growth.

Economic Logic – Lowering Transaction Costs

• High transaction costs previously: Firms avoided hiring, formalisation, and expansion. Compliance complexity was a shadow tax on business.
• New compliance architecture: Clearer rules, online systems, and uniform standards reduce friction. Encourages formal economic behaviour and sustainable enterprise growth.

Institutional Importance

• Earlier regime: Fragmented laws resulted in risk-averse, defensive firms.
• New regime: Coherent, predictable framework will lead to ambitious, growth-oriented behaviour.
• Institutions shape economic behaviour: Supports a modern, competitive labour market aligned with economic transformation goals.

Challenges Ahead

• Implementation bottlenecks

  • States must notify rules in harmony with the Centre.
  • Robust digital platforms required for registration and compliance.
  • Inspectorate reforms needed to prevent discretion-based enforcement.
  • Awareness gaps among MSMEs and workers.

• Transition management

  • Shift from legacy systems to new Codes may initially create confusion. Ensuring social protection coverage for gig/platform workers is a long-term challenge.

Way Forward

• Strengthen state capacity to implement rules uniformly.
• Ensure seamless digital integration for registration, licensing, and compliance.
• Build awareness and training for MSMEs, start-ups, gig workers, and labour officers.
• Promote social security portability, especially for gig/platform workforce.
• Continuous feedback loops to refine Codes based on ground realities.
• Gender-sensitive infrastructure to support increased female labour participation.

Conclusion

• India’s four Labour Codes mark a historic institutional shift, replacing outdated and fragmented statutes with a coherent, predictable, and modern labour framework.
• They promote formalisation, reduce compliance uncertainty, support women and gig workers, and strengthen the ease of doing business—key pillars for building a Viksit Bharat 2047.
• While successful implementation remains critical, the Codes lay a strong foundation for an inclusive, competitive, and resilient labour market that benefits both workers and entrepreneurs.

New Labour Codes FAQs

Q1. How do the new Labour Codes address the “missing middle” problem in India’s industrial structure?

Ans. By providing uniform definitions, predictable rules, and simplified compliance, the Labour Codes remove scale-related regulatory disincentives.

Q2. How the Labour Codes strengthen the ease of doing business in India?

Ans. They reduce regulatory ambiguity through unified registration, single licences, and clear compliance norms.

Q3. What is the significance of recognising gig and platform workers under the new Labour Codes?

Ans. Recognition extends social security pathways to a fast-growing workforce segment, aligning India’s labour regulation with global trends.

Q4. In what way do the Labour Codes support formalisation and labour-market efficiency?

Ans. Mandatory appointment letters, harmonised wage definitions, and uniform categories reduce informal arrangements.

Q5. Why is effective implementation critical for realising the benefits of the new Labour Codes?

Ans. Because uniform state rules, non-discretionary enforcement are essential to ensure that Codes translate into tangible economic and labour-market gains.

Source: IE