The UPSC challenge

Several myths surround the UPSC examination, but here is what you need to do to succeed.

The Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) is the central authority that conducts various examinations to recruit candidates for various government services such as civil services, engineering services, defence services and so on. The civil services, however, have always had an added allure. Hence, the selection process is much more competitive.

Let us first try to understand the importance of civil services in a democracy such as India. For effective administration, it is vital that our political leaders are given non-partisan advice. Effective co-ordination is required between the various institutions of governance. Policy-making must be effective and regulated and able leaders are required at every level of administration. In addition to this, civil services executives must offer free, frank and unbiased advice to the government (irrespective of who is in power) to fulfil their responsibility to the public who elected the government.

Different options

Given the significance of the role played by civil service executives, it is only fair that recruitment to these services is done in a conservative manner. As of today, there are nearly 25 different services in the government that recruit their workforce based on the civil services exam conducted by the UPSC. This includes Indian Administrative Services (IAS), Indian Police Services (IPS), Indian Foreign Services (IFS), Indian Revenue Services (IRS), Indian Postal Services, Indian Railway Services, Indian Trade Services, among others.

More often than not, we hear about how difficult it is to crack the civil services exams. Is it for the highly intelligent only? Or for those with excellent academic records? Do people from engineering or medical background find it easier? Does one have to choose their graduation subject carefully to gain an upper hand? Does one need to study 16 hours a day every day for a year? Does one need to relocate to Delhi to find good coaching classes? The answer to all the above questions is a big NO.

In reality, clearing the civil services exam (CSE) has no shortcuts and there are no magic tricks. Students have to plan their study and work accordingly. Previous-year toppers have all come from various backgrounds and some of them hadn’t even scored a second class in their degrees prior to CSE. All toppers have had access to the same books that lakhs of other students did. The only thing they did differently was that they practised writing, took mock tests, were confident, and, of course, had a dash of good luck as well!

Anyone with a valid undergraduate degree and between 21 and 32 years of age (as of August 1 every year) is eligible to appear for the civil services exam. The upper limit for age is relaxed for people from certain categories (SC/ST, OBC, Disabled etc). General category candidates are allowed, maximum of six attempts at the exam while special category students are given more leniency.

There are several challenges before the UPSC aspirants — fear of exam, fear of unemployment, fear of failure, lack of information, lack of proper guidance and right resources to prepare for the exam. But one of the biggest challenges faced by students is the choice that they have to make — whether to move to Delhi and study there, or do self-study at home. This is a big decision and one that is often made without proper research. These days, there are several options available at home or online for UPSC coaching. Students, however, fear the new ways and tend to adhere to the tested ways, even if they are not convenient or fruitful.

Interview

Clearing the interview is the final hurdle in the civil services exams. The following guidelines are generally believed to be useful for tackling it:

Dos:

Be polite and greet all five members on the interview board confidently.

Do not take a seat untill you’re asked to do so.

Maintain eye contact with your interviewer(s)

Before answering a question, take a few seconds to think through your answer and keep it short and to the point.

If you do not know the answer to a particular answer, it is better to admit it openly.

It is quite possible that interviewers may not agree with your opinions. Do not get very defensive.

Don’ts

Avoid fidgeting. Maintain a dignified posture and keep your hands and head steady.

Never resort to wild guesses or speculation.

While answering questions, do not give away your lack of confidence through your expressions or body gestures.

You should not come across as being arrogant or overconfident. That is a big minus.

Avoid unnecessary humour. Do not try to get overly friendly with the interviewers.

Do not leave the interview hall unless you’re asked to do so.

In summary, to become a civil service executive is a matter of great prestige. In order to be successful, one needs to be methodical and systematic about their study plan. It is extremely important to turn a deaf ear to myths and focus on what is real. Practice is of course vital.

The writer is head of UPSC classes, SuperProfs.com.

Keywords: Union Public Service Commission, UPSC exam, civil services exam preparation, exam preparation tips, civil services interview

Source: The Hindu, 30-01-2016

The basics for free speech

Courts have routinely invoked contempt to punish expressions of dissent, when such expressions often posed no threat to the administration of justice.

Through a most pernicious act of judicial fiat, in a judgment delivered on December 23, 2015, Justice A.B. Chaudhari, sitting on the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court, issued notice to the Booker Prize-winning writer Arundhati Roy for committing what he believed constituted a clear case of criminal contempt of court. The decision was rendered on an application for bail by the Delhi University professor, G.N. Saibaba. Not only did the court reject Dr. Saibaba’s plea, in spite of his substantial disabilities, it also hauled Ms. Roy up for writing in support of the professor, and in criticism of the Indian state, including the country’s judiciary. In initiating contempt proceedings, Justice Chaudhari’s judgment has exemplified the state of the right to free speech in India — a liberty fractured by colonial vestiges such as the law on contempt, which we have embarrassingly embraced as a supposed necessity to uphold the majesty of our courts.

The conventional defences adopted in favour of the judiciary retaining powers to punish acts of contempt invariably point to the Constitution. Article 19(1)(a) no doubt grants to the country’s citizens a right to freedom of speech and expression. But the ensuing clause, Article 19(2), limits this freedom, and accords the state the express authority to make laws that establish reasonable restrictions on speech, on various grounds, including contempt of court. When in 1971, Parliament enacted the Contempt of Courts Act, with a purported view of defining and limiting the powers of courts in punishing acts of contempt, it was the inherent constraint in Article 19 that it took refuge under. But this statute is neither reasonable nor in keeping with the fundamental mandates of a legitimate government.

Contempt’s broad contours

Broadly, the 1971 law recognises two common forms of contempt. First, it defines civil contempt to include, among other things, a wilful disobedience of a court’s judgment, order or direction. And second, it defines criminal contempt to include publications that do one or more of the following: (a) scandalise or lower the authority of any court; (b) prejudice or interfere with the due course of any judicial proceeding; or (c) interfere with or obstruct the administration of justice in any other manner.

As is evident, there are clear divisions between different types of contempt. Some of these categories are more obviously justifiable as offences. For instance, the court’s power to punish acts that tantamount to disobedience of its orders, or indeed a court’s inherent authority to ensure that its hearings are conducted in a fair and undisturbed manner, is required to ensure that we subscribe to a basic rule of law. But the idea that the judiciary can also punish acts that have very little to do with the actual administration of justice and all to do with the impact of speech on the institution’s supposed reputation in the eyes of the public is substantially more problematic. Notably, the power to punish acts which ostensibly scandalise or lower the authority of the court speaks not to the majesty of the institution, but to an ingrained sense of insecurity, coupled with an almost despotic view of its own infallibility, that the judiciary seems to possess. In a democracy, properly understood, it’s difficult to locate any justification for thwarting speech at the face of the judiciary, notwithstanding the fact that contempt of court is one of the explicitly spelled out restrictions to the guaranteed right to freedom of speech under the Constitution.

During the course of drafting the Constitution, there was, writes the lawyer Gautam Bhatia in his new book, Offend, Shock, or Disturb: Free Speech under the Indian Constitution, “a marked uncertainty among the framers about the understanding of contempt they were inserting into the Constitution”. When T.T. Krishnamachari suggested the inclusion of contempt of court as one of the permissible limitations to free speech, he was met by members who were passionate in their opposition to the category’s inclusion. One of these challengers, Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava, believed that contempt of court was simply not germane to a discussion on freedom of speech and expression. In his understanding, powers to reprimand contempt concerned only actions such as the disobedience of an order or direction of a court, which were already punishable infractions. Speech in criticism of the courts, he argued, ought not to be considered as contumacious, for it would simply open up the possibility of gross judicial abuse of such powers. Almost none of the responses to Bhargava in the Constituent Assembly met his core argument: that the guarantee of free speech in a democracy ought to serve as a value unto itself.

Courts and criticism

Bhargava’s warnings have since proved prophetic. India’s courts have routinely invoked the long arm of its contempt powers to often punish expressions of dissent on purported grounds of such speech undermining or scandalising the judiciary’s authority. But, while doing so, the court has rarely conducted a strict analysis on whether those acts posed any actual threat to — or interfered in any direct manner with — the administration of justice.

For example, in 1970, the Supreme Court famously upheld a conviction of contempt of court against the former Chief Minister of Kerala, E.M.S. Namboodiripad. During his tenure as Chief Minister, Namboodiripad had apparently delivered a speech arguing that judges were guided and dominated by class interests. “To charge the judiciary as an instrument of oppression, the judges as guided and dominated by class hatred, class interests and class prejudices, instinctively favouring the rich against the poor,” wrote Justice M. Hidayatullah, “is to draw a very distorted and poor picture of the judiciary. It is clear that it is an attack upon judges, which is calculated to raise in the minds of the people a general dissatisfaction with, and distrust of all judicial decisions. It weakens the authority of law and law courts.”

The judgment made no effort at showing any actual link between Namboodiripad’s statements and the supposed weakening of the courts’ authority. In so doing, a disturbing trend was set in motion, which culminated in a 1996 decision in which the Supreme Court ruled that “all acts which bring the court into disrepute or disrespect or which offend its dignity or its majesty or challenge its authority” amount to punishable contempt. The ultimate consequence of this ruling is typical of Indian free speech jurisprudence: a complete eschewal by the courts of any regard for individual choice and liberty, coupled with a belief that some forms of speech are to be muzzled purely by virtue of their content as opposed to any actual anti-democratic harm stemming through their expression.

In 2006, with a view to reducing the breadth of the judiciary’s powers, Parliament amended the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971. The law now provides two additional safeguards in favour of a dissenter. One, it establishes that a sentence for contempt of court can be imposed only when the court is satisfied that the contempt is of such a nature that it substantially interferes, or tends to substantially interfere with the due course of justice. Two, the truth in speech now constitutes a valid defence against proceedings of contempt, if the court is satisfied that the larger public interest is served through the publication of such content. In spite of these amendments, though, courts have continued to routinely equate the supposed scandalising of the judiciary’s authority to an act of contempt.

Constitutional lawyers have proposed many different justifications for the right to free speech. As legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin argued, these justifications usually fall into one or the other of two larger categories. The first involves an instrumental understanding of free speech: that to allow people to speak freely and openly promotes good rather than bad policies. The second justification is premised on a larger platform of a commitment to individual autonomy, of treating people with equal concern, and of therefore respecting their right to speak freely. Punishing speech for supposedly scandalising or lowering the authority of the court falls afoul of whichever rationale we might wish to adopt in our theorising of the abstract right to free expression in India.

Interestingly, in England, whose laws of contempt we’ve so indiscriminately adopted, there hasn’t been a single conviction for scandalising the court in more than eight decades. What’s more, in 2013, after a recommendation by its Law Commission, the country altogether abolished as a form of contempt the offence of scandalising the judiciary. In so doing, it gave credence to Lord Denning’s characteristically precise opinion in a case where contempt charges had been pressed against Queen’s Counsel Quintin Hogg for what was an excoriating attack on the courts in Punch magazine. “Let me say at once that we will never use this jurisdiction as a means to uphold our own dignity,” Denning wrote. “That must rest on surer foundations… We do not fear criticism, nor do we resent it. For there is something far more important at stake. It is no less than freedom of speech itself.”

(Suhrith Parthasarathy is an advocate practising in the Madras High Court.)

Keywords: criminal contempt proceedings, Bombay High Court, Booker prize-winning author Arundhati Roy

Source: The Hindu, 30-01-2016

Gandhiji's Life Lessons

SURAKSHA GIRI





First, do away with platitudes.Language, communication and discussion have become a labyrinth of context, nuances and sophistication. A society based on truth and non-violence affirms a belief in God.Second, Gandhiji gave importance to right values. He was a plain-speaking person without artifice; never mincing his words. Sarvodaya, or universal uplift, trusteeship and principled leadership formed his vision for taking India forward. He was not interested in his statues or parks named after him.
Gandhiji hoped that the ideals of his vision would be like the tiny spring that gushes forth from the Gangotri glacier and that flows down as the mighty Ganga, nurturing, serving and sharing in the lives of the people. He believed in a decent standard of life, unlike the concept of standard of living that is a material quotient.
Standard of life suggests a flowering of spiritual, cultural and material values so that one is not afflicted by the seven deadly sins: wealth without work, pleasure without conscience, knowledge without character, commerce (business) without morality (ethics), science without humanity , religion without sacrifice, and politics without principle.
Third, Gandhiji believed everyone ought to share and care.Trusteeship, serving people, sacrificing for them and, thus, contributing to the standard of life was advocated by Gandhiji, who would say , “A person cannot do right in one department whilst attempting to do wrong in another department. Life is one indivisible whole.“

Sharpen Your Intellect With Your Problems

Maulana Wahiduddin Khan





Every individual wants peace of mind. But it is hard to find a person who can say that he has attained such a state of mental equilibrium as will allow him to live a life of tranquility. Peace of mind is a distant dream for all of us. What is the reason for this? The reason is that people hanker after ideal peace, that is, pure peace ­ a peace that is free from all kinds of non-peace items.But this kind of absolute peace is not in nature's storehouse. Let us take the analogy of the rose. A rose is a very beautiful flower, but every stem has its thorns. Indeed, thorns are an integral part of the rose plant. A poet has rightly said that thorns serve as security guards for the flower. The translation of his Urdu lines is: `The safety of the flower would become impossible if the thorns were silk-like.' So flowers have to be accompanied by thorns. There must be hard thorns along with soft flowers ­ that is, there must be non-peace items along with peaceful items. A peaceful mind is a very precious aspect of human nature and it too needs safety to maintain its sublime quality.
Studies in psychology show that an untroubled mind very soon becomes stagnant. It loses its creativity. For this reason, nature always leads people into challenging situations. It is a non-peace item which acts as a challenge for the mind. This guarantees that the creativity of a peaceful mind never comes to an end. A creative mind is always alive. It is a common phenomenon that one who is born in affluence and has a problemfree life, very soon finds his s mind becoming dull, while the one who is born into a life of problems and hardship, has an active mind.Such a person develops creative thinking and his intellectual development continues unhindered.
Here, i would like to cite a personal experience, concerning a politician who had two sons. He loved one of his sons very much. He got this son married to someone of his choice and presented him with a farmhouse in which to live a life of comfort, just as he pleased. I met this son and conversed with him. It seemed as if i were talking to a dull person. He did tell some jokes but could not utter a word of wisdom. I have met the other son also. He was not given a comfortable life by his father and so left town for another place. After a few years of struggle, he emerged as a successful person. When i met him, i found that his whole conversation was full of wisdom. The human mind needs constant challenges. In the environment of challenge, it continues to grow till it becomes a super-mind. On the other hand, in an environment where there is no challenge, the human mind becomes like a stunted plant and gradually , it shrivels away into a state of underdevelopment.
Peace is not a ready-made item. It is a self-managed item. One should be intelligent enough to develop one's mind along positive lines so that one may deal effectively with unwanted situations. A peaceful mind is only the other name of a positive mind.
British author Samuel Smiles said: `It is not ease, but effort, not facility but difficulty that makes a man.' It is a fact that ease and facility are constant obstacles to intellectual development, while effort and difficulties are like stepping stones to the sharpening of the intellect.
Source: Times of India, 30-01-2016

Most doctors now prefer digital interaction'

Rupali Mukherjee

Mumbai:





Up To 60% Use Tech 1 Out Of 3 Times: Survey

Over 60% of doctors in the country now prefer, one out of three times, digital interaction with their patients as against the traditional face-to-face interaction, indicating a trend where WhatsApp, text messages and emails are increasingly being used for consultations.This is slightly lower, but in keeping with the trend in the US, Japan and China, where a greater number of healthcare professionals (HCPs) -in certain markets, over 90% -have switched to the digital medium, using WeChat, blogs, email and text messaging to engage with patients for follow-up consults.Also, a majority of doctors -globally 60% -de mand drug companies combine the use of digital tablets and iPads along with direct interaction when medical representatives (MRs) are detailing the portfolio of medicines. These findings are part of the Digital Savvy HCP (Healthcare Practitioner) 2015, an annual global survey on the digital habits of doctors across the US, Japan, China and India, by healthcare so utions firm Indegene, sha red exclusively with TOI.
The survey involved more than 1,600 healthcare profes than 1,600 healthcare professionals across the globe, with 67% speciality doctors, and the remaining 33% general practitioners. In India, over 300 doctors were part of the survey with more than 10 years of experience, practising in tier 1 and tier 2 places across the country .
The survey found that 76% doctors in the US prefer personal interaction (of field force) along with detailing with the tablet, while the corresponding figure in India is 90%. “Doctors in the US have a higher digital adoption rate, and are more comfortable with remote detailing channels (through Skype, etc).This also works well with pharmaceutical companies in terms of costs, as well as adherence to ethical marketing code,“ Gaurav Kapoor, EVP (emerging markets), Indegene, told TOI.
As against this, doctors in India prefer a face-to-face detailing with their digital tablets, wherein they meet MRs in their clinics and the latter are equipped with detailing on their tabletsiPads.
Dr Upendra Kaul, ED, academics and research (cardiology) in Delhi-based Fortis Escorts Hospital, says, “As doctors, our bandwidth is committed to treating more and more patients and improving their health outcomes.In this pursuit, technologyled information sharing on new drugs, new indications and peer information on emerging treatment protocols is of tremendous benefit to the medical fraternity . It frees up our time for patients and at the same time, keeps us updated on the latest medical information.“
Globally , drug companies are increasingly switching to digital channels like emails, websites, webinars, apps and text messages due to compliance requirements, the survey says, adding 34% of physicians globally value the smartphone as a key resource in seeking medical information. Other devices used by doctors are laptops, PCs and tablets. India sees less than half the global usage of smartphones (by doctors), while the most preferred device for doctors here is laptops (34%).
In terms of overall digital engagement across channels, globally pharma companies are far ahead, with MSD at the top, followed by GSK, AstraZeneca and Pfizer. In India, Abbott leads the pack as the top digital engager, who doctors believe is effectively leveraging technology to reach out to them for providing drug information. Abbott is followed by MSD, Pfizer, Novartis, GSK and Sanofi.
Most MNCs here use digital technology and have equipped their field staff with tablets to engage with physicians for scientific and product communication. “For instance, Abbott's `Knowledge Genie Portal' has a host of data that can be easily accessed by physicians at their convenience, across multiple therapy areas,“ Bhasker Iyer, VP, Abbott India, said.

Source: Times of India, 30-01-2016

Govt names 20 cities for smart makeover; Bhubaneswar tops list

Urban development minister M Venkaiah Naidu on Thursday announced the first list of 20 cities to be developed as Smart Cities, with Bhubaneswar topping the list and Pune and Jaipur coming in second and third respectively.

The others on the list include Surat, Kochi and Ahmedabad.

These cities will be developed to have basic infrastructure through assured water and power supply, sanitation and solid waste management, efficient urban mobility and public transport, IT connectivity, e-governance and citizen participation.

“The states selected cities and sent us a list of 97 names. There was a competition among these names and 20 cities have been selected,” Naidu told a news conference. “Bottom up approach has been the key planning principle under Smart City Mission,” he said.

“The Smart City Challenge Competition was as rigorous and demanding as the civil services competition conducted,” Naidu quipped.

These are the 20 cities named in the first list: Bhubaneswar; Pune; Jaipur; Surat; Kochi; Ahmedabad; Jabalpur; Visakhapatnam; Solapur; Davanagere; Indore; New Delhi; Coimbatore; Kakinada; Belgaum; Udaipur; Guwahati; Chennai; Ludhiana; Bhopal.

List of the 20 smart cities announced by the government.

In the subsequent years, the government will announce 40 cities each to be developed as smart cities as per Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s plan to develop 100 smart cities in the country.

The government plans to build these smart cities by 2022 to help accommodate its swelling urban population, which is set to rise by more than 400 million people to 814 million by 2050.

The cities are competing on a variety of matrices, including urban reforms and their plan of action in four key areas -- Swachh Bharat, Make in India, good governance (modern accounting system, rationalisation of property taxes) and e-governance.

Naidu said that a total of 15.20 million (1.52 crore) citizens had participated in the preparation of the ambitious Smart City plans at various stages.

Some sent their ideas to city officials via Twitter, Facebook or SMS. Others entered local contests for designing logos or writing essays. Bhubaneswar, the capital of the eastern state of Orissa, unfurled a 10-kilometer-long canvas banner across the city and invited residents to scroll down their suggestions.

Many of the proposals mentioned a need for better transportation, sewage treatment or trash management.

The Rajasthani heritage cities of Jaipur and Udaipur, and Agra, the city of the iconic Taj Mahal, all wanted to clean up their downtown tourist areas, while people in Amritsar, best known for its Golden Temple and location near Pakistan, suggested CCTV cameras and an emergency call center to address their main concerns about safety and security.

He further said that Smart City plans will demonstrate how integrated planning and smart technologies can deliver better a quality of life.

The Centre and states will equally split the overall cost of the project estimated at Rs 96,000 crore. The central government will provide on an average Rs. 100 crore per chosen city per year. The project cost of each smart city will vary depending upon the level of ambition, model, capacity to execute and repay.

Raising funds is the key challenge as also is developing older cities with limited scope to overhaul. Heavily populated areas may need complete rebuilding which will then involve temporarily rehabilitating people and, in some cases, acquiring land.

Source: Hindustan Times, 28-01-2016

Let's Become Nothing

J KRISHNAMURTI





All one's education, past experience and knowledge are a movement in becoming, inwardly , psychologically as well as outwardly . Becoming is the accumulation of memory , called knowledge. As long as that movement exists, there is fear of being nothing. But when one really sees the illusion of becoming something, to see there is nothing, this becoming is endless time-thought and conflict, there is the ending of the movement that is the psyche, which is time-thought. The ending of that is to be nothing.Nothing, then, contains the whole universe -not my petty little fears and petty little anxieties and problems, and my sorrow with regard to, you know, a dozen things.
Nothing means the entire world of compassion -compassion is nothing. And, therefore, that nothingness is supreme intelligence. That's all there is.So, why are human beings -just ordinary , intelligent -frightened of being nothing? If I see that I am nothing but dead memories, that's a fact. But I don't like to think I am just nothing but memories. But that's the truth.
If I had no memory , either I'm in a state of amnesia or I understand the whole movement of memory , which is time-thought, and see the fact as long as there is this movement, there must be endless conflict, struggle and pain. And when there is an insight into that, nothing means something entirely different. And that nothing is the present -being nothing is no time, therefore, it is not ending one day and beginning another day .