India Among Top 10 Countries In Hydro Power Capacity

India acounts for 0.36 per cent of world’s installed hydro capacity. India has an estimated potential of about 19,750 MW of Small Hydro Power (SHP) projects. So far, 898 SHP projects with an aggregate capacity of 3411 MW have been set up and 348 projects aggregating to 1309 MW are under implementation. Ministry of New and Renewable Energy ensures performance testing of all the plants for their functionality.
During the 11th Plan, a capacity of 1419 MW was added against 536 MW during the 10th Plan. A capacity addition of 2100 MW from SHP projects has been planned during the 12th Five Year Plan. Ministry Of New And Renewable Energy provids Central Financial Assistance (CFA) to set up small / micro hydro projects both in public and private sectors. Financial support is also given to the State Government for identification of new potential sites including survey and preparation of DPRs, and renovation and modernization of old SHP projects. It also helps the State Governments in formulating their policies for the development of small hydro projects and exploitation of this potential.
Have a look at this infographic which provides the details of top 10 countries in hydro power capacity.

Earthquake Risk And Vulnerability In India

According to the latest seismic zone map of India, about 59 per cent of India’s land area is vulnerable to moderate or severe seismic hazard, i.e., prone to shaking of MSK intensity VII and above. In the recent past, most Indian cities have witnessed the phenomenal growth of multi-storied buildings, super malls, luxury apartments and social infrastructure as a part of the process of development. The rapid expansion of the built environment in moderate or high-risk cities makes it imperative to incorporate seismic risk reduction strategies in various aspects of urban planning and construction of new structures.

During the period 1990 to 2006, India has experienced 6 major earthquakes that have resulted in over 23,000 deaths and caused enormous damage to property, assets and infrastructure.

The entire Himalayan Region is considered to be vulnerable to high intensity earthquakes of a magnitude exceeding 8.0 on the Richter Scale, and in a relatively short span of about 50 years, four such earthquakes have occurred: Shillong, 1897 (M 8.7); Kangra, 1905 (M.8.0); Bihar–Nepal, 1934 (M 8.3); and Assam–Tibet, 1950 (M 8.6).

Scientific publications have warned that very severe earthquakes are likely to occur anytime in the Himalayan Region, which could adversely affect the lives of several million people in India.

The Bhuj earthquake of 2001 caused widespread damage and destruction not only to residential buildings but also to government buildings, public infrastructure and to buildings housing industrial enterprises in more than 7,900 villages in 21 districts of Gujarat. The severe economic losses caused by the Gujarat earthquake were not only restricted to the local economy but also influenced the savings and investment patterns and stock market behaviour.

Thus, the economic impact of an earthquake in a metropolitan city like Delhi or Mumbai etc., will have primary, secondary and tertiary effects.

Critical Areas of Concern in Earthquake Management

There is an increasing need being felt for a more systematic, holistic and integrated effort to address the critical areas of concern responsible for the weak seismic safety measures in India.

These Guidelines have been drawn up to address these critical areas of concern and to provide the foundation for seismic safety.

The regions away from the Himalayas and other inter-plate boundaries were previously considered to be relatively safe from the devastating impact of earthquakes. However, the Koyna earthquake of 1967 and the Latur earthquake of 1993 dispelled this widely held view and influenced the revisions of the seismic zoning map. This map, however, only indicates areas with low, moderate and high seismic hazards based on past trends.

There is an urgent need to revise the seismic zone map of India to reflect the return period related design accelerations. This work will be carried out in a phased manner covering the Himalayan ranges, the North-East and the western region in the first phase.

The critical areas of concern for the management of earthquakes in India include the:

• Lack of awareness among various stakeholders about the seismic risk
• Inadequate attention to structural mitigation measures in the engineering education syllabus
• Inadequate monitoring and enforcement of earthquake-resistant building codes and town planning bye-laws
• Absence of systems of licensing of engineers and masons
• Absence of earthquake-resistant features in non-engineered construction in suburban and rural areas
• Lack of formal training among professionals in earthquake-resistant construction practices
• Lack of adequate preparedness and response capacity among various stakeholder groups

Urgent Need: A More Realistic and Scientific Seismic Zonation Map

The Ministry of Environment And Science (MoES) will coordinate this task in collaboration with technical institutions like the IMD, the Earthquake Risk Evaluation Centre (EREC), the BIS and the Geological Survey of India (GSI), along with the concerned scientific and professional institutions.

Section 66(A) Of The Information Technology Act Creates Controversy

In the wake of recent events in Maharashtra and the Apex court’s intervention, the Government has issued new guidelines to the states that an officer not below the rank of DCP will decide on filing of cases under section 66A of IT Act. The guidelines have come in the wake of alleged misuse of the section in recent few cases.

The decision came after the Communications & IT Minister Kapil Sibal’s meeting with civil society activists for Internet freedom who had sought clarifications on the definition of section 66A of the IT Act.

According to the new guidelines, police officers at the level of IGP or DCP will have to give prior approval for registration of cases relating to 66 A of the IT Act. The senior officer will also decide whether a complaint needs to be registered under this section or not.

Recently two girls from Palghar, in Maharasthra were arrested citing section 66A of the Act.

Apex Court’s Intervention

The Supreme Court on November 29, 2012 observed that the country was outraged when two young women were arrested in Mumbai recently for posting comments in social networking websites, and decided to examine the constitutional validity of Section 66A of the Information Technology Act.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice Altamas Kabir and Justice J. Chelameswar was responding to a PIL (Public Interest Litigation) filed by 21-year old Delhi-based girl Shreya Singhal. In her PIL, she challenged the constitutional validity of section 66A of the IT Act. PIL filed by said recent events had had a chilling effect on her and crores of other Internet users.

The petitioner contended that the Section was so wide and vague and incapable of being judged on objective standards that it was susceptible to wanton abuse. Contending that it was violative of freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution, she wanted it declared unconstitutional, and an interim stay on its operation.

The apex court has sought the government’s view on the act. Presently, the matter is pending with the court.

What Is Section 66 A?

Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, was inserted vide the Information Technology Amendment Act of December 2008.  This section states:

Any person who sends, by means of a computer resources or a communication device,

1. Any information that is grossly offensive or has menacing character, or
2. Any information which he knows to be false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, inquiry, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred or it will, persistently by making use of such computer resource or a communication device; or
3. Any electronic mail or electronic mail or electronic mail message for the purpose of causing annoyance or inconvenience or to deceive or to insult the addressee or recipient about the origin of such message, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine.

Explanation: For the purpose of this section, terms “electronic mail” and “electronic mail message” means a message or information created or transmitted or received on a computer, computer system, computer resource or communication device including attachments in text, image, audio, video and any other electronic record, which may be transmitted with the message.

POCSO Act – Providing Child-Friendly Judicial Process

India is home to the largest child population in the world, with almost 42 per cent of the total population under eighteen years of age. Needless to say, the health and security of the country’s children is integral to any vision for its progress and development.

One of the issues marring this vision for the country’s future generations is the evil of child sexual abuse. Statistics released by the National Crime Records Bureau reveal that there has been a steady increase in sexual crimes against children.

According to a study conducted by the Ministry of Women and Child Development in 2007, over half of the children surveyed reported having faced some form of sexual abuse, with their suffering exacerbated by the lack of specific legislation to provide remedies for these crimes.

While rape is considered a serious offence under the Indian Penal Code, the law was deficient in recognising and punishing other sexual offences, such as sexual harassment, stalking, and child pornography, for which prosecutors had to rely on imprecise provisions such as “outraging the modesty of a woman”.

The Ministry of Women and Child Development, recognising that the problem of child sexual abuse needs to be addressed through less ambiguous and more stringent legal provisions, championed the introduction of a specific law to address this offence. The POCSO Act was therefore formulated in order to effectively address the heinous crimes of sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children.

Centre Notifies New Copyright Rules 2013

The Copyright Rules, 2013 has been notified by the Copyright Division, Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Human Resource Development on 14th March, 2013. The amendments to the existing provisions of the Copyright Act, 1957 and introduction of new provisions under the Copyright(Amendment) Act, 2012, which came into the force on 21st June, 2012, necessitated amendments to the Copyright Rules, 1958. The draft Rules were posted on the website of the Copyright Office on 28th August, 2012 seeking comments of all stakeholders and experts giving a deadline of 20th September, 2012. The Ministry also held a meeting with various stakeholders and copyright experts on 8th October, 2012 to seek their suggestions on the draft rules.

The Copyright Rules, 2013 provide new rules for statutory licence for cover versions and broadcasting of literary and musical works and sound recording; compulsory licences for works withheld from public, unpublished and published works, for benefit of disabled; registration of Copyright Societies and Performer’s Right Societies; storage of transient or incidental copies of woks; making or adapting the work by organisations working for the benefit of persons with disabilities; importation of infringing copies and technological protection measures.

The fee for registration of copyright for various works and fee for licences to be issued by register of Copyrights under the directions/orders of the Copyright Board have been increased under the Copyright Rules, 2013. The minimum fee has been increased for registration from Rs. 50/- per work to Rs. 500/- per work and the maximum fee has been increased from Rs. 600/- per work to Rs. 5,000/-. The fee for licences has been increased from Rs. 200/- to Rs. 2000/- per work and the maximum fee has been increased from Rs. 400/- to Rs. 40,000/-. The new fee structure provided under Second Schedule of the Rules is applicable from the date of coming into force of the Copyright Rules, 2013 that is 14th March, 2013. A copy of the same has been made available on the website of the Copyright Office.

Clinical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2010

The Clinical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2010 has been enacted by the Central Government to provide for registration and regulation of all clinical establishments in the country with a view to prescribing the minimum standards of facilities and services provided by them. The Act has taken effect in the four states namely, Arunachal Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Mizoram, Sikkim, and all Union Territories since 1st March, 2012 vide Gazette notification dated 28th February, 2012. The states of Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan and Jharkhand have adopted the Act under clause (1) of article 252 of the Constitution.

The Government has notified the National Council for Clinical Establishments and the Clinical Establishments( Central Government) Rules, 2012  under this Act vide Gazette notifications dated 19th March, 2012 and 23rd May, 2012 respectively.

The Act is applicable to all kinds of clinical establishments from the public and private sectors, of all recognized systems of medicine including single doctor clinics. The only exception will be establishments run by the Armed forces.

Definition Of Clinical Establishment

“Clinical establishment” is defined as hospitals and clinics and similar facilities that offer treatment for illness in any recognised system of medicine (allopathy, yoga, naturopathy, ayurveda, homoeopathy, siddha and unani). It also includes any laboratory which offers pathological, chemical and other diagnostic services. An establishment can be owned by the government, a trust, and a single doctor establishment. The Bill does not apply to any clinical establishment owned or managed by the Armed Forces.

Salient Features

• The Act mandates the Centre to establish a National Council of Clinical Establishments to (a) determine the minimum standards of health care by a clinical establishment; (b) classify them into categories; and (c) maintain a national register of clinical establishments
• Every clinical establishment has to be registered to admit patients for providing treatment
• National Register to be compiled within two years from the date of commencement of the law
• The register to determine the first set of standards for clinical establishments
• Every state government shall establish a State/Union Territory Council for clinical establishments
• The state government shall set up a district registering authority for registering clinical establishments at district level
• The central government to notify standards for each type of clinical establishment

The Civil Liability For Nuclear Damage Act, 2010

Current Status: Rules, the Civil Liability For Nuclear Damage Bill 2010 was passed by the Lok Sabha on August 25, 2010 and the Rajya Sabha on August 30, 2010.

Ministry: Dept. of Atomic Energy

The Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act that was passed by the Parliament in August 2010 limits the liability of the operator in case of a nuclear incident. It secures the operator the right to recourse under certain circumstances. The Act also provides a mechanism to compensate victims of nuclear damage. The Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Rules were notified under the Act on November 11, 2011. The Rules stipulate certain mandatory clauses for contracts that secure the operator the right to recourse. They also prescribe the procedure to provide compensation to victims in case of nuclear incidents.

Salient Features

• The Rules were notified under the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010 on November 11, 2011
• The Rules specify conditions for the operator to seek recourse against the supplier when the right to recourse is provided under a contract
• The Act specifies three circumstances under which the operator can seek recourse
• The Rules specifically relate to the operator’s right to recourse under a contract under Section 17(a)
• The right to recourse can be exercised either during the ‘initial license period’ under the Atomic Energy (Radiation Protection) Rules, 2004, or the product liability period, whichever is longer
• The procedures prescribed to transfer compensation to the claimant differ on the basis of the claimant’s gender, literacy level and disability