Arihant Magbook Geography PDF in English Free Download [2023 Edition]

 This article will help you get access to the Arihant Magbook Geography PDF in English free download (2022 edition).

Arihant Magbook Geography is a comprehensive book for competitive exams such as SAT, GRE, GMAT, CAT, and other similar exams. The book covers almost all the topics that any aspirant needs to crack these exams. It also contains important questions with answers and analysis from previous years. It will be very helpful for aspirants who are preparing for the above mentioned exams and anyone who wants to build a strong foundation in Geography and its related subjects. With this e-Book you can study and revise at any time conveniently.

This book is a compilation of everything that you need to know about geography. You will get to learn about all types of geographical locations such as mountain ranges, rivers, lakes, valleys etc. Apart from that there is also detailed information about natural resources and land formations. This book will prove to be very beneficial for your upcoming exams or if you’re just interested in knowing more about geography.



Magbook Geography by Arihant PDF

The importance of geography cannot be undermined when it comes to competitive exams. At such times, students need books that are concise and easy to understand, especially for entrance exams. The competition is too tough for everyone to mess up in the details. This Arihant Magbook Geography PDF will come as an excellent companion for any student who is preparing for competitive examinations or wants to brush up on their general knowledge about geography, rivers, cities, states, and cultures around the world.



Book Details:-

Book Name:MagBook Indian & World Geography
Author/Publisher:Arihant
Language:English
No of Pages:287 Pages
File Type:PDF (Downloadable)
PDF Size:6.29 MB

Arihant have come up with a brilliant set of study material in the form of ‘Arihant Magbook’ series. Now what exactly is the ‘Arihant Magbook’ series? It is an extensive compilation of different books on various subjects that are necessary to crack any competitive exam. Each book in the series covers a topic comprehensively and is equipped with several practice exercises that will aid you in your preparation.

Arihant MagBook [Combo of 5 Books] in PDF @ 350₹

Get the Combo of 5 Books (Arihant MagBook) to score for the upcoming SSC, UPSC & Banking exams
  1. Indian History
  2. Indian Polity
  3. Indian Economy
  4. Indian & World Geography
  5. General Science

 BUY NOW @ 350₹ 

Things to consider:

  • Pdfs are 100% Original (Not Photocopied)
  • Found nowhere on the Internet
  • Give you the Cheapest Price ever

Arihant Magbook Indian Geography Book PDF has been made available online on our website. You can go to the below link and download it in pdf format so that you can study it at your convenience without having to carry the book with you all the time.


This Magbook of Indian & World Geography and governance is a must for civil services (pre) examinations, PCSs, and other competitive exams, as it covers syllabus material as well as thousands of MCQs from previous tests.

Demo (First 20 Pages)



★ SSC Exam is best suited for the book★ The book contains grammatical mistakes
★ The content in the book is good, but the answers to the exercises are incorrect in someplace.★ Everything is fine about this book, except that the questions are not up to date

Conclusion:

Arihant Magbook Indian & World Geography offers a full range of books on Geography like Indian Geography, World Geography, Physical Geography etc. It is a complete encyclopedia that provides detailed information on geography


Lithium Found In J&K Is Of Best Quality

 


The country’s first lithium reserve,  in Jammu and Kashmir, is of the best quality, a senior government official told PTI on Saturday, as upbeat villagers expressed hope the discovery will bring them a bright future.

The 5.9-million ton reserve of lithium, a crucial mineral for the manufacturing of electric vehicles and solar panels, had been discovered in Reasi district by the Geological Survey of India (GSI).

“Lithium falls in the critical resource category which was not earlier.

Lithium falls in the critical resource category which was not earlier available in India and we were dependent for its 100 percent import. The G3 (advanced) study of the GSI shows the presence of best quality lithium in abundant quantity in the foothills of Mata Vaishno Devi shrine at Salal village (Reasi),” J-K Mining Amit Secretary Sharma told PTI.

He said against the normal grade of 220 parts per million (PPM), the lithium found in J&K is of 500 ppm-plus grading, and with a stockpile of 5.9 million tons, India will surpass China in its availability.

“India joined a select group of countries at the global level after this finding and it will fulfil the vision of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ‘Aatmanirbhar Bharat’ (self-reliant India),” he said.

Sharma said lithium has widespread usage and its discovery at a time of India’s G20 presidency provides an opportunity for J-K to showcase its rich reserves.

Significance of the term State in the context of the fundamental right

 Fundamental rights are a group of rights which are guaranteed to all the citizens of the nation by the Constitution of India under Part III. These rights apply universally to all citizens residing in the nation, irrespective of their race, place of birth, religion, caste or gender. They are recognized by law as rights requiring a high degree of protection from the government and they cannot be violated by the Government. Fundamental rights cannot be enforceable against individuals and private entities.  The obligation of protecting these rights lies on the government or the state or its authorities.

Most of the Fundamental rights provided to the citizens are claimed against the State and its instrumentalities and not against the private bodies. Article 12 gives an extended significance to the term ‘state’. It is very important to determine what bodies fall under the definition of a state so as to determine on whom the responsibility has to be placed.


The framers of the Constitution used the words ‘the State’ in a wider sense than what is understood in the ordinary or narrower sense. It does not merely mean the states in the Union. The word ‘includes’ in the article shows that the definition is not exhaustive and through judicial interpretations, the court has widened the scope of the Article way beyond what even the framers of Article 12 may have had in mind during the framing of the constitution.

Meaning of State under Article 12

Article 12 of the Indian Constitution states that,

“Definition in this part, unless the context otherwise requires, the State includes the Government and Parliament of India and the Government and the Legislature of each of the States and all local or other authorities within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India.”

In other words, for the purposes of Part III of the constitution, the state comprises of the following:

  1. Government and Parliament of India i.e the Executive and Legislature of the Union
  2. Government and Legislature of each State i.e the Executive and Legislature of the various States of India
  3. All local or other authorities within the territory of India
  4. All local and other authorities who are under the control of the Government of India

Key terms discussed under the article

  1. Government (Union and state)
  2. Parliament and state legislature
  3. Local authorities
  4. Other authorities
  5. Territory of India
  6. Control of the government of India

The above-mentioned terms are better explained in the following section along with relevant cases.


Government (Union and state), Parliament and State Legislature

  • Parliament: The parliament comprises of the President of India, the lower house of the parliament that is the Lok Sabha as well as the upper house of the Parliament, that is the Rajya Sabha.
  • Executive: It is that organ which implements the laws passed by the legislature and the policies of the government. The rise of the welfare state has tremendously increased the functions of the state, and in reality, of the executive. In common usage, people tend to identify the executive with the government. In contemporary times, there has taken place

A big increase in the power and role of the executive in every state. The executive includes the President, Governor, Cabinet Ministers, Police, bureaucrats, etc.

  • Legislature: The legislature is that organ of the government which enacts the laws of the government. It is the agency which has the responsibility to formulate the will of the state and vest it with legal authority and force. In simple words, the legislature is that organ of the government which formulates laws. Legislature enjoys a very special and important in every democratic state. It is the assembly of the elected representatives of the people and represents national public opinion and power of the people.
  • Government: The law-making or legislative branch and administrative or executive branch and law enforcement or judicial branch and organizations of society. Lok Sabha (the lower house) and Rajya Sabha (the upper house) form the legislative branch. Indian President is the head of the state and exercises his or her power directly or through officers subordinate to him. The Supreme Court, High Courts, and many civil, criminal and family courts at the district level form the Judiciary.
  • State Legislature: The legislative body at the state level is the State Legislature. It comprises of the state legislative assembly and the state legislative council.

Local Authorities

Before understanding what a local authority is, it is important to define Authorities. According to Webster’s Dictionary; “Authority” means a person or body exercising power to command. When read under Article 12, the word authority means the power to make laws (or orders, regulations, bye-laws, notification etc.) which have the force of law. It also includes the power to enforce those laws

Local Authority: As per Section 3(31) of the General Clauses Act, 1897,

Local Authority shall mean a municipal committee, district board, body of commissioner or other authority legally entitled to or entrusted by the Government within the control or management of a municipal or local fund.”

The term Local authority includes the following:

  1. Local government: According to Entry 5 of the List II of VII Schedule ‘local government’ includes a municipal corporation, improvement trust, district boards, mining settlement authorities and other local authorities for the purpose of local self-government or village administration.
  2. Village Panchayat: In the case of Ajit Singh v. State of Punjab, it was held that within the meaning of the term local authority, village panchayat is also included.

Test to determine Local Authorities

In Mohammad Yasin v. Town Area Committee, the Supreme Court held that to be characterized as a ‘local authority’ the authority concerned must;

  1. Have a separate legal existence as a corporate body
  2. Not be a mere government agency but must be legally an independent entity
  3. Function in a defined area
  4. Be wholly or partly, directly or indirectly, elected by the inhabitants of the area
  5. Enjoy a certain degree of autonomy (complete or partial)
  6. Be entrusted by statute with such governmental functions and duties as are usually entrusted to locally (like health, education, water, town planning, markets, transportation, etc.)
  7. Have the power to raise funds for the furtherance of its activities and fulfilment of its objectives by levying taxes, rates, charges or fees

Other Authorities

The term ‘other authorities’ in Article 12 has nowhere been defined. Neither in the Constitution nor in the general clauses Act, 1897 nor in any other statute of India. Therefore, its interpretation has caused a good deal of difficulty, and judicial opinion has undergone changes over time.

The functions of a government can be performed either the governmental departments and officials or through autonomous bodies which exist outside the departmental structure. Such autonomous bodies may include companies, corporations etc.

So, for the purpose of determining what ‘other authorities’ fall under the scope of State, the judiciary has given several judgements as per the facts and circumstances of different cases.

In the University of Madras v. Shanta Bai, the Madras High Court evolved the principle of ‘ejusdem generis’ i.e. of the like nature. It means that only those authorities are covered under the expression ‘other authorities’ which perform governmental or sovereign functions. Further, it cannot include persons, natural or juristic, for example, Unaided universities.

In the case of Ujjammabai v. the State of U.P., the court rejected the above restrictive scope and held that the ‘ejusdem generis’ rule could not be resorted to the in interpreting ‘other authorities’. The bodies named under Article 12 have no common genus running through them and they cannot be placed in one single category on any rational basis.

Lastly, in Rajasthan Electricity Board v. Mohan Lal, the Supreme Court held that ‘other authorities’ would include all authorities created by the constitution or statute on whom powers are conferred by law. Such statutory authority need not be engaged in performing government or sovereign functions. The court emphasized that it is immaterial that the power conferred on the body is of a commercial nature or not.

Territory of India

Article 1(3) of the Constitution of India states that;

“The territory of India shall comprise- (a) the territories of the States;(b) the Union territories specified in the First Schedule; and (c) such other territories as may be acquired.”

In the case of Masthan Sahib v. Chief Commissionerthe court held that the territory of India for the purposes of Article 12  means the territory of India as defined in Article 1(3).

Control of the government of India

Under Article 12, the control of the Government does not necessarily mean that the body must be under the absolute direction of the government. It merely means that the government must have some form of control over the functioning of the body. Just because a body is a statutory body, does not mean that it is ‘State’. Both statutory, as well as non-statutory bodies, can be considered as a ‘State’ if they get financial resources from the government and the government exercises a  deep pervasive control over it.

For example- State includes Delhi Transport Corporation, ONGC and Electricity Boards, but does not include NCERT as neither is it substantially financed by the government nor is the government’s control pervasive.

The test laid down in the case of Ajay Hasia is not rigid and therefore if a body falls within them, then it must be considered to be a State within the meaning of Article 12. It was discussed in the case that– “whether in the light of the cumulative facts as established, the body is financially, functionally and administratively dominated by or under the control of Government. Such control must be particular to the body in question and must be pervasive.

Whether State includes Judiciary?

Article 12 of the Constitution does not specifically define ‘judiciary’. This gives the judicial authorities the power to pronounce decisions which may be contravening to the Fundamental Rights of an individual. If it was taken into the head of ‘State’, then as per the article, it would be  by the obligation that the fundamental rights of the citizens should not be violated. Accordingly, the judgements pronounced by the courts cannot be challenged on the ground that they violate fundamental rights of a person. On the other hand, it has been observed that orders passed by the courts in their administrative capacity (including by the Supreme Court) have regularly been challenged as being violative of fundamental rights.

The answer to this question lies in the distinction between the judicial and non-judicial functions of the courts. When the courts perform their non-judicial functions, they fall within the definition of the ‘State’. When the courts perform their judicial functions, they would not fall within the scope of the ‘State’.

So, it can be noted that the judicial decision of a court cannot be challenged as being violative of fundamental rights. But, an administrative decision or a rule made by the judiciary can be challenged as being violative of fundamental rights, if that be supported by facts. This is because of the distinction between the judicial and non-judicial functions of the courts.

In the case of Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1967 SC 1, a 9-judge bench of the Supreme Court held that a judicial decision pronounced by a judge of competent jurisdiction in or in relation to a matter brought before him for adjudication cannot affect the fundamental rights of the citizens since what the judicial decision purports to do is to decide the controversy between the parties brought before the court and nothing more. Therefore, such a judicial decision cannot be challenged under Article 13.

Conclusion

The Constitution of India not only gives fundamental right to the citizens but also imposes the duty on the state to ensure that the fundamental rights are protected. The court through its interpretations has widened the scope of the term State to include a variety of statutory and non-statutory bodies under its umbrella.

The need to determine what falls within the meaning of state is, to assign the party on whom the duty to implement such right is placed upon. Not only that, the definition of state under Article 12 has several words which may not have definite meanings, words such as local authorities, control of government, other authorities, etc. and as seen in the above sections, the courts have, through the course of their judgements,  described the extent of the article by laying down a test and discussing the meaning of the terms.

The Problem of Excessive Government Litigation

A litigant is person who is involved in a lawsuit ie. someone who is suing another person or is being sued by another person. Government litigation reportedly constitutes nearly half of all litigation in the Indian judiciary. In this post let us examine the problem of excessive government litigation and the need for reviewing the National Litigation Policy, 2010.

Government litigation constitutes nearly half of all litigation in the Indian judiciary

Excessive Government Litigation.

  • There are more than 3 crore cases pending in different courts of India.
  • Government litigation reportedly constitutes nearly half of all litigation in the Indian judiciary.
  • However, there are no government sources to confirm the actual quantum of its litigation.
  • The absence of this statistic itself is an indicator of how ‘interested’ various governments have been in attempting to understand this problem or tackling it meaningfully.
  • Besides being a constraint on the public exchequer, government litigation has contributed to judicial backlog, thus affecting justice delivery in India.
  • The Supreme Court, since the 1970s, has berated successive governments for being callous and mechanical in pursuing litigation.
  • The Law Commission of India also studied this problem in its 126th Report in 1988, and made appropriate observations on this front.
  • In 2016, the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi broached the problem of excessive government litigation.

In more than 90% cases, the Government side fails to prove the point!

Many of the government litigations are actually cases of one department of the government suing another, leaving decision-making to the courts. Also, it most of the other cases, when government files a case, it is seen that the government side fails to prove the point.

National Litigation Policy (NLP), 2010

The concept of a national litigation policy has been explored by many countries. The Australian Taxation Office, for example, conducts its litigation in accordance with the PS LA 2009/9 Conduct of Tax Office Litigation, which is an elaborate set of guidelines obligating the government to be a model litigant.

The Law Minister in the United Progressive Alliance government had launched a “National Litigation Policy” (NLP) in 2010 to transform the government into a “responsible and efficient” litigant.

The policy idealistically states that there should be greater accountability regarding governmental litigation, and mandates “suitable action” against officials violating this policy.

The NLP 2010 also creates “Empowered Committees” at the national and regional levels, to regulate the implementation of the policy

Why did NLP 2010 fail?

Excessive litigation in India

  • The NLP has failed as an initiative due to ambiguity.
  • The NLP 2010 has no scope for implementation.
  • It is replete with rhetoric and generic phraseology.
  • Instead of being an analytical policy document attempting to address the causes of excessive government litigation, it appears to have been drafted on anecdotal notions of the problem, with no measurable outcomes or implementation mechanism.
  • The NLP 2010 fails to provide a yardstick for determining responsibility and efficiency.
  • The text does not define “suitable action”, or prescribe any method to conduct any disciplinary proceedings.
  • There is ambiguity about their role and powers of Empowered Committees, resulting in lack of transparency in their functioning. While these committees are intended to be integral to the accountability mechanisms under the policy, the ambiguity in their roles and functions make them susceptible to a constitutional challenge.
  • The NLP 2010 also lacks any form of impact assessment to evaluate actual impact on reducing government litigation. This absence of a monitoring mechanism is evident from the fact that there is no data available even today to accurately verify the extent of government litigation in India. Without such evaluation, this litigation policy remains a theoretical, ambiguous and fairly inadequate document on the pretext of policy reform.

The way forward

In 2015, after the National Democratic Alliance came to power, there was a discussion to review the NLP. This is yet to culminate in a revised NLP.

The bureaucracy needs to be sufficiently motivated to tackle the issue.

Finally, the ongoing revision of the NLP needs to ensure certain critical features are not missed out:

  1. It must have clear objectives that can be assessed;
  2. The role of different functionaries must be enumerated;
  3. The minimum standards for pursuing litigation must be listed out;
  4. Fair accountability mechanisms must be established;
  5. The consequences for violation of the policy must be provided;
  6. A periodic impact assessment programme must be factored in.

REFERENCE:

  1. The Hindu
  2. Wikipedia

The Problem of Pending Cases in Indian Courts: How to tackle?

 

There are more than 3 crore cases pending in different courts of India. Many of these cases are pending for more than 10 years. Below are the approximate number of cases pending in Supreme Court, High Courts and District and Subordinate courts in India.

  • Around 60,000 cases are pending in Supreme Court.
  • Around 42 lakh cases are pending in different High Courts.
  • Around 2.7 crore cases pending in District and Sub-ordinate Courts.

Why are too many cases pending in Indian courts?

Pending Cases in Indian Courts

At least five crore cases are filed every year and judges dispose of only two crore. The reasons being –

1. Increase in the awareness of rights by common man

The recent socio-economic advances and the resultant awareness of legal rights, has given courage to common people to approach courts of law for justice.

2. New mechanisms (Eg: PIL) and new rights (Eg: RTI)

As government explicit made legislation for new rights like ‘Right to Information’ and ‘Right to Education’, aggrieved parties started to increasingly knock the doors of justice.  Also, active judiciary has invented new devices like Public Interest Litigation which gave again resulted in more cases.

3. There are not enough judges

There are not enough judges (only around 21,000). Current Judge to Population ratio is 10 to 1 million. The Law Commission report in 1987 recommends atleast 50 to 1 million. Population has increased by over 25 crore since 1987.

The Centre says the States should take the lead in increasing the number of judges and the States say Centre should take the lead. As this tug-of-war goes on, judges’ strength remains the same and litigants remain in jail.

More than half the posts are vacant. There is a conflict between Judiciary and Executive regarding the appointment of Judges to Supreme Court and various High Courts.

Colonial legacies like paid long vacations – at a time when the number of judges is low, the appointed judges are taking long vacations, especially in High Courts.

4. There are not enough courts

  • Indian judiciary has insufficient resources. Both Center and States are not interested in increasing spending with respect to the judiciary.
  • Budgetary allocations for the whole judiciary are a pathetic 0.1% to 0.4% of the whole budget.
  • India needs more courts and more benches.
  • Modernization and computerization have not reached all courts.

5. There is too much litigation from the Government Side

The government is the largest litigant in India, responsible for nearly half the pending cases. Many of them are actually cases of one department of the government suing another, leaving decision-making to the courts. Also, it most of the cases, when government files a case, it is seen that the government side fails to prove the point.

6. Low judicial quality in lower courts

The Indian Judicial system has miserably failed to attract the best brains and the talented students.

As the quality of judges in lower courts is not always up to the mark, appeals are filed against the decisions in higher courts, which again increases the number of cases.

Judges lack specialization and they have turned less efficient and lazy.

7. Archaic Laws or Vague Drafting of Laws

The archaic laws that fill up the statute books, faulty or vague drafting of laws and their multiple interpretations by various courts are also reasons for prolonged litigation. Some of these laws date back to 1880s. Somebody wants to do something, he is shown a law drafted in the last century and told to stop doing it.

Why can’t the number of Judges be increased?

SC Chief Justice Thakur lamented “inaction” by the Executive in increasing the number of judges to 40,000 from the current 21,000.  He blamed the Centre for doing nothing to increase the number of courts and judges in the country. He accused Centre of stalling appointment of judges to the High Court.

More productive days?

In 2014, former Chief Justice of India, Justice R.M. Lodha, proposed to make Indian judiciary work throughout the year (instead of the present system of having long vacations, especially in the higher courts) in order to reduce pendency of cases in Indian courts.

However, as per this proposal, there is not going to be any increase in the number of working days or working hours of any of the judges and it only meant that different judges would be going on vacation during different periods of the year as per their choice.

But, the Bar Council of India rejected this proposal mainly because it would have inconvenienced the advocates who would have to work throughout the year.

Consequences of Pending Cases in Indian Courts

Consequences of Pending Cases in Indian Courts

  • The common man’s faith in the justice system is at an all-time low.
  • Denies the poor man and under trial prisoners their due of justice.
  • Economic reforms remain only on paper without speedier justice system.
  • Foreign investors are increasingly doubtful about the timely delivery of justice, which affects the success of programs like ‘Make in India’.
  • Judiciary is unable to handle the “avalanche” of litigation. Judiciary becomes overworked and lose its efficiency. Justice delayed is justice denied and Justice hurried is justice buried.

Solutions to the Problem of Pending Cases in Indian Courts

  • The government needs to double the number of judges and create all India Judicial Service. The number of judges (vacancies) should be immediately raised to at least 50,000 from the current 21,000.
  • Fix the NJAC controversy at the earliest and start appointing judges in Supreme Court and High Courts.
  • More courts – Fast Track Courts, Lok Adalats, and Gram Nyayalayas.

REFERENCE:

  1. PIB
  2. Legal Service India
  3. The Hindu