Context:

• As India’s economy rises, millions from States like Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, and Kerala migrate abroad for work, sustaining families and contributing significantly to national income.
• However, the Overseas Mobility (Facilitation and Welfare) Bill, 2025—meant to replace the 1983 Emigration Act—risks weakening protections for these vulnerable workers.
• Marketed as a modern, efficient reform, the Bill prioritises ease of movement and deregulation over worker safety and welfare.
• Critics argue it could intensify exploitation rather than provide meaningful safeguards, turning a promised shield into a system that accelerates migrant workers’ insecurity.
• This article highlights how India’s Overseas Mobility (Facilitation and Welfare) Bill, 2025, risks undermining the rights and safety of millions of migrant workers by prioritising deregulation and administrative ease over protection, accountability, and welfare.

Overseas Mobility Bill, 2025: Core Concerns

• Dilution of Migrant Workers’ Legal Rights
  • The Bill removes provisions that earlier allowed migrant workers to directly pursue legal action against exploiters.
  • Unlike the 2021 draft, it weakens enforceable rights and shifts responsibility to an overstretched state apparatus.
• Weakening Protections for Women and Vulnerable Migrants
  • Labour migration is deeply gendered, yet the Bill dilutes specific safeguards for women and children.
  • Stronger penalties proposed earlier are replaced with vague references to “vulnerable classes,” risking poor enforcement.
• Silence on Human Trafficking
  • The Bill fails to explicitly address human trafficking, despite migrants operating in high-risk corridors.
  • This omission undermines protection against coercion, forced labour, and modern forms of slavery.
• Deregulation of Recruitment Agencies
  • Key anti-exploitation measures are rolled back.
  • Mandatory disclosure of recruitment fees is dropped, increasing risks of debt bondage, contract substitution, and fraud by unregulated agents.
• Risky Accreditation and Digital-Only Oversight
  • Replacing Emigration Check Posts with digital clearances may streamline procedures but removes critical on-ground safeguards.
  • The accreditation model risks legitimising unscrupulous recruiters.
• Reduced Accountability Abroad
  • Earlier provisions holding recruitment agencies responsible for reception, dispute resolution, and document renewal overseas are diluted.
  • These duties are shifted to government bodies with limited capacity.
• Surveillance Without Safeguards
  • The Integrated Information System expands data collection without clear consent or protection norms, raising concerns about surveillance rather than worker welfare.
  • Online recruitment fraud remains unaddressed.
• Inadequate Reintegration Support
  • Reintegration measures are weak.
  • The Bill offers limited support for skill training or trauma care and excludes migrants deported within 182 days from rehabilitation benefits.
• Excessive Centralisation
  • Decision-making is concentrated at the Centre, sidelining States with high migration experience like Kerala and Uttar Pradesh.
  • Trade unions and civil society groups are excluded from governance structures.
• Weak Penalties and Enforcement Gaps
  • Penalties target recruitment violations but fail to address traffickers or abusive overseas employers, leaving the most powerful actors beyond the law’s reach.

A Call to Strengthen Protections for India’s Migrant Workers

• India’s labour migrants are vital contributors to the economy, not expendable exports.
• The Overseas Mobility Bill, 2025 risks deepening inequities by weakening safeguards and accountability.
• Parliament must act to restore workers’ self-advocacy rights, enforce transparent recruitment fees, ensure post-arrival protections, and involve States and civil society in governance.
• Stronger anti-trafficking provisions, expanded definitions of work, meaningful penalties with compensation, and well-funded reintegration support are essential.
• What migrants need is not facilitation alone, but firm legal and institutional protection.

Conclusion

• Unless substantially amended, the Overseas Mobility Bill will deepen migrant vulnerability; India must replace facilitation-driven reform with a rights-based, federal, and worker-centric protection framework.

Why in the News?

• The Supreme Court has settled a uniform definition of the Aravalli hills and ranges and paused fresh mining leases across Delhi, Haryana, Rajasthan, and Gujarat, while issuing directions for sustainable mining and ecological restoration of the region.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Aravalli Mountain Range (Geographical & Ecological Significance, etc.)
• Mining & Environmental Degradation (Court’s Intervention, Committee’s Recommendations, Sustainable Mining, etc.)

Aravalli Mountain Range: Geographic and Ecological Significance

• The Aravalli Mountain Range is one of the oldest mountain systems in the world, estimated to be nearly two billion years old.
• Stretching over 650 km from Delhi to Gujarat, the range passes through Haryana, Rajasthan, and Gujarat, forming a critical ecological spine in north-western India.
• Ecologically, the Aravalli’s act as a natural barrier against desertification, preventing the eastward expansion of the Thar Desert into the fertile Indo-Gangetic plains.
• They play a vital role in climate regulation, groundwater recharge, and biodiversity conservation.
• Several important rivers, such as the Chambal, Sabarmati, and Luni, originate from or are supported by the Aravalli system.
• The region is rich in minerals like limestone, marble, sandstone, copper, zinc, and tungsten, which have historically made it a mining hub.
• However, excessive quarrying over recent decades has severely degraded forests, reduced groundwater levels, and worsened air quality, especially in the National Capital Region (NCR).

Mining and Environmental Degradation

• Since the early 1990s, the Environment Ministry has issued regulations restricting mining to sanctioned projects.
• Despite this, widespread illegal and unregulated mining continued, particularly in parts of Haryana and Rajasthan.
• In 2009, the Supreme Court imposed a blanket ban on mining in Faridabad, Gurugram, and Mewat districts of Haryana. However, enforcement challenges persisted.
• Recognising the long-term ecological risks and India’s commitments under the UN Convention to Combat Desertification, the Court revisited the issue in recent years to adopt a more comprehensive and sustainable approach.

Supreme Court Intervention and Uniform Definition

• A major issue in protecting the Aravalli’s was the absence of a uniform definition.
• Different States and agencies used inconsistent criteria to identify Aravalli formations, leading to regulatory loopholes.
• To address this, the Supreme Court constituted a committee comprising representatives from the Environment Ministry, Forest Survey of India (FSI), Geological Survey of India, State Forest Departments, and the Central Empowered Committee (CEC).
• In 2025, the Court accepted the committee’s recommendation that hills above 100 metres in height would be considered part of the Aravalli range.
• While concerns were raised that this definition might exclude smaller formations, the Court held that it was more inclusive and workable than earlier slope-based or buffer-based definitions, which risked excluding large areas altogether.

Central Empowered Committee Recommendations

• The Central Empowered Committee proposed a science-based, multi-layered strategy for protecting the Aravalli’s. Key recommendations included:

• Comprehensive scientific mapping of the Aravalli range across all States
• Macro-level environmental impact assessment of mining activities
• Strict prohibition of mining in ecologically sensitive zones such as wildlife corridors, aquifer recharge areas, water bodies, and protected habitats
• No new mining leases or renewals until proper mapping and assessments are completed
• Tight regulation of stone-crushing units contributing to air pollution

• These recommendations were accepted by the Supreme Court in its November 2025 order.

Sustainable Mining and the Green Wall Initiative

• Instead of imposing a complete ban, the Supreme Court adopted a calibrated approach.
• It allowed existing legal mining to continue under strict regulation while pausing fresh approvals. The Court noted that total bans often fuel illegal mining mafias and unregulated extraction.
• Complementing judicial action, the Centre launched the Aravalli Green Wall Project in June 2025.
• The initiative aims to increase green cover in a five-kilometre buffer zone across 29 districts in Gujarat, Rajasthan, Haryana, and Delhi.
• The project targets the restoration of 26 million hectares of degraded land by 2030, strengthening India’s land degradation neutrality goals

Context:

• India has withdrawn Quality Control Orders (QCOs) on a wide range of industrial raw materials and intermediates, marking a significant regulatory reset in manufacturing governance.
• The move reflects a shift away from excessive mandatory certification towards a risk-based, pragmatic quality regime, aligned with global best practices.
• The decision (notified on November 13) follows the concerns raised by industry, MSMEs, and NITI Aayog.

Quality Control Orders (QCOs):

• QCOs mandate compulsory BIS certification for specified products, intended to prevent substandard imports and protect consumers.
• Over time, QCOs expanded from about 70 products a decade ago to about 790 products (as per NITI Aayog), including low-risk industrial inputs.

Key Features of the Rollback:

• Removal of compulsory BIS certification for 14 chemical products (chemicals and petrochemicals department) and 6 products (ministry of chemicals).
• It covers widely used industrial intermediates such as polymers, fibre intermediates, aluminium and copper products, and certain steel grades.
• These inputs pose no direct consumer safety risk.

Problems with the Earlier QCO Regime:

• One-size-fits-all regulation: Mandatory certification applied even to low-risk, widely traded inputs. Certification became a blunt instrument, not a targeted safety tool.
• High compliance costs: Foreign suppliers (Japan, Korea, EU) often refused factory inspections for low-volume exports. Resulted in input shortages, higher prices, reduced sourcing options.
• MSME and export competitiveness hit:
  • MSMEs struggled with paperwork, delays, and limited testing capacity.
  • Export sectors (textiles, electronics, engineering goods) lost price competitiveness vis-à-vis Vietnam, China, Bangladesh.
• Global practice ignored: In the EU and US, conformity requirements apply mainly to finished goods, safety-critical items. Intermediate inputs are governed largely by voluntary standards and contracts.

Significance of the Rollback:

• Regulatory maturity: Signals India’s shift from over-regulation to smart regulation. Acknowledges complex modern supply chains, especially under PLI schemes.
• Boost to manufacturing strategy: Easier access to globally competitive inputs. Supports India’s goal of becoming a manufacturing hub. Positive signal to investors and trading partners.

Challenges and Way Ahead:

• Risk of quality dilution if oversight weakens: Mandatory certification only where consumer or public safety is directly involved (e.g., pressure vessels, electrical equipment).
• Capacity constraints: Improve regulatory capacity, expand testing facilities, reduce certification timelines, and pre-notification impact assessments.
• Focus on enforcement, not expansion: Sharper enforcement improves credibility more than regulatory overreach.
• Weak voluntary standards: Promote contractual quality assurance and international standards for intermediates.

Conclusion:

• The rollback of QCOs marks a decisive shift from compliance-heavy regulation to outcome-oriented governance.
• Regulations that raise costs without enhancing safety undermine India’s manufacturing ambitions. Regulation should protect consumers, not choke competitiveness.
• A proportionate, globally aligned, and capacity-driven quality regime will better position India in the industries that will define the next decade.

Context

• Modern citizenship has traditionally been tied to territorial residence, with political rights anchored to stable habitation within defined borders.
• However, large-scale migration, both international and internal, is disrupting this foundational assumption.
• As populations move with increasing frequency, governments face growing challenges in regulating political membership, electoral participation, and demographic change.
• This tension has produced public anxiety, nativist politics, and administrative interventions that are reshaping democratic systems.

Citizenship, Migration, and Electoral Anxiety

• The overlap between citizenship and territory weakens when people migrate.
• Electoral systems that depend on fixed residence become sites of political contestation, as questions arise over who is entitled to vote and where.
• In India, the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls is justified as a response to duplicate registrations caused by migration.
• Yet such exercises raise fears of disenfranchisement of mobile and vulnerable populations.
• Similar anxieties are visible in the United States, where demands for access to voter databases and documentary proof of citizenship have been framed as election-integrity measures.
• Critics argue that these moves risk restricting voter access and undermining federal autonomy.
• In both countries, the fear of alien voters has become a powerful political narrative, often outweighing empirical evidence.

Global Migration and the Rise of Nativism

• Although migrants form only a slightly higher share of the global population than in the past, their absolute numbers have nearly doubled since 1990, exceeding 300 million by 2024.
• This demographic reality has intensified political reactions, particularly in developed democracies.
• Immigration ranks among the top electoral concerns in countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia, where the proportion of foreign-born residents has risen sharply.
• This has fuelled nativist populism, even as these economies rely heavily on migrant labour.
• The contradiction between economic dependence and political exclusion lies at the heart of contemporary migration politics.

Labour Without Citizenship

• A defining feature of current migration regimes is the growth of temporary labour systems.
• Wealthy countries increasingly seek migrant workers who contribute economically but do not settle permanently or claim political rights.
• Examples include H-1B workers in the United States and migrant labour systems in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries and Singapore.
• These arrangements produce a large class of workers without political identity, essential to economic growth yet excluded from democratic participation.
• Migration thus creates mobility without belonging, redefining the relationship between labour and citizenship.

Internal Migration and Democratic Representation in India

• Migration within national borders has equally profound political consequences.
• In India, rural-to-urban and inter-State migration has reshaped demographics, electoral outcomes, and party strategies.
• Voting rights remain tied to place of residence, making electoral roll revisions decisive not only in determining who can vote, but where that vote is counted.
• This has major implications for federal politics. Migrant-receiving States gain political weight, while migrant-sending States risk losing influence.
• With delimitation approaching after decades, internal migration is set to significantly redistribute political representation.

Cultural Transformation and Historical Continuity

• Migration is not only a political force but also a cultural one. Migrating populations carry languages, beliefs, and social practices, reshaping societies over time.
• Historically, migration enabled the spread and transformation of religious traditions, languages, and cultural identities.
• Contemporary examples, such as the celebration of Deepavali at the White House, highlight migration’s role in expanding cultural universes rather than eroding them.
• Languages themselves bear the imprint of past migrations, reflecting gendered and social patterns of movement.

The Retreat from Birthright Citizenship

• One of the most consequential shifts concerns birthright citizenship, long considered a settled principle in liberal democracies.
• In the United States, long-standing interpretations of constitutional citizenship are being challenged amid fears of demographic change.
• India has similarly restricted citizenship by birth for children of undocumented migrants.
• These developments signal a global move away from inclusive citizenship toward conditional belonging, driven by migration-related anxieties.

Conclusion

• Migration is moving more than people; it is moving the foundations of political life.
• By destabilising the link between territory, citizenship, and representation, it compels democracies to confront fundamental questions of belonging and participation.
• Administrative processes such as censuses, electoral roll revisions, and delimitation are not neutral exercises, but arenas where the future of democracy is negotiated.
• As populations continue to move, the central challenge will be adapting political institutions without sacrificing inclusion, representation, and democratic legitimacy.

About AH-64E Apache Attack Helicopter:

• It is the world’s most advanced multi-role combat helicopter.
• It is widely used for advanced reconnaissance, precision strikes, and close air support missions globally.
• Country of Origin: United States of America
• Manufacturer: Boeing
• It is also known as the Apache Guardian.
• The AH-64E attack helicopter is the latest version of the Apache used by the US Army.
• Other purchasers: India, Egypt, Greece, Indonesia, Israel, Japan, South Korea, Kuwait, Netherlands, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, UAE, and UK.
• Apache for Indian defence forces: The Indian Air Force has a fleet of 22 AH-64E Apache attack helicopters.
• Features:
  • Max Speed: 300 kph
  • It is a heavily armed, twin-engine ground-attack helicopter.
  • Armed with Hellfire missiles, chain gun, the helicopter can engage tanks, vehicles, troop concentrations, communications and logistics centres, etc.
  • It can also fire short-range air-to-air missiles like the Stinger.
  • The AH-64E includes a new integrated infrared laser that allows for easier target designation and enhanced infrared imagery that blends infrared and night vision capabilities.
  • It can track up to 128 targets per minute and prioritise threat levels.

About Param Vir Chakra:

• It is India’s highest military decoration, awarded for displaying the most exceptional acts of valour, courage, and self-sacrifice during war.
• It was introduced on January 26, 1950, on the first Republic Day with retrospective effect from 15 August 1947.
• Literally, Param Vir Chakra means ‘Wheel (or Cross) of the Ultimate Brave’.
• It can be awarded to officers, men, and women of all ranks of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force; of any of the Reserve Forces, of the Territorial Army Militia; and of any other lawfully constituted Armed Forces.
• It can be, and often has been, awarded posthumously.
• It is similar to the British Victoria Cross, the US Medal of Honor, the French Legion of Honor, or the Russian Cross of St. George.
• Design:
  • The medal was designed by Mrs. Savitri Khanolkar.
  • The medal is cast in bronze and circular in shape.
  • In the centre, on a raised circle, is the state emblem, surrounded by four replicas of Indra’s Vajra, flanked by the sword of Shivaji.
  • On its reverse, it has embossed Param Vir Chakra both in Hindi and English with lotus flowers.
• First winner: Major Somanth Sharma, from the Kumaon regiment.
• Till now, only 21 people had been given the Param Vir Chakra award, of which 14 are posthumous.

What are Gallantry Awards?

• They have been instituted by the Government of India to honour the acts of bravery and sacrifice of the officers/personnel of the Armed Forces, other lawfully constituted forces, and civilians.
• They are announced twice in a year – first on the occasion of the Republic Day and then on the occasion of the Independence Day.
• All the gallantry awards may be awarded posthumously.
• India’s Gallantry Awards in the Order of Precedence:
  • Param Vir Chakra
  • Ashoka Chakra
  • Mahavir Chakra
  • Kirti Chakra
  • Vir Chakra
  • Shaurya Chakra.
• The President awards the gallantry awards to the awardees or their next of kin at the Defence Investiture Ceremony held every year at the Rashtrapati Bhawan.
• However, the Param Vir Chakra and the Ashoka Chakra are conferred by the President to the awardees on the occasion of the Republic Day Parade at the Rajpath.

About Natyashastra:

• It is an ancient Sanskrit treatise on performing arts.
• The title is a combination of two Sanskrit words – Natya and Shastra.
  • Natya refers to the technique of dance and drama, and shastra refers to science.
• It was composed by the sage Bharata Muni.
• It has been dated to between the second century BCE and the second century CE.
• It is the earliest known treatise on performative arts in South Asia.
• It comprises verses detailing drama (natya), performance (abhinaya), music (sangita), emotions (bhava), and aesthetic experience (rasa).
• One of the text's most profound contributions is the articulation of the concept of Rasa, the essential emotional essence that lies at the heart of any great work of art.
  • Bharata Muni identified eight primary Rasas - Shringara (love), Hasya (humor), Karuna (compassion), Raudra (anger), Veera (heroism), Bhayanaka (fear), Bibhatsa (disgust), and Adbhuta (wonder).
  • He also explained how the skilled performer, through the skillful deployment of bhava (emotional expression), could evoke these sentiments in the audience.
• UNESCO added Natyashastra to its Memory of the World Register, recognizing its global cultural significance.

Key Facts about Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts (IGNCA):

• It was established as an autonomous body by the Government of India, under the Ministry of Culture.
• Mandate:
  • Document, preserve, conserve and disseminate the Indian arts and cultural heritage.
  • Train competent professionals to work in the specialized field of culture.
• The IGNCA has six functional units:
  • Kalanidhi, the multi-form library;
  • Kalakosa, devoted mainly to the study and publication of fundamental texts, predominantly in Sanskrit;
  • Janapada Sampada, the division engaged in lifestyle studies;
  • Kaladarsana, the executive unit which transforms researches and studies emanating from the IGNCA into visible forms through exhibitions;
  • Cultural Informatics Lab, which applies technology tools for cultural preservation and propagation;
  • Sutradhara, the administrative section that acts as a spine supporting and coordinating all the activities.

About Arun-3 Hydropower Project:

• It is a 900 MW run-of-the-river hydropower project located on the Arun River in the Nepal. 
  • Arun is a tributary of the Kosi River in Nepal.
• Once completed, it will be the biggest hydroelectric facility in Nepal.
• SJVN Arun-III Power Development Company (SAPDC), a wholly-owned subsidiary of India’s Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam (SJVN), is developing the project on a build-own-operate-transfer (BOOT) basis.
  • SJVN is a joint venture between the Government of India and the Government of Himachal Pradesh.
• The project will provide surplus power to India, strengthening economic linkages with Nepal.
• The power from the project shall be exported from Dhalkebar in Nepal to Muzaffarpur in India.

About Channa bhoi:

• It is a new species of snakehead fish.
• It was discovered from a small mountain stream near Iewmawlong village in the Ri-Bhoi district of Meghalaya.
• It has been named Channa bhoi, after the indigenous Bhoi people of the Khasi tribe who inhabit the Ri-Bhoi region.
• It belongs to the “Gachua group” of snakehead fishes, a group known for its high diversity in the Eastern Himalayan region. 

About Narpuh Wildlife Sanctuary:

• Location: It is situated in East Jantia Hills in Jowai, Meghalaya.
• It was declared a wildlife sanctuary in 2014 and is the only protected area in the Jaintia Hills.
• The Sanctuary is bounded by Reserve Forests on all sides except a part in South West which shares boundary with Assam. 
• Rivers: The northern part of the sanctuary is bounded by Lukha River forming a physical barrier.
• It is prone to extremely heavy rainfall.
• Its climate is favorable for the propagation and sustenance of a rich and wide variety of wild, endangered Flora and Fauna.
• Vegetation: Some of the tallest evergreen and semi-evergreen forests remaining in Meghalaya are found in this region.
• Fauna: Hoolock Gibbon, Serow, Slow Loris, Sloth Bear, Large Indian Civet, Leopard Cat, Clouded Leopard, Barking Deer etc are found here.
• Flora : Castanopsis indica, C. tribuloides, Dysoxylum Sp., Elaeocarpus Sp., Engelhardtia spicata, Syzygium Sp. Etc.