What to Read in The Hindu Editorial( Topic and Syllabus wise)

Editorial 1: ​Fixing problems, unlocking India’s growth potential

Context

GST 2.0 marks not just a tax reform, but also the beginning of a new chapter in the nation’s growth story.

Introduction

India’s economic trajectory has consistently been shaped by bold reforms, and the recent Goods and Services Tax (GST) measures unveiled at the 56th GST Council meeting on September 3, 2025, could emerge as one of the most significant milestones yet. For a long time, both businesses and policymakers have emphasized the need for a tax system that is simpler, more predictable, and fairer.

• The latest set of decisions—rationalizing rates, addressing structural anomalies, easing compliance burdens, and strengthening dispute resolution mechanisms—reflects a thoughtful approach that combines ambition with pragmatism.
• What makes this moment truly significant is not only the breadth of the reformsbut also the collaborative spirit that has driven them.
• The outcome is what many describe as GST 2.0— a reform aimed not just at addressing the challenges of today, but at unlocking India’s growth potential for the decade to come.

Relief for many income groups

• Household essentials— Items such as soap, toothpaste, hair oil, shampoo, kitchenware, and packaged foodsnow fall under lower tax brackets, helping ease family budgets while boosting consumer demand in sectors employing millions.
• Housing sector— Reduced GST on cement and construction materials will make homes more affordable, advancing the government’s ‘Housing for All’ mission and stimulating allied industries like steel, tiles, sanitaryware, and paints.
• Infrastructure projects— Lower costs of key inputs will improve project viability, enabling faster execution and freeing up capital for expansion.
• Healthcare access— Life-saving drugs and critical medical devices have been shifted to nil or 5% GST, reducing treatment costs and improving patient access. For India, a global hub for affordable medicines, this is both a social and economic gain.
• Labour-intensive industries— Sectors such as textiles, handicrafts, leather, footwear, and toys benefit from lower rates that help protect margins, safeguard livelihoods, and generate jobs in semi-urban and rural clusters.
• Automotive sector— Lower rates on small cars, motorcycles, buses, and trucks will boost demand, encourage investment, and strengthen India’s auto-manufacturing hubs.

Helping exporters and MSMEs

• Support for exporters
  • Rationalisation of ratesremoves inverted duty structures in textiles, fertilizers, and renewables, making Indian products more globally competitive and reducing import dependence.
  • Export-heavy MSME-driven sectorslike handicrafts, leather, and engineering goods stand to gain significantly.
  • Lower dutieson capital goods and intermediates will encourage local value addition, directly boosting the ‘Make in India’ initiative.
• Reduced litigation and compliance burden
  • Long-standing issues like interpretational disputes, classification complexities, and uncertain tax treatmenthave slowed businesses.
  • Simplified slabsand harmonised rates will reduce ambiguities.
  • Clarifications on intermediary servicesand post-sale discounts provide relief for service exporters by aligning tax rules with commercial practices.
• Relief for small exporters
  • Removal of refund thresholdson low-value consignments ensures fairer treatment for courier and e-commerce players.
  • Faster and more reliable refundswill ease working capital constraints and promote reinvestment in growth.
• Simplified GST Registration Scheme
  • Designed for small and low-risk businesses, this scheme allows automated approvals within three days.
  • Cuts compliance costs, encourages formalisation, and helps MSMEs expand into new markets.
  • Significant, given that MSMEs are the backboneof India’s economy in terms of jobs, exports, and innovation.
• Institutional reform through GSTAT
  • The operationalisation of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT)enables faster and fairer dispute resolution.
  • This builds trustin the system, reduces case backlogs, and shows GST is not just about revenue collection, but also about a predictable and fair tax regime.
• Shift to a streamlined two-rate structure
  • New GST framework: standard rate of 18%, merit rate of 5%, and a special de-merit rate of 40%for select goods/services.
  • Aligns India’s system with global best practicesand advanced economy models.
  • Sends a strong signal of policy stability, predictability, and ease of doing businessto international investors.
  • Positions India as both a large marketand a reliable, competitive investment destination amid shifting global supply chains.

A pathway to economic expansion

• Implementation remains key— Reforms alone are not enough; delays and procedural complexities must still be addressed.
• Government intent is clear— It is listening to industry, showing decisive action, and working to build a growth-oriented tax system.
• GST 2.0 as economic reform— Goes beyond tax changes to boost consumption, empower MSMEs, strengthen competitiveness, and sustain growth momentum.
• Foundation for expansion— Establishes the groundwork for India’s next phase of economic growth.
• GST story of ambition— From the beginning, GST has symbolized bold ambition; the latest reforms mark a decisive step forward.
• A new chapter begins— For businesses, consumers, and policymakers, this is more than a rate adjustment — it is the start of a new growth journey.

Conclusion

The new GST 2.0, despite lingering anomalies, reflects a strong commitment to rationalisation and ease of compliance. By reducing duty inversions, abolishing the compensation cess, and aligning with income-tax cuts, it offers a timely boost to public confidence and the economy. Ensuring that benefits are passed on to consumers will be the real test of these reforms.

 

Editorial 2: Governors as Chancellors

Context

Universities need to be headed by distinguished academicians.

Introduction

The tussle between Governors and elected State governments over university administration highlights deeper questions of federalism and autonomy in higher education. Kerala Governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar’ssubmission to the Supreme Court—excluding the Chief Minister from Vice-Chancellor (V-C) appointments—reflects this ongoing friction. The issue extends beyond Kerala, with similar contests seen in Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, and Punjab.

Governor’s Submission and UGC Rules

• Kerala Governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar told the Supreme Court:
  • The Chief Minister has no rolein appointing Vice-Chancellors (V-Cs) of A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Technological University and Digital University Kerala.
  • His stance mirrors similar Governor–State conflictsin Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal.
• 2018 UGC Rules:
  • Search-cum-selection committees must include eminent persons in higher education, unconnected with the university.
  • The Governor argued this excludes the Chief Minister.
• Draft 2025 UGC Regulations:
  • Further sidelines State governments.
  • Brings V-C appointments entirely under the Chancellor (Governor’s) purview.

Constitutional and Historical Role of Governors

• Colonial Legacy: Governors were instruments of colonial control, retained after Independence.
• Over time, legislation restricted Governors’ discretionary powers.
• Post-Independence, Governors remained as Chancellors of universitiesto:
  • Safeguard independence in higher education.
  • Act as a symbolic “father figure” or elder.
• However, the Governor’s role as Chancellorexists because of State laws, not constitutional mandate.

State Pushback and the Way Forward

• State governmentsare increasingly challenging Governors’ influence in universities.
  • Punjab and West Bengal passed laws making the Chief Minister the Chancellor.
• Courts are also curtailing Governors’ powers(e.g., on assent to Bills).
• Key issue:
  • V-Cs should be distinguished academicians with vision, leadership, and managerial skills.
  • Appointments must avoid being reduced to political patronage, either by the Union or States.

Conclusion

The debate underscores the need to balance institutional independence with democratic accountability. Governors, historically colonial relics, cannot remain unchecked arbiters in higher education. States too must resist politicization of appointments. Ultimately, universities require visionary, academically accomplished leaders rather than nominees of political convenience. Resolving this tension is vital to safeguarding both federal principles and the integrity of India’s higher education system.