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

 

Article 1: ​Arbitrary and opaque

Why in news: The Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation approved EPS 2026 without prior consultation, raising transparency concerns. The scheme removes higher pension options and keeps outdated limits, prioritising fiscal burden reduction over stronger pension security for workers and retirees.

Key Details

The Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) approved Employees’ Pension Scheme (EPS) 2026 on March 2, replacing EPS 1995, affecting about 5.4 crore members and 82 lakh pensioners.

The scheme was approved without prior consultation or public indication, raising transparency concerns, even though it is linked to the Code on Social Security, 2020.

Over the past decade, changes to EPS 1995—such as the ₹15,000 wage ceiling, 60-month salary averaging for pension calculation, and restrictions on higher pension options—have reduced pension benefits and led to litigation, including cases in the Supreme Court of India.

The new EPS 2026 removes the higher pension option and does not revise the ₹15,000 wage ceiling or the ₹1,000 minimum pension, both unchanged for over 11 years.

Critics argue the EPFO’s approach focuses on reducing pension liabilities, whereas greater government support and higher contributions could help strengthen pension security for workers and retirees.

Approval of Employees’ Pension Scheme (EPS) 2026

The Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO)’s Central Board of Trustees (CBT) approved the Employees’ Pension Scheme (EPS) 2026 on March 2, replacing the EPS 1995 scheme.

The manner of approval has raised serious transparency concerns.

The decision impacts about 5.4 crore contributing members and 82 lakh pensioners.

Lack of Transparency and Consultation

The EPS, EPF, and Employees’ Deposit-Linked Insurance Schemes were intended to align with the Code on Social Security, 2020.

The Code was suddenly notified in November 2025 along with three other labour codes.

Before the approval of the new pension scheme:

No prior indication was given by the government or the Labour Ministry.

Stakeholders were not consulted during the process.

Long History of Litigation

The EPS 1995 has been one of the most litigated social security schemes in India.

Over the past decade, it frequently appeared in court cases, including those before the Supreme Court of India.

Many disputes arose due to changes made to the scheme’s provisions.

Key Changes to EPS Over the Last Decade

Restriction of Coverage

Pension coverage was limited to employees earning up to ₹15,000 per month.

This departed from the scheme’s original intention of universal coverage.

Change in Pensionable Salary Calculation

Pensionable salary calculation shifted from the average salary of the last 12 months to the average of the last 60 months.

This significantly reduced the pension amount employees could receive.

Restrictions on Higher Pension Option

The option to receive higher pension based on actual salary was limited.

Only employees who exercised the option within one year of the modified scheme (September 1, 2014) were eligible.

Supreme Court Intervention (2022)

In 2022, the Supreme Court of India allowed the higher pension option to be extended to post-2014 retirees as a special case.

However, pre-2014 retirees were largely excluded because:

The EPFO imposed difficult and unrealistic eligibility conditions.

As a result, many pensioners remained ineligible for higher pension benefits.

Features of the New EPS 2026

Removal of the Higher Pension Option

The option provision for higher pension has been completely removed.

Authorities consider it “obsolete”, arguing it reflected a narrow legal interpretation.

No Revision of Wage Ceiling

There is no indication of raising the ₹15,000 PF contribution ceiling.

Both:

The ₹15,000 wage ceiling, and

The ₹1,000 minimum pension
have remained unchanged for over 11 years.

Concerns About EPFO’s Approach

The EPFO’s approach appears focused on reducing the long-term pension burden.

Critics argue that the organisation could manage pension obligations if:

Government funding increases, and

Employer and voluntary employee contributions rise.

Way Forward

Pension reforms require greater empathy and a positive policy approach from the Union government and the EPFO.

Simply changing laws, rules, and procedures will not adequately address the concerns of millions of members and pensioners.

Sustainable reform must balance financial viability with social security protection.

Conclusion

The approval of EPS 2026 by the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation highlights concerns about transparency, stakeholder consultation, and pension adequacy. With unchanged wage ceilings and removal of higher pension options, many workers may face reduced retirement security. Sustainable reform requires greater government support, periodic revision of pension limits, and inclusive policymaking to balance fiscal responsibility with stronger social security protection.

Descriptive question:

1. Critically examine transparency concerns and pension security implications of EPS 2026 approved by the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation. (150 words, 10 marks)

 

Article 2: ​Justice for all

Why in news: The Supreme Court of India criticised a National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) textbook for referencing judicial corruption, directing exclusion of its authors, raising concerns about academic freedom, selective scrutiny, and objectivity in school textbooks.

Key Details

The Supreme Court of India criticised references to judicial corruption in a National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) textbook, stating authors lacked proper understanding of the judiciary.

The Court directed that members of the textbook team should not be involved in future curriculum or textbook preparation, raising concerns about academic freedom.

Critics argue the Court should encourage expert review mechanisms rather than broadly excluding textbook writers.

Textbook revisions under the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government have introduced religious and cultural references, such as Vedic rituals, across subjects.

Concerns persist over biased historical narratives, where Muslim rulers are portrayed negatively and Hindu kingdoms positively, undermining objectivity in education.

Supreme Court’s Concern Over NCERT Textbook Content

The Supreme Court of India expressed concern over references to judicial corruption in a textbook prepared by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT).

The Court stated that the textbook development team lacked adequate understanding of the Indian judiciary.

It directed that such individuals should not be involved in preparing or finalising school textbooks in the future.

Concerns About Judicial Intervention

The Court’s broad directive may undermine the textbook development process.

Instead of excluding authors, the Court could have recommended expert review mechanisms for chapters related to the judiciary.

Similar review processes could also apply to other sensitive subjects such as history.

Debate Over Ideological Influence in Textbooks

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) earlier criticised Indian textbooks as “Macaulay-influenced” and excessively westernised.

After coming to power, efforts were made to revise textbooks to reflect India’s traditions and cultural heritage.

As a result, references to Hindu rituals and beliefs have increasingly appeared across subjects.

Examples of Content Controversy

A solar energy discussion in textbooks refers to the Vedic ritual of “arghyam”, a salutation to the sun.

A Class 7 geography chapter describes a divine feminine presence across the Indian landmass, presenting it as sacred.

Critics argue that scientific subjects should remain objective and free from religious interpretations.

Need for Balanced and Objective Textbooks

Some textbooks portray Muslim rulers as uniformly oppressive, while Hindu kingdoms are depicted positively, raising concerns of bias.

Selective targeting of chapters, particularly those about the judiciary, may create the perception that the judiciary is protecting its own image.

Textbooks should promote objectivity, fairness, inquiry, equality, peace, and social harmony to ensure balanced education for students.

Conclusion

The controversy highlights tensions between judicial sensitivity and academic freedom. While safeguarding the credibility of the Supreme Court of India is important, broad restrictions on textbook authors risk undermining independent scholarship. A balanced approach—through transparent review, diverse expert participation, and objective content standards in National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) textbooks—is essential to promote fairness, critical inquiry, and public trust.

 

Article 3: Reforming choice-based education

Why in news: The debate on choice and flexibility in higher education has resurfaced with the implementation of the Four-Year Undergraduate Programme (FYUGP) under NEP 2020, highlighting gaps between policy ideals and classroom realities.

Key Details

Shift toward flexibility: Educational reforms emphasise student choice, multidisciplinary learning, and personalised academic pathways instead of a rigid one-size-fits-all system.

CBCSS limitations: The Choice-Based Credit and Semester System (CBCSS) introduced in 2009 promised flexibility but offered limited electives and inconsistent credit structures.

FYUGP reforms: The Four-Year Undergraduate Programme (FYUGP) allows major–minor combinations and course mobility, aiming to enhance autonomy and interdisciplinary learning.

Structural challenges: Teacher workload, large class sizes, traditional pedagogy, and outdated evaluation systems restrict effective implementation of flexibility.

Need for systemic change: Successful reform requires teacher training, institutional support, and curriculum innovation to make choice meaningful rather than symbolic.

Shift Toward Student-Centric Education

Choice and flexibility have become key themes in recent educational reforms and policy discussions.

Educators are increasingly focusing on individual student needs, abilities, and aspirations.

The traditional one-size-fits-all model of education is gradually being replaced.

The new approach recognises the diversity of student interests and talents.

Education systems are attempting to become more inclusive and personalised.

Emergence of Multidisciplinary Learning

The new educational model promotes multiple academic pathways for students.

Students can combine subjects from different fields (for example, science with music).

This reflects a transition from teacher-centred to learner-centred education.

Greater emphasis is placed on multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary learning.

Cross-disciplinary exposure provides students with a broader and more holistic understanding of the world.

Limits of Flexibility in a Rigid System

When such ideals are applied within rigid academic structures, real choice becomes limited.

Factors such as heavy teacher workload, traditional pedagogy, and poor student-teacher ratios restrict implementation.

Outdated evaluation systems further reduce the scope of innovation.

As a result, flexibility often remains a policy promise rather than classroom reality.

The system sometimes offers choice only in name, not in practice.

The Illusion of Choice in Academic Reforms

The Choice-Based Credit and Semester System (CBCSS) introduced in Kerala in 2009 aimed to expand student freedom.

In practice, inconsistencies in credit allocation and teaching hours emerged.

Most courses remained compulsory core subjects, with limited elective options.

Departments often determined the electives, reducing true student choice.

The “open course” offered in the fifth semester was one of the few genuine options available.

Need for Systemic and Institutional Changes

Major reforms like the Four-Year Undergraduate Programme (FYUGP) require deep structural adjustments.

Policies promoting interdisciplinary learning may sometimes create unintended restrictions.

Effective reforms require teacher training, smaller class sizes, and improved infrastructure.

Evaluation methods and teaching practices must evolve to support skill-based and concept-driven learning.

Without systemic transformation, educational reforms may struggle to produce meaningful results.

Conclusion

Educational reforms emphasising choice, flexibility, and interdisciplinary learning represent an important shift toward student-centric education. However, without corresponding institutional restructuring, teacher preparedness, and improved classroom conditions, such reforms risk remaining symbolic. For these policies to succeed, systemic support, pedagogical innovation, and administrative flexibility are essential to translate policy promises into meaningful learning opportunities for students.

Descriptive question:

1. Evaluate the extent to which recent higher education reforms in India promoting choice, flexibility, and multidisciplinary learning have transformed undergraduate education. Discuss the challenges in their effective implementation. (250 words, 15 marks)