Content
- The Skills Check
- Justice is not about ‘teaching someone a lesson
The Skills Check
Background & Context
- India’s Labour Market Challenge:
- Large youth population but low employability due to academic-focused, rote-based system.
- Formal vocational/skill training penetration extremely low (~4% of workforce).
- Institutional Setup:
- India has 14,000+ ITIs and 25 lakh sanctioned seats.
- Actual enrolment in 2022: ~12 lakh (48% seat utilisation).
- Employment rate among ITI graduates: 63% (2018).
- In comparison, Germany, Singapore, Canada show employment rates of 80–90% for VET graduates.
- Mismatch: India’s VET is both underutilised and unattractive.
Relevance : GS 3(Skill Development , Economy)
Practice Question : India’s Vocational Education and Training (VET) system is both underutilised and unattractive. Discuss the key structural, institutional, financial, and perception challenges it faces, and suggest reforms by drawing from global best practices.(250 Words)
Why VET Matters
- Higher Employability: VET graduates worldwide have higher chances of jobs in formal sector.
- Global Competitiveness: Countries with strong VET (Germany, Singapore) show better labour outcomes.
- India’s Development Vision: Without a skilled workforce, Viksit Bharat@2047 cannot be realised.
Core Problems in India’s VET System
Structural Issues
- VET in India treated as “afterthought” → introduced only after secondary school, unlike Germany where VET is integrated early.
- Shorter practical training period → weak hands-on exposure.
- Weak alignment of curricula with industry needs.
Institutional Issues
- ITIs often outdated curricula, poor teaching quality, irregular staff training.
- Low private sector engagement in VET institutions (curricula design, internships, apprenticeships).
- Weak feedback loop between industry and ITIs.
Financial & Policy Issues
- India spends just 3% of total education expenditure on VET vs. 10–13% in Germany/Canada.
- Limited incentives for ITIs → financial unviability → poor training infrastructure.
- Low per-student investment reduces training quality.
Perception Issues
- VET seen as “second-class education” compared to academic degrees.
- Social stigma around skill-based training.
International Best Practices
- Germany:
- Dual system → combines school + paid apprenticeship.
- Strong employer engagement, early integration.
- Singapore:
- Industry-led curriculum, high instructor quality, regular audits, strong upskilling ecosystem (e.g., SkillFuture).
- Seamless pathways from VET to higher education.
- Canada:
- Public-private partnerships, apprenticeship subsidies, employer co-funding.
Recent Government Initiatives in India
- Employment Linked Incentive (ELI) scheme: Formalises jobs but lacks training focus.
- PM Internship Scheme: Offers apprenticeships to youth.
- EIP (Employee Incentive Programme): Employers get ₹15,000 for training every 3 interns; interns get ₹3,000/month.
- Skill India Mission (2015): Large-scale but limited industry participation, poor outcome monitoring.
Suggested Reforms
Integration & Early Start
- Integrate VET in school curricula (secondary level), not as a post-school option.
- Offer flexible pathways from VET to higher education.
Governance & Financing
- Raise VET spending to 8–10% of education budget (closer to global norms).
- Provide financial viability grants to ITIs → reduce per-student cost burden.
- CSR & public-private funding to be leveraged.
Quality & Relevance
- Regular audits of ITIs, standardised instructor training.
- Curriculum designed with real-time industry feedback.
- Strengthen National Skill Qualification Framework (NSQF).
Industry Engagement
- Stronger public-private partnerships (PPP) in training and apprenticeships.
- Incentivise firms to host apprentices with tax credits or wage subsidies.
Social Perception
- Campaigns to de-stigmatise vocational training.
- Link VET outcomes directly with employment guarantee pathways.
Expected Benefits of Reform
- For Youth: Better employability, smoother transition from school to work.
- For Economy: Higher productivity, competitive workforce, export-oriented industries.
- For Government: Reduced unemployment, inclusive growth, stronger global competitiveness.
Challenges Ahead
- Bureaucratic inertia and slow curriculum reforms.
- Resistance from academic-focused education lobbies.
- Ensuring quality parity across 14,000+ ITIs.
- Bridging rural-urban disparity in access to skill institutions.
- Creating demand for VET-trained workers in formal industries.
Strategic Significance
- A strong VET system is critical for:
- Manufacturing push under Make in India.
- Atmanirbhar Bharat through skilled workforce.
- Leveraging demographic dividend of India’s young population.
- Without urgent reforms, India risks a scenario of educated but unemployable youth, worsening unemployment.
Conclusion
- India’s VET system is currently underfunded, underutilised, and undervalued.
- Learning from Germany & Singapore, India must:
- Integrate VET early in schooling,
- Involve industry in curriculum design,
- Increase funding, and
- Elevate the status of vocational education.
- Only then can India convert its demographic dividend into a demographic advantage for Viksit Bharat@2047.
Justice is not about ‘teaching someone a lesson
Background of the Case
- Incident:
- A Dalit man in Chhattisgarh arrested for alleged public misbehaviour.
- Medical check → no injuries; hours later → custodial death with 26 postmortem wounds.
- Trial Court Verdict: Convicted four police officers for murder (Section 302 IPC).
- High Court Ruling: Reduced conviction to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section 304 IPC).
- Key Observation: Officers assaulted to “teach a lesson” → implying discipline rather than malice.
Relevance : GS 2(Judiciary, Social Justice)
Practice Question : “Teaching a lesson is neither a constitutional principle of justice nor a legal standard.” Examine in the context of custodial violence and judicial reasoning in India.(250 Words)
Conceptual Issues Raised
“Teaching a Lesson” – Problematic Framing
- Not a legal principle → rooted in vigilante logic, not constitutional justice.
- Suggests violence can be corrective/deterrent, not unlawful.
- Shifts perception from criminality → misguided discipline.
Implications of Language
- Judicial language shapes policy & culture.
- Acceptance of “teaching a lesson” risks:
- Normalising custodial violence.
- Emboldening police officers to act as judge, jury, and executioner.
- Weakening rule of law, proportionality, and due process.
Custodial Violence in India
Structural Reality
- Custodial torture/deaths: persistent issue in India.
- Supreme Court precedents:
- D.K. Basu case (1997) – detailed safeguards for arrests and detentions.
- Munshi Singh Gautam v. State of M.P. (2005) – condemned police brutality.
- Despite safeguards → implementation weak.
- Investigations often by same police unit → lack of independence.
Disproportionate Impact
- Marginalised communities (Dalits, Adivasis, poor) are most affected.
- Structural vulnerability + caste power dynamics → higher risk of violence.
Caste Dimension
Court’s Treatment of SC/ST Act
- Trial Court acquitted under SC/ST Act; High Court upheld acquittal.
- Reason: lack of direct proof that caste identity motivated assault.
Problem in Jurisprudence
- Courts demand explicit caste slurs or intent to invoke SC/ST Act.
- Ignores structural caste realities:
- Violence against Dalits often inseparable from power hierarchies.
- Custodial violence on Dalits cannot be seen as “neutral”.
Consequence
- SC/ST Act narrowly applied, weakening protection.
- Denies justice in cases where caste operates subtly but pervasively.
Rule of Law vs Authoritarian Logic
Constitutional Justice
- Based on dignity, proportionality, due process.
- State actors bound by law, not personal notions of discipline.
“Teaching a Lesson” Logic
- Replaces legal deterrence with fear-based coercion.
- Enables state authoritarianism under the guise of discipline.
- Treats citizens as subjects to be corrected, not rights-holders.
Dangers of Judicial Rationalisation
- Each time courts justify violence as “disciplinary”:
- Weakens accountability.
- Undermines safeguards laid down by Supreme Court.
- Normalises authoritarian policing.
- Creates chilling precedent for future cases.
Way Forward
Judicial Role
- Courts must:
- Name custodial violence as criminal, not disciplinary.
- Use strong language reinforcing zero tolerance.
- Expand interpretation of SC/ST Act to include structural caste bias.
Institutional Reforms
- Independent accountability bodies for custodial deaths (not police-led).
- Strict enforcement of D.K. Basu guidelines.
- Mandatory application of SC/ST Act where caste dynamics evident.
- Victim-centric approach: dignity and rights at the centre.
Cultural Shift
- End public tolerance of “police brutality as discipline”.
- Recognise that misbehaviour in public ≠ forfeiture of rights.
- Build policing culture of constitutional functionaries, not enforcers of fear.
Conclusion
- Justice ≠ punishment through violence.
- “Teaching a lesson” is extra-legal authoritarianism, not constitutional justice.
- Courts must guard against legitimising custodial torture.
- The path forward lies in:
- Strong judicial messaging,
- Robust application of SC/ST Act,
- Independent accountability,
- Reaffirming dignity, equality, and rule of law.
