The Tamil Nadu government issued an order placing its Public (Law and Order) Department outside the RTI Act, and then withdrew it after protests. The episode shows how easily a transparency law can be weakened through a notification rather than an amendment.

The Act already allows secrecy where it is truly needed. The key difference is scale: Section 8 judges each piece of information, while Section 24 removes a whole organisation from the Act.

• Wrong tool: sensitive details can already be withheld under Section 8; a blanket exclusion under Section 24 was unnecessary.
• Wrong category: Section 24 is meant for intelligence and security organisations, not a general administrative department.
• Wrong process: the order was used before it was made public, and it required scrutiny by the Legislature.
• Bigger pattern: delays, vague refusals and weak Information Commissions already limit citizens’ access.

• Use Section 8 narrowly and give written reasons for each refusal.
• Fill vacancies in Information Commissions on time, including the post of Chief.
• Proactive disclosure under Section 4, so fewer citizens need to file requests at all.
• Legislative oversight: every Section 24 notification should be debated, not just tabled.

India grows enough food for its 1.4 billion people, yet a sizeable share is lost between farm and market or wasted in shops, restaurants and homes. The article argues that reducing both can improve food security, cut emissions and raise incomes at the same time.

• India is the only country to have run three national post-harvest loss surveys, through the Ministry of Food Processing Industries (MoFPI): 45 commodities (2005–07), 45 (2012–14) and 54 (2020–22). A fourth round is under way.
• The 2020–22 round (by NABCONS) valued annual post-harvest losses at about ₹1.53 lakh crore, with the highest loss rates in fruits and vegetables — perishable crops that need cold chains.

• Food security and nutrition: more of what is grown reaches people, especially perishable, nutrient-rich foods.
• Resources and climate: lost food wastes the land, water, fertiliser and energy used to grow it; rotting food in landfills releases methane, a potent greenhouse gas.
• Incomes and productivity: farmers and traders sell more of their produce and get better prices.

• FAO and COSAMB (Council of State Agricultural Marketing Boards) found that large wholesale markets can generate up to 100 tonnes of organic waste a day.
• Nationally, this adds up to about 3.5 million tonnes a year. If treated, it could offset about 3.3 million tonnes of CO₂-equivalent a year — close to US$30 million in carbon credits.
• Model: a 50-tonne-a-day bio-CNG plant in Surat, run through a private partnership for over five years, reportedly avoids about 7,500 tonnes of methane-related emissions a year.

• Close data gaps on waste at retail, food-service and household levels.
• Direct finance to high-impact technologies — drying, moisture control, energy-efficient cooling and storage. The FAO–SIDBI partnership links loss hotspots with these technologies and arranges loans for small firms.
• Circular approach: redistribute surplus food; convert unavoidable residues into compost, biogas or energy.
• Cities: an FAO “Package of Practices” to help municipalities measure, prevent, reduce, redistribute and valorise food waste.
• Mainstreaming: build loss reduction into agricultural, food-processing, urban and climate policy.

• Strength: treats waste as a resource and links it to climate finance, not just to charity or behaviour change.
• Affordability: small and marginal farmers (over 85% of holdings) often cannot pay for storage or cooling without pooled models such as FPOs and cooperatives.
• Energy for cold chains: cooling must be energy-efficient and, ideally, solar-powered, or it adds to emissions.
• Carbon credit estimates depend on reliable measurement and on how India’s carbon market develops.