Why freight moves so slowly in India ??

Freight in India move at very slow pace,lack of proper roads is given the primary reason but it seems to be  secondary if carefully construed, some other factor that prop up are:
1. time synchronization are not designed to factor in entry restriction in cities like Mumbai and Delhi(most of the good is send/delivered ),which leads to time loss.

2. Most drivers are under paid so they try to make money through other routes like by reducing speed of vehicles to save fuel or by skipping tolls ,this pull down efficiency of the sector.

3. there is no mechanism to check the nature of goods being transferred without harassing the drivers by policeman.

4. owner dealers don't employ  extra driver just to avoid cost incurred by him this increase travel time like it depends on the number of hour a driver takes rest.


5.A disquieting aspect is institutionalization of corruption on the route  and transporters prefer it because it allow them to flout rules with impunity.like taking extra fuel tank to avoid differential pricing in various states.


6. For Railways see the average speed of train over the decade which is almost constant. We have seen  passenger trains giving way to freight trains or vice versa delaying both the trains,this is due to lack of double tracks which would be used exclusively by passenger or goods trains.

7.We are too slow in exploiting our water ways for transportation all major developed countries have highly developed water ways and much of their transportation is through water. see below:-

sources:https://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/by_the_numbers/maritime_trade_and_transportation/index.html

This is India's trade through different modes Air,land and water.You see the difference ?

So waterways are the solution 

Hope is that these 111 waterways get on the track as early as possible: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_National_Waterways_in_India

Globlisation effects on womens??

postive effects of Globlisation of womens

Skilled Sector(Organised sector): 1.Globalisation has created new standard of treatement of womens,who were traditionally seen as a taboo in the workforce and has helped women group to mobilize and break away from patriarch structure.
2.Globalization concept of human rights and gender equality and activity of NGOs have created a space for women organisation to grow.
3.Increasing globalization has incentivized the labour cost incurred by the company and helped in its settlement  in developing countries which in turn has incresed the demand of female labour which is helpful for womens  from informal sector.
4.world trade in services has increase women's migration to cities to seek job like babysitter,housekeeping and other home based work, which was not possible few decades ago.
5.Increasing presence of Internation NGOs has improved  the education,health and welfare of womens like by pressurising Govt. or by opening their own educational institutes. like :Bill and Melinda Gates organisation
6.Globlisation has enabled womens from various spheres of the world to participate, join and adopt soem convension for common causes like :Bejing Declaration, Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women,UN World Conference for Women


negative effect of globalisation on womern:

 1.In developing countries like India lack formal training, women work in the informal sector with no access to social security, low paying job and terrible working condition many womens accepts it because it is the convenient form of income generation that allows them to carry domestic responsibilities.
2. Women are increasing getting employed in formal sector like catering,insurance,BPOs they have to work for long time(14-15 hrs) which leds to their security problem(harrrasment) and health complication like chronic fatigue.
3. Globlisation has not been able to exude out  income discrimination ,in many parts of world womens are still paid low wages comapre to men for same work.
4. bad  working condition(wages,employment status) keeps qualified women out of those companies provideing them.

Appointment/Transfer of Judges

Appointment/Transfer of Judges

Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v . Union of India , AIR 1994 SC 268: (1993) 4 SCC 441 ; S.P. Gupta v. President of India, AIR 1982 SC 149: (1981) Supp SCC 87 Overruled 1. The process of appointment of Judges to the Supreme Court and the High Courts is an integrated ‘participatory consultative process' for selecting the best and the most suitable persons available for appointment; and all the constitutional functionaries must perform this duty collectively with a view primarily to reach an agreed decision, subserving the constitutional purpose, so that the occasion of primacy does not arise. 2. Initiation of the proposal for appointment in the case of the Supreme Court must be by the Chief Justice of India, and in the case of a High Court by the Chief Justice of that High Court; and for transfer of a Judge /Chief Justice of a High Court, the proposal has to be initiated by the Chief Justice of India. This is the manner in which proposals for appointments to the Supreme Court and the High Courts as well as for the transfers of Judges, Chief Justices of the High Courts must invariably be made. 3. In the event of conflicting opinions by the constitutional functionaries, the opinion of the judiciary ‘symbolized by the view of the Chief Justice of India', and formed in the manner indicated has primacy. 4. No appointment of any Judge to the Supreme Court or any High Court can be made, unless it is in conformity with the opinion of the Chief Justice of India. 5. In exceptional cases alone, for stated strong cogent reasons, disclosed to the Chief Justice of India, indicating that the recommendee is not suitable for appointment, that appointment recommended by the Chief Justice of India may not be made. However, if the stated reasons are not accepted by the Chief Justice of India and the other Judges of the Supreme Court who have been consulted in the matter, on reiteration of the recommendation by the Chief Justice of India, the appointment should be made as a healthy convention. 6. Appointment to the office of the Chief Justice of India should be of the senior most Judge of the Supreme Court considered fit to hold the office. 7. The opinion of the Chief Justice of India has not mere primacy, but is determinative in the matter of transfers of High Court Judges/Chief Justices. 8. Consent of the transferred Judge/ Chief Justice is not required for either the first or any subsequent transfer from one High Court to another. 9. Any transfer made on the recommendation of the Chief Justice of India is not to be deemed to be punitive, and such transfer is not justiciable on any ground. 10. In making all appointments and transfers, the norms indicated must be followed. However, the same do not confer any justiciable right in any one. 11. Only limited judicial review on the grounds specified earlier is available in matters of appointments and transfers. 12. The initial appointment of a Judge can be made to a High Court other than that for which the proposal was initiated. 13. Fixation of Judge-strength in the High Courts is justiciable, but only to the extent and in the manner indicated. 14. The majority opinion in S.P. Gupta v. Union of India, (1982) 2 SCR 365: AIR 1982 SC 149, insofar as it takes the contrary view relating to primacy of the role of the Chief Justice of India in matters of appointments and transfers, and the justiciability of these matters as well as in relation to Judge-strength does not commend itself to us as being the correct view. The relevant provisions of the Constitu tion, including the constitutional scheme must now be construed, understood and implemented in the manner indicated herein by us.