The Kerala government is taking legal action against the Central government in India for withholding Rs 1,500 crore in funding tied to various education schemes. Kerala's Education Minister V Sivankutty has asserted that this withholding of funds is a consequence of the state's non-participation in the PM Schools for Rising India (PM SHRI) initiative, which is a centrally sponsored program aimed at enhancing school quality in alignment with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.

Key Points:

• Legal Action: The Kerala government plans to approach the Supreme Court regarding the withheld funds.

• Funding Details: The Central government has not released Rs 1,500 crore intended for the education sector in Kerala, which includes financial support from the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan scheme.

• PM SHRI Scheme Overview:

  • Launched by the Union Ministry of School Education and Literacy.
  • Aims to upgrade over 14,500 schools nationwide to model institutions.
  • Total project cost is Rs 27,360 crore over five years (2022-27), with the Centre covering 66% of the expenses.

• Participation Issues:

  • Currently, 12,400 schools from various states, excluding Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal, are part of the PM SHRI scheme.
  • These states have not signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) to participate in the scheme.

• Kerala’s Opposition to PM SHRI:

  • The state government, led by CPI(M), opposes the PM SHRI scheme, viewing it as a mechanism for "saffronisation" of education.
  • Concerns are raised that the scheme would place state schools under Central control.
  • Kerala officials argue that they have already implemented many aspects put forth by the PM SHRI scheme, having developed significant educational infrastructure, including 40,000 smart classrooms in state schools.

• Impact of Funding Withholding:

  • The state government warns that the lack of funding will significantly affect various educational initiatives in Kerala.
  • Impact on the universal education efforts intended for children aged 6 to 14 could be severe, potentially harming students.

The conflict between the Kerala government and the Central government underscores broader issues regarding educational policies and governance in India, particularly the influence of national schemes on state-run education systems.

The Central Arecanut and Cocoa Marketing and Processing Co-operative (CAMPCO) Ltd. has made a significant charitable contribution of ₹5 crore to the National Defence Fund (NDF), as announced by its president, A. Kishore Kumar Kodgi. This act of philanthropy underlines CAMPCO's commitment to supporting national service and humanitarian efforts. Mr. Kodgi emphasized the organization's historical pattern of financial assistance, referencing past contributions to the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund during natural disasters and emergencies. He articulated the moral obligation to support the Armed Forces, especially during times when they are actively defending the nation from terrorism and external threats. The NDF is designed to promote the welfare of armed forces members, para-military personnel, and their families.

Key Points:

• CAMPCO has donated ₹5 crore to the National Defence Fund (NDF).
• President A. Kishore Kumar Kodgi highlighted CAMPCO's commitment to national service.
• The cooperative has previously contributed to the Prime Minister's Relief Fund during crises.
• Mr. Kodgi stressed the moral responsibility to support the Armed Forces.
• The NDF aims to improve the welfare of armed forces members and their dependents.

The Supreme Court of India delivered a significant ruling on May 9, 2025, overturning a Delhi High Court decision mandating the Wikimedia Foundation to remove a specific Wikipedia page that garnered controversy. This case revolves around freedom of expression and the public's right to know, particularly in the context of judicial proceedings.

Key Points from the Article:

• On May 9, 2025, the Supreme Court of India overturned a Delhi High Court order requiring the Wikimedia Foundation to take down a Wikipedia page.
• The initial order by the Delhi High Court stemmed from a defamation case where Wikipedia users had created a page discussing the case and making derogatory comments about the judge’s previous order.
• The High Court's order was upheld by a Division Bench before the Foundation appealed to the Supreme Court.
• Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan emphasized that vital issues must be debated publicly, even if they are ongoing in court, indicating that the High Court overreacted to the adverse comments seen in the forum.
• The Supreme Court's ruling focused on the legality of the take-down order while also discussing the importance of the right to know, protected under Articles 19(1)(a) and 21 of the Indian Constitution.
• The Justices viewed the right to know as essential for participatory democracy and ensuring access to justice.
• The Foundation's role is described as providing the technical platform for users to create and share information, thus serving the public's right to knowledge and expression without creating original content itself.
• The Court noted the democratic framework of Wikipedia, which protects users from retaliation and encourages participation by ensuring their contributions remain anonymous.
• The ruling aligns with a larger theme in Indian jurisprudence wherein freedom of expression is emphasized, suggesting that judicial proceedings benefit from public scrutiny.
• Citing D.Y. Chandrachud, the Justices reiterated that transparency in court proceedings is fundamental for judicial accountability.

Overall, this ruling by the Supreme Court not only reaffirms the principles of free speech and public knowledge but also highlights the challenges and responsibilities of digital platforms in balancing content moderation with user rights. The emphasis on the right to know as a fundamental aspect of democracy places significant implications on current and future cases involving the internet and judicial processes.