There are numerous examples of such One Nation policies being propagated and, in several cases, implemented in the eleven years since this Government came to power. For instance, in 2016, Parliament passed a series of constitutional amendments to introduce a new Goods and Services Tax (GST), which introduced a unified value-added tax in place of state-specific levies. This reform, known informally as One Nation, One Tax, had been debated and discussed for nearly two decades and was widely touted as an important precursor to forging a common market across India's twenty-eight states.
In a similar vein, the government rolled out a new initiative to allow Indian citizens to take advantage of subsidized food rations irrespective of their state of residence. This scheme, commonly termed One Nation, One Ration Card, was intended to increase access to welfare benefits, especially for the millions of internal migrants in India without a fixed place of residence.
Earlier this year, the government announced the launch of a new online portal that will provide students, faculty, and researchers across the country's public higher education institutions with open access to international scholarly journals and articles under a scheme it has dubbed One Nation, One Subscription.
Most notably, the government recently signalled its intention to pursue a monumental One Nation policy that has been long discussed but only recently outlined in detail. This measure, known as One Nation, One Election, would do away with India's current system of staggered elections for state and national assemblies, replacing it with a framework of simultaneous elections. The proposal, which has featured in many of PM's speeches in the past, was advanced by a high-level committee (HLC) established by the government in 2023. (351 words)
[Excerpts from Does “One Nation, One Election" Make Sense for India? by Milan Vaishnav, Caroline Mallory, and Annabel Richter Published on July 28, 2025]
The provided text discusses various "One Nation" policies adopted in India, aiming to create uniform solutions across the country. One such initiative highlighted is the "One Nation, One Ration Card" scheme. This policy allows citizens to access subsidized food rations from any fair price shop across the nation, regardless of their home state.
The text explicitly states that the primary intention behind the "One Nation, One Ration Card" scheme was to "increase access to welfare benefits, especially for the millions of internal migrants in India without a fixed place of residence." This clearly indicates that migrant workers are a direct target group for the scheme's benefits.
The question asks about the object of the "One Nation, One Ration Card" scheme, specifically who it benefits. Let's look at the options in light of the information:
While the text strongly emphasizes that the scheme is designed to help migrant labourers by ensuring their access to essential food supplies anywhere in India, the question asks about the 'object' of the scheme, which can also be interpreted through the lens of implementation and operational aspects. In this context, ration shopkeepers can be considered beneficiaries in several ways:
Therefore, besides the direct beneficiaries like migrant labourers, ration shopkeepers are integral to the scheme's execution and can experience operational and volume-based benefits.
During a legal proceeding in India, an advocate argues that the Supreme Court should directly legislate on same-sex marriage because the right to choose a partner inherently implies a fundamental right to marry for all citizens. How would the Supreme Court's judgment likely to counter this argument?
Following the Supreme Court's decision, an LGBTQ+ advocacy group in India aims to achieve legal recognition for same-sex marriage. To which governmental body or bodies should this group primarily direct its lobbying efforts to secure the necessary legislation?
While same-sex marriage is not legally recognized in India, however, the Supreme Court's verdict did offer some acknowledgments of rights for same-sex couples. Which of the following rights was specifically affirmed by the Court?
Ramesh and Suresh, a same-sex couple in India, have lived together for a decade and want to ensure they receive legal benefits equivalent to those of married couples, such as automatic inheritance and pension rights. Based on the Supreme Court's judgment, what is the primary obstacle they face in achieving these benefits
The new acronym that is evolved after LGBTQ+ is an acronym called LGBTQIA+. In this new acronym ‘IA’ refers to:
According to the passage, the relationship between the Constitution and the Preamble can best be described as:
During a legal proceeding in India, an advocate argues that the Supreme Court should directly legislate on same-sex marriage because the right to choose a partner inherently implies a fundamental right to marry for all citizens. How would the Supreme Court's judgment likely to counter this argument?
Following the Supreme Court's decision, an LGBTQ+ advocacy group in India aims to achieve legal recognition for same-sex marriage. To which governmental body or bodies should this group primarily direct its lobbying efforts to secure the necessary legislation?
While same-sex marriage is not legally recognized in India, however, the Supreme Court's verdict did offer some acknowledgments of rights for same-sex couples. Which of the following rights was specifically affirmed by the Court?
Ramesh and Suresh, a same-sex couple in India, have lived together for a decade and want to ensure they receive legal benefits equivalent to those of married couples, such as automatic inheritance and pension rights. Based on the Supreme Court's judgment, what is the primary obstacle they face in achieving these benefits
The new acronym that is evolved after LGBTQ+ is an acronym called LGBTQIA+. In this new acronym ‘IA’ refers to: