Explanation:

What is the issue?
The petition seeks an amendment to Article 1 of the Constitution, which says “India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States…”
It wants ‘India’ to be struck off from the Article.
Article 1 of the Constitution
Article 1 in the Constitution states that India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States.
The territory of India shall consist of: The territories of the states, The Union territories and Any territory that may be acquired in future.
The names of the States and the Unions have been described in the First Schedule. This schedule also holds that there are four Categories of State and territories – Part A, Part B, Part C and Part D.

Part A – includes the nine provinces which were under British India
Part B – princely states consisted of this category
Part C – centrally administered five states
Part D – Andaman and Nicobar Islands
Abolishing of these schedules

In the seventh amendment of the Constitution in 1956, the distinction between Part A and Part B states was abolished.
Subsequently, states were reorganized on a linguistic basis.
As a result, several new states were formed, eg. Haryana, Goa, Nagaland, Mizoram etc. At present, there are 28 States and 8 UTs (corrected).
Debate over name change
Bharat and India are both names given in the Constitution. India is already called ‘Bharat’ in the Constitution”.
The petition says that India is a name of foreign origin. The name can be traced back to the Greek term ‘Indica’.
The word ‘Bharat’ is closely associated with our Freedom Struggle as the cry was ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’.
Chauvinists argue that the name change will ensure citizens to get over the colonial past and instil a sense of pride in our nationality.
What 2016 ruling has to say?
The apex court had dismissed a similar petition in 2016.
Then CJI T.S. Thakur orally remarked that every Indian had the right to choose between calling his country ‘Bharat’ or ‘India’.
CJI said that the Supreme Court had no business to either dictate or decide for a citizen what he should call his country.
Back2Basics
Article 2
Article 2 states that the parliament may, by law, admit new states into the Union of India or establish new states on terms and conditions it deems fit.
For e.g. the addition of the State of Sikkim by the 35th (1974) and 36th (1975) constitutional amendments.
Article 3
Article 3 empowers the parliament to form a new state by separation of a part of the territory of an established state or to unite two or more states or parts of states or by uniting any territory to a part of any state.
This article provides that area of any state can reduced or increased and alter the boundaries or change the name of a state.
Even though the state boundaries are subject to change, their area cannot be acquired by a foreign state.
There is also a saving clause in the article to protect the rights of the state.
The first condition is that no bill for the purpose can be introduced in either house except on the recommendation of the President of India.
Second, whether the proposal contains the alternation of the area, boundaries or name of the state mentioned, it has to refer by President to the Legislatures of concerned states, for expressing opinions.
Such opinion has to be expressed within a period specified by the President. In any case, the views expressed do not bind the decisions of either the President or the Parliament
Article 4
This article specifies that the laws provided in article 2 and 3, admission/establishment of new states and alteration of names, areas and boundaries etc. of established states, are not to be considered amendments of the Constitution under article 368.
It means these can be passed without resorting to any special procedure and by a simple majority.

Explanation:

Global Economic Prospects (GEP)
GEP is a World Bank Group flagship report that examines global economic developments and prospects, with a special focus on emerging market and developing economies.
It is issued twice a year, in January and June.
The January edition includes in-depth analyses of topical policy challenges while the June edition contains shorter analytical pieces

Explanation:

The Inner Line
A concept drawn by colonial rulers, the Inner Line separated the tribal-populated hill areas in the Northeast from the plains.
To enter and stay for any period in these areas, Indian citizens from other areas need an Inner Line Permit (ILP).
Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Mizoram are protected by the Inner Line, and lately, Manipur was added.
The concept originates from the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation Act (BEFR), 1873.
Its inception
The policy of exclusion first came about as a response to the reckless expansion of British entrepreneurs into new lands which threatened British political relations with the hill tribes.
The BEFR prohibits an outsider’s — “British subject or foreign citizen” — entry into the are beyond the Inner Line without a pass and his purchase of land there.
On the other hand, the Inner Line also protects the commercial interests of the British from the tribal communities.
After Independence, the Indian government replaced “British subjects” with “Citizen of India”.
Today, the main aim of the ILP system is to prevent settlement of other Indian nationals in the States where the ILP regime is prevalent, in order to protect the indigenous/tribal population.

Understanding Superconductivity
A superconductor is a material, such as a pure metal like aluminium or lead, that when cooled to ultra-low temperatures allows electricity to move through it with absolutely zero resistance.
Kamerlingh Onnes was the first scientist who figured out exactly how superconductor works in 1911.
Simply put, superconductivity occurs when two electrons bind together at low temperatures.
They form the building block of superconductors, the Cooper pair.
This holds true even for a potential superconductor like lead when it is above a certain temperature.

Explanation: The British manufacturers looked upon the East India Company, its monopoly of eastern trade, and its methods of exploitation of India through control of India’s revenues and export trade, to be the chief obstacles in the fulfilment of their dreams.
Between 1793 and 1813, they launched a powerful campaign against the Company and its commercial privileges and finally succeeded in 1813 in abolishing its monopoly of Indian trade.

With this event, a new phase in Britain’s economic relations with India began. Agricultural India was to be made an economic colony of industrial England. The Government of India now followed a policy of free trade or unrestricted entry of British goods. Therefore we can say that when the industrial revolution in England gained pace commercialization of Indian agriculture started.