Legal Cases related to euthanasia, High school final essays of Law

Download Legal Cases related to euthanasia and more High school final essays Law in PDF only on Docsity! MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI MUMBAI ert aeaSsatt MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI AN ECONOMIC IMPACT OF DISINVESTMENT IN INDIA: CRITICALLY ANALYSIS Under the guidance of Prof. Rohit Jadhav Final submission submitted to Maharashtra National Law University Mumbai in fulfilment of the requirement of Internal Evaluation for Law of Economics-II Submitted to- Date of Submission- Prof. Rohit Jadhav 3" November, 2021 Submitted by- Div. & Enrolment Number- Karishma Dodain Section A, 2020 049 MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI TABLE OF CONTENTS DRAFT 1 1. INTRODUCTION .......ccssssssssssssesssscsecsseessesssesnsnssunssusensnsssesseeseeseessesssssnsnssunnes 2 2. RESEARCH PROBLEM ..........c.ccssssssssssssssssseesseessesssnssunssussnusssessessceseesseess 3 3. OBJECTIVE oo..csccccccccscsssssssessessssssssssunsssssssssssescceceessesssssssssussussnsssesecesceseesseess 4 4. LITERATURE REVIEW . 6. BIBLIOGRAPHY... DRAFT 2 T. INTRODUCTION ..0...0. cece eeee css eseeecsseeeeessseenesssseseesssneseessseessseeseesseeeeeeeees 7 1.1. RESEARCH PROBLEM ...0....0.0.ccccccccsscssessssesseseeseseesessseensseesseeesssseseassneeeeaes 9 1.2. NATURE & SCOPE .0.0....0.cccccscscccccsesssssssesseseesessesessessssesessssesssssessssessaseees 10 1.3. LITERATURE REVIEW. ......0.0..0ccccccccscscsecssesssesceeeseeeseeesesseeesseessenessesenes 10 1.4. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY ...0.....0.0.ccccccces cs estesceseseeseseeeenessessenenseeeees 11 1.5. METHODOLOGY 0.00.0... cccccccscccccseesesessesseseseeseeeesesssessnsssessensseessssesseeeees 12 2. CHAPTERISATION ..0.0......ccsccscscessseseseseseesesseseessseeseeseseesseesseseesessnssseseesesseseees 13 2.1. IMPACT OF DISINVESTMENT IN INDIA ...0.0..0.c..ceceeeeesese estes eeeeees 13 2.2. MERITS OF DISINVESTMENT. ......0....0.0.ccccssssessessesessesesseseesseeseeneseseeees 15 MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI 1. INTRODUCTION Disinvestment refers to the government's sale or liquidation of assets, mainly public sector firms, projects, or other fixed assets. Disinvestment is undertaken by the government to lessen the fiscal burden on the exchequer or to raise funds for specific purposes, such as bridging revenue shortfalls from other sources. Strategic disinvestment is a sort of government disinvestment that involves the transfer of ownership and control of a public sector firm to another entity (mostly to a private sector entity). Strategic sale, unlike simple disinvestment, entails a form of privatisation. Strategic sale, according to the disinvestment commission, is defined as the sale of a substantial portion of the government's shareholding in a central public sector enterprise (CPSE) of up to 50%, or such higher percentage as the competent authority may determine, along with management control transfer. The underlying economic idea that the government should not be in the business of manufacturing/producing products and services in industries where competitive markets have matured has led strategic disinvestment in India. For the first four decades after independence, India followed a development path that emphasised the public sector as the engine of prosperity. However, the public sector outgrew itself, and its flaws began to show up in low-capacity utilisation and efficiency as a result of overstaffing, poor work ethics, overcapitalization as a result of significant time and cost overruns, inability to innovate, take quick and timely decisions, and significant interference in decision-making processes, among other things. As a result, in 1991, the decision was made to adopt the Disinvestment course. The transformation process in India began in 1991-92, when 31 public sector undertakings were disinvested for a total of Rs.3,038 crore. The Disinvestment Commission, chaired by G V Ramakrishna, was established in August 1996 to advise, supervise, monitor, and promote the gradual disinvestment of Indian public sector undertakings. The Disinvestment Commission, on the other hand, ceased to function in May 2004. In December 1999, the Department of Disinvestment was established as a separate department, and in September 2001, it was renamed the Ministry of Disinvestment. The Department of Disinvestment was transferred to the Ministry of Finance on May 27, 2004. Page | 2 MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI Since April 14, 2016, the Department of Disinvestment has been renamed the Department of Investment and Public Asset Management (DIPAM), which has been designated as the nodal department for strategic stake sales in public sector undertakings (PSUs). The National Investment Fund (NIF) was established in November 2005 to redirect earnings from the disinvestment of Central Public Sector Enterprises. In 2015, the Government reinitiated the policy of strategic disinvestment in order to open up sectors for private enterprise to bring efficiency in management that would contribute to general economic development The Government had set a disinvestment target of 1.05 lakh crore rupees for the financial year 2019-20. Main objectives of Disinvestment in India are to meet the budgetary needs, to reduce fiscal deficit, to improve public finances and overall economic efficiency, to diversify the ownership of PSU for enhancing efficiency of individual enterprise, to raise funds for technological upgradation, modernization and expansion of PSUs, to encourage wider share of ownership etc 2. RESEARCH PROBLEM While investment refers to converting cash into securities, debentures, bonds, or other instruments, disinvestment means converting money claims or securities into cash. From another perspective, disinvestment can be seen as a strategy to dispose of or sell assets for cash. In terms of government, the disinvestment strategy means the market activity in which the government sells or liquidates government-owned assets. That is, the government may have an ownership stake in Central and State public sector enterprises. Further, government assets may include other project undertakings and fixed assets. The government chooses a disinvestment strategy to reduce the fiscal burden and raise money to meet public needs. They may also be done to privatise the assets. Disinvestment can realise the long-term growth of the country. Since disinvestment gives out a larger share of PSU ownership to the open market, it sets the groundwork for India’s firm capital market. This paper mainly will be looking into the concept of disinvestment and its impact on Indian Economy, along with a review of the benefits and challenges towards the idea of disinvestment and the overall policy and providing recommendations based on the findings of the research. Page | 3 MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI 3. OBJECTIVE The objective of this document is to analyze and discuss the effects of disinvestment in India. The aims of this project are to: 1. Analysis the concept of disinvestment. 2. Research in-depth the impact of disinvestment on Indian Economy. 3. Examine the benefits and challenges towards the idea of disinvestment. 4. Reviewing the overall policy and providing recommendations based on the findings of the research 4, LITERATURE REVIEW Arun and Nixson (2000) have advocated disinvestment in order to reduce public sector borrowing and increase rationalization. However, they also issue a useful warning in terms of dealing with social impact of privatization and loss of employment. A paper by Chhibber and Gupta (2017) on the performance of the PSEs in India between the periods 1990-2015 explores the factors that explain the performance of these PSEs. The results show that the MOUs did have a positive impact on their performance. Roadblocks to Disinvestment article in Political & Economic Weekly (2000)! Disinvestment is taking wing finally - that is the im- pression that the high-profile decision to privatise Air India should have created. However, the ambiguities surrounding the decision to disinvest in Air India reflect the absence of a coherent policy and continuing arbitrariness in the government's approach to privatisation. ' Roadblocks to Disinvestment. (2000). Economic and Political Weekly, 35(21/22), 1779-1780. http://www jstor.org/stable/4409304 Page | 4 MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI 1. INTRODUCTION Disinvestment is the sale or liquidation of an asset or subsidiary by an organisation or the government. Disinvestment is the departure of capital from a country or organisation in basic terms. Disinvestment has several distinguishing characteristics, including the selling of only a portion of the government's equity assets to private investors, resulting in only dilution of ownership rather than full ownership transfer. Privatization, on the other hand, is the process of transferring ownership from the government to private investors. ‘Partial Privatization’ is the term for disinvestment. Following WWII, there was a push to nationalise vital industries like as coal, iron and steel, power, gas, shipbuilding, and other industries that were deemed important for the nation's general development. It was thought that only the government could adequately accomplish social welfare by running these important businesses. The newly formed public sector was protected by government-created monopolies, entrance restrictions, and quota schemes. Following the oil shocks of the 1980s, it became evident that the government should not enter areas where the private sector can perform better. Rather than being a producer, the state is better served as a regulator and facilitator. It was well acknowledged that the public sector did not maximise capital usage and production efficiency. PSEs were created in areas where the private sector was unable to invest, such as the integrated steel factories built following independence. A huge number of public sector undertakings (PSUs) were established across sectors, and they have played an important role in job creation, social welfare, and general economic growth of the country; they have risen to commanding heights in the economy. However, despite the Indian economy's expanding liberalisation and globalisation, many PSUs have struggled to maintain their growth over time. Due to a loss of monopoly and a protectionist system, as well as increased competition from private sector competitors, many government-owned businesses have seen their market share dwindle dramatically. Many PSUs have found themselves unable to compete with private sector rivals in terms of technological prowess and efficiency, despite many blaming their plight on a lack of autonomy and government meddling. PSEs' financial performance began to decline, and several measures to improve it, such as performance contracts through Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs), failed. This condition persisted Page | 7 MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI for a few years, during which time public sector deficits grew (Majumdar, 1998). As a result, in 1991, the decision was made to adopt the Disinvestment option. sehen 2004-2009 ites forthe fret time elianee Industries: Amount realised 31,491 crore. stake civested 26%. permeate oe ana VSNL to Tota Communication: Amount realised 31,439 crore. stake divested 25%. NTPC: Amount raised ©2684 Maruti Udyog to Suzuki: Amount STOND ae eens realised 10% Power Grid: Amount raised 2993 crore. stake divested Ss %995 crore. stake divested ao ONGC moa art tale Hindustan Zine to Sterlite: for 210,542 cr REC: Amount raised 7820 ‘Amount realised 7445 crore. Stake ‘Sale GrOTE. stake divested 22.1% ested 9.1% Ag te CMC to TCS: Amount eased Asluggich period for entities: 152 crore. stake divested 51%. a None jn uunuina What Is suuTi? SSUUTI came into being in February 2003 following the breakup of the Unit Trust of India after its flagship Introduction of CPSE ETF in 2013-14, through which the US-64 scheme collapsed government divested its stake in some key PSUs. ‘SUUTI has stakes in 43 ‘Amount realised in first tranche 23,000 crore. Sue Sale 1PO of Coal Inca in 2010. Amount raised paauccee topriate 215,199 crore. sais chests 10% ICICI Bank, Axis Bank, Titan ‘None z First divestment through SUUTI: 9% stake in Axis and others Bank officaded tor 25,500 crore 2014-2019 Bharat 22 ETF ‘An open-end ‘exchange-traded fund Government divestd tao in 22 companies trough the Bharat 2€1F through which the and raised 214,500 crore trom the first tranche. oe ieee its stake in 22 PSU to PSU sale of HPCL to ONGC for ?36,915 Sale ‘companies, includi a pa ing CrOFE. Stake divested: 51.1% ena three private PSU to PSU sale of REC to PFC for 214,500 crore. ere hse Stake divested 52.6%. TM A brief history of disinvestment Market cap of PSUs to the total market cap rd ei By) Couey ce EY Excluding banking and finance stocks Source: BSEPSU.com The government has very little surplus for capital investment on social and physical infrastructure due to current revenue expenditure on items like as interest payments, wages and salaries of government personnel, and subsidies. Furthermore, the government is being forced to contribute additional resources to the survival of several non-viable PSEs due to the PSEs' prolonged existence. The government continues to put taxpayer funds at risk when it could Page | 8 MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI easily avoid it. To top it off, there is a massive debt burden that must be serviced and decreased before money can be allocated to infrastructure investment. All this makes Disinvestment of the Government stake in the PSEs absolutely imperative. PSUs have always had bureaucracy, and attempts to eliminate it have been ineffectual, if not ineffective. In most cases, such as VSNL and Delhi Vidyut Board, private management has shown to be a cure. The success of these organisations following privatisation has been demonstrated by their rapid transformation from red to black. PSUs do longer have the same privileges in terms of prestige and awe as they had in the past; instead, they are branded by the lack of efficiency and social considerations of the past. Disinvestment, the Government of India's tremendous weapon and instrument, has enabled the public sector to enhance its efficiency and become more responsible and accountable to the public, and by extension the nation. Unfortunately, the benefits of the Disinvestment were not effectively directed into the country's continued development through productive activities. As a result, the current article makes a modest attempt to examine the same by examining the conceptual framework as well as the trends, aims, successes, use, and impact of disinvestment on the Indian economy. 1.1. RESEARCH PROBLEM While investment refers to converting cash into securities, debentures, bonds, or other instruments, disinvestment means converting money claims or securities into cash. From another perspective, disinvestment can be seen as a strategy to dispose of or sell assets for cash. In terms of government, the disinvestment strategy means the market activity in which the government sells or liquidates government-owned assets. That is, the government may have an ownership stake in Central and State public sector enterprises. Further, government assets may include other project undertakings and fixed assets. The government chooses a disinvestment strategy to reduce the fiscal burden and raise money to meet public needs. They may also be done to privatise the assets. Disinvestment can realise the long-term growth of the country. Since disinvestment gives out a larger share of PSU ownership to the open market, it sets the groundwork for India’s firm capital market. This paper mainly will be looking into the concept of disinvestment and its impact on Indian Economy, Page | 9 MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI India. The aims of this project are to: 1. Analysis the concept of disinvestment. 2. Research in-depth the impact of disinvestment on Indian Economy. 3. Examine the benefits and challenges towards the idea of disinvestment. 4. Reviewing the overall policy and providing recommendations based on the findings of the research. 1.5. METHODOLOGY While preparing this final submission research methodology the researcher has relied entirelyon the Arm Chair method of research, which focuses on the collection of secondary data gathered mainly from through sources like books, articles, economic reports, websites, and newspaper reports. It is based on Secondary research which involves the summary, collation and/or synthesis of existing research. Secondary research is contrasted with primary research in that primary research involves the generation of data, whereas secondary research uses primary research sources as a source of data for analysis. A notable marker of primary research is the inclusion of a "methods" section, where the authors describe how the data was generated. The research paper’s approach to find out answers to these questions i: systematic step by step application of available principles, laws, tests and other sources of economic knowledge. For this analysis, data from the governmental and technical documents have been used. It will also explain all these sources so as to understand their force properly and analyses the facts of the graphs/ statistics in the manner the paper wishes to. After explaining the key points in these sources, the paper will then focus policies made by the government and suggestions so that it can add the dimensions which were never thought of and also identify knowledge gaps. Page | 12 MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI 2. CHAPTERISATION 2.1. IMPACT OF DISINVESTMENT IN INDIA Public sector enterprises (PSEs) have an indistinct mandate of meeting objectives beyond the narrow paradigm of profit maximisation. Generating employment, investing in projects that have long gestation periods, setting up operations in certain locations, and regulating prices of some of their products, are some of the objectives that may fall under the social ambit of PSEs. When this multidimensional mandate is combined with an environment free of competitive pressure, PSEs may suffer from operational inefficiencies. To address this inefficiency without compromising on the social objectives that PSEs are expected to achieve, minor disinvestment may be a useful remedial policy. Theoretically, disinvestment is defined as the transfer of ownership/control of PSEs from the government to the private sector. Privatisation, on the other hand, is a stronger form of disinvestment in which the control is always transferred to the private sector!. Hence, by selecting a PSE for disinvestment the government reduces the haziness of the multidimensional objective function (pure social welfare) by making it a combination of social welfare and profits (due to the transfer of ownership to the private sector). However, unlike privatisation, disinvestment does not imply a complete compromise on the social mandate of the government by reducing it to just profit maximisation. Thus, partial privatisation or disinvestment should be preferred over privatisation. However, there exists a counterargument questioning the limited impact of disinvestment on firm performance since the realm of control continues to lie in the hands of the government. If India wants a continuous increased growth, it has to scale to the next level of performance. This is not an option but a necessity and disinvestment are a tool to get there. Increased population, unemployment, and poverty levels are main reasons why India needs to scale. The cost of not scaling to the next level will see India eclipsed by China and other South East Asian aspirants leaving India to its internal chaos. It needs a 10% rate of growth every year in its GDP to continue to be competitive with China and potential emergent nations in South East Asia. Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may have. Page | 13 MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs. In the context of macroeconomics, time has shown us how countries like Chile, UK, China, New Zealand, Poland successfully used disinvestment to achieve new economic heights. Many countries used disinvestment as a sure means of restoring budgetary balance & to revive growth ona sustainable basis after facing economic crisis in 80s. Impact of privatisation Graph shows net worth, gross revenue of privatised CPSEs and their peers before and after privatisation of the CPSEs @ Pre-Privatisation © Post-Privatisation Net worth (€ Crore) Privatised Average of Privatised Average of firms peer firms firms peer firms Analysis of these countries before & after disinvestment shows that market-driven economies are more efficient than the state-planned economies. At the micro level, the change in ownership will increase domestic competition, hence efficiency; and encourage public participation in domestic stock market — all of which will promote ‘popular ‘capitalism that rewards risk taking and private initiative, that is expected to yield superior economic outcomes. Disinvestment shows that govt means business which will attract FDI, FII to finance projects in India. MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI 2.3. PROBLEM/CHALLENGES OF DISINVESTMENT A number of problems and issues have bedevilled the disinvestment process. The number of bidders for equity has been small not only in the case of financially weak PSUs, but also in that of better performing PSUs. Besides, the government has often compelled financial institutions, UTI and other mutual funds to purchase the equity which was being unloaded through disinvestment. These organizations have not been very enthusiastic in listing and trading of shares purchased by them as it would reduce their control over PSUs. Instances of insider trading of shares by them have also come to light. All this has led to low valuation or under- pricing of equity. Further, in many cases, disinvestment has not really changed the ownership of PSUs, as the government has retained a majority stake in them. There has been some apprehension that disinvestment of PSUs might result in the crowding out of private corporates (through lowered subscription to their shares) from the primary capital market. An important fact that needs to be remembered in the context of divestment is that the equity in PSUs essentially belongs to the people. Thus, several independent commentators have maintained that in the absence of wider national consensus, a mere government decision to disinvest is not enough to carry out the sale of people assets. Inadequate information about PSUs has impeded free, competitive and efficient bidding of shares, and a free trading of those shares. Also, since the PSUs do not benefit monetarily from disinvestment, they have been reluctant to prepare and distribute prospectuses. This has in turn prevented the disinvestment process from being completely open and transparent. It is not clear if the rationale for divestment process is well-founded. The assumption of higher efficiency, better / ethical management practices and better monitoring by the private shareholders in the case of the private sector all of which supposedly underlie the disinvestment rationale is not always borne out by business trends and facts. Total disinvestment of PSUs would naturally concentrate economic and political power in the hands of the private corporate sector. While the creation of PSUs originally had economic, social welfare and political objectives, their current restructuring through disinvestment is being undertaken primarily out of need of government finances and economic efficiency. Lastly, to the extent that the sale of government Page | 17 MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI equity in PSUs is to the Indian private sector, there is no decline in national wealth. But the sale of such equity to foreign companies has far more serious implications relating to national wealth, control and power, particularly if the equity is sold below the correct price! If the disinvestment policy is to be in wider public interests, it is necessary to examine systematically, issues such as - the correct valuation of shares, the crowding out possibility, the appropriate use of disinvestment proceeds and the institutional and other prerequisites. Challenges of Disinvestments can be said as: = Sale of profit-making and dividend paying PSUs would result in the loss of regular income to the Government = There would be chances of “Asset Striping” by the strategic partner. Most of the PSUs have valuable assets in the plant and machinery, land and buildings, etc. = Strategic and National Security Concerns: Strategic Disinvestment of Oil PSUs is seen by some experts as a threat to National Security since Oil is a strategic natural resource and possible ownership in the foreign hand is not consistent with our strategic goals. = Disinvestment affects labour forces' social security. The depressed state of the markets and the paucity of reasonable buyers would land in a bad deal. = Complete Privatisation may result in public monopolies becoming private monopolies, which would then exploit their position to increase costs of various services and earn higher profits » A majority stake sale done to another CPSE results in no real change in ownership, and is thus just hogwash. 2.4, EFFECT OF NEP ON DISINVESTED ENTERPRISES After Independence, India became a socialist society with a strong public sector but also with private property and democracy. As part of it, India adopted a centralised planning approach. Policy tended towards protectionism, with a strong emphasis on import substitution, Page | 18 MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI industrialisation under state monitoring, state intervention at the micro level in all businesses especially in labour and financial markets, a large public sector, business regulation. The New Economy policy were mainly based on two broad based reforms- structural reforms that dealt with changing the prevailing economic structure of India. The New Economic Policy that India adopted in 1991 proved to be an immediate solution to the Economy crisis which the country was facing. The Balance of Payment crisis left no choice but to accept the terms and conditions of the International agencies IMF & Word bank to open up and liberalise the economy. On one hand this step was beneficial for the economy and was the need of the hour but the policy should be designed taking into consideration the nature of the whole of Indian economy. As a result of this policy Indian economy has grown to 2 trillion and we are able to have a large forex reserve. But on the other hand, we see India is still facing a crisis which is hindering the integration of whole of the nation. Even after around 25 years of this policy our farmers are forced to commit suicide. Now since Indian Economy is an agriculture-based economy, though the share of Agriculture in GDP has decreased to 14% but it still continues to provide employment to more than 50% of the population.® The New Economic policy has been highly successful in liberating the Economy, creating Job opportunities, but it has not been successful in integration all the sections of the society which today lives in an atmosphere of uncertainty and deprivation. In order to protect the domestic industries and also to protect sovereignty the economic policies undertook by Indian government aftermath the independence was mostly inward looking. State monopoly, licence raj was some of the features of Indian economic policy prior to 1980s. In order to boost the economic growth Indian government mostly depended on foreign borrowing which culminated in weak balance of payment condition in 1990. India received financial assistance from WB and IMF tagged with some conditions. These conditions were formulated as New Economic Policy which was mainly intended to open up Indian economy. Private entities were allowed to enter in the sectors which were earlier reserved for state. Disinvestment of PSUs was done. Licensing system was withdrawn from most of the sectors. Tariffs were brought down and rupee was devalued. These are often called Liberalisation-Privatisation Globalisation (LPG) > Sudhir Naib, Disinvestment in India: Policies, Procedures, Practices pg. 414 (Sage Publications 2004) Page | 19 MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI continued interference by the government in management of the PSEs post partial divestment. This leads to inefficiencies even after divestment. Now that we have seen even the social countries succeed with privatization and fail without it, it is high time we implement it too in major respects. 5. REFERENCES WEBSITE REFFERED e Ahluwalia, M. S. (2002). Economic Reforms in India since 1991: Has Gradualism Worked? The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(3), 67-88 (October 20, 2021, 1:50 PM) http://www. jstor.org/stable/3216951 ¢ Roadblocks to Disinvestment. (2000). Economic and Political Weekly, 35(21/22), 1779- 1780 (October 20, 2021, 3:55 PM) http://www. jstor.org/stable/4409304 e Surendra S. Yadav. (2004). Competition and Ownership [Review of Disinvestment in India: Policies, Procedures, Practices, by Sudhir Naib]. Economic and Political Weekly, 39(27), 2976-2976 (October 21, 2021, 11:15 AM) http://www. jstor.org/stable/4415228 e Ahluwalia, M. S. (2002). Economic Reforms in India since 1991: Has Gradualism Worked? The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(3), 67-88 (October 21, 2021, 11:40 AM) http://www. jstor.org/stable/32 1695 | e All Answers Ltd., Impact of Disinvestment on Indian Economy (October 28, 2021, 1:50 PM) _https://www.ukessays.com/essays/economics/impact-of-disinvestment-for-indian- economy-economi: ssay phy e Ideas For India, Impact of disinvestment policy on public sector enterprises in India (October 26, 2021, 11:13 AM) Page | 22 MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI https://www.ideasforindia.in/topics/macroeconomics/impact-of-disinvestment-policy-on- public-sector-enterprises-in-india.html e Strategic Disinvestment (October 28, 2021, 1:50 PM) https://www.drishtiias.com/to-the- points/paper3/strate gic-disinvestment-1 e Mint, Centre bets big on disinvestment as a growth tactic (October 30, 2021, 4:15 PM) https://www.livemint.com/news/india/centre-bets-big-on-disinvestment-as-a-growth- tactic-11612286934615.html e Clear Tax, Objectives of Disinvestment of PSUs in India (October 30, 2021, 5:10 PM) https://cleartax.in/s/disinvestment-psus-india ¢ Rajan Gulati, A 20-year history of disinvestment in India (October 30, 2021, 5:25 PM) https://www.valueresearchonline.com/stories/47774/a-20-year-history-of-disinvestment- in-india/ JOURNAL ARTICLE ¢ = Chhibber, Ajay & Gupta, Swati, Bolder Disinvestment or Better Performance Contracts? Which Way Forward for India's State-Owned Enterprises, Working Papers 17/205, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy. ¢ Mandiratta, Priya; Bhalla, G.S., Disinvestment in Indian central public sector enterprises: a performance improvement measure, Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences, Volume 37, Number 4, 2020. BOOK e Sudhir Naib, Disinvestment in India: Policies, Procedures, Practices pg. 414 (Sage Publications 2004) Page | 23 MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI e = T.G. Arun & F. I. Nixson, The Disinvestment of Public Sector Enterprises: The Indian Experience (Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1).) Page | 24