9th and 10th June, 2025 - Notes and Explanation on Karnataka Current Affairs

Notes and Explanation for Karnataka Current Affairs of 9th and 10th June, 2025

9th June, 2025

GS - II

Stalled Monsoon over Karnataka Expected to Revive After June 12: IMD

Key Reasons for the Stall in Karnataka

• Weak Monsoon Trough

  
  

  The monsoon trough, which pulls moist air northwards, has weakened or shifted from its ideal position. This weak trough means less organized convection and rainfall activity.

• Lack of Synoptic-Scale Systems

  
  

  No active low-pressure area or cyclonic circulation over the Arabian Sea or Bay of Bengal. Such systems help in drawing moist winds inland and promoting rainfall. Their absence causes a break or stagnation in monsoon progression.

  
  

• High Pressure in the Arabian Sea

  
  

  Sometimes a subsidence of air (sinking air) due to high-pressure systems over the Arabian Sea can suppress convection. This leads to clear skies, less rainfall, and increased temperatures especially in northern Karnataka.

  
  

• Madden-Julian Oscillation (MJO) Phase

  
  

  The MJO, a global atmospheric disturbance, was likely in a non-conducive phase for rainfall over South Asia. It affects large-scale wind patterns and convection zones; an unfavorable MJO phase can lead to a temporary break in rainfall.

  
  

• Jet Stream Dynamics

  
  

  The Tropical Easterly Jet (TEJ) and subtropical westerly jet streams influence monsoon intensity. If these winds are not strong or misplaced, they can delay the northward march of the monsoon.

  
  

10th June, 2025

GS - I

E-Khata Mandatory for Building Plan Approvals from July 1

After making e-khata mandatory for property transactions, the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) has now made the document mandatory for building plan approval as well.

The Revenue Department of the BBMP has implemented the E-Aasthi software, through which E-Khatas are already being issued for properties under its jurisdiction.

Now E-Aasthi will be integrated with EoDB-OBPS (Ease of Doing Business – Online Building Permission System) software that is used by the BBMP’s Town Planning Department. This will in making e-khata mandatory for both building plan approval, property registration and property transactions.

Trust & Verify’ Model

• Temporary approvals granted online must be verified and confirmed by the Assistant Director (Town Planning) within the specified timeframe.

• If no action is taken or no valid reason is given within the timeframe, the system will automatically grant deemed approval.

• The Joint Director (Town Planning) of the respective zone will register a complaint with Zonal Commissioner against such Assistant Director for disciplinary action.

What is A-Khata, B-Khata, and E-Khata?

• 1. A-Khata

  
  

  Definition: A-Khata properties are legally recognized properties that comply with all building by-laws, government regulations, and tax requirements.

  
  

  Issued By: Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) or other urban local bodies.

  
  

  Legal Basis: Under the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976, and applicable rules of urban development authorities.

  
  

  Complies with:

  • Zoning regulations under the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961

  • Approved building plan

  • Proper conversion of land (from agricultural to non-agricultural)

    
    

  Uses: Eligible for building licenses, bank loans, property registration, sale, and transfer. Tax payment receipt is issued regularly.

• 2. B-Khata

  
  

  Definition: B-Khata properties are irregular or semi-legal properties that do not fully comply with zoning or building laws.

  
  

  Introduced By: BBMP created the B Register (B-Khata) to include such properties for tax collection only, not as proof of legality.

  
  

  Legal Standing: Not a valid ownership proof. Based on Section 108A of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976, inserted in 2009 to allow tax collection from such properties. The Karnataka High Court in 2014 (WP 3676/2008) declared B-Khata properties as not equal to legal properties and said B-Khata entries cannot be used for transfer/sale.

  
  

  Typical Reasons for B-Khata Entry:

  
  

  • Built on revenue land or unauthorised layouts

  • Lack of conversion certificates

  • Violation of building by-laws or zoning rules

    
    

  Limitations: Cannot get building plan approvals, loans, or registration as legal property. Can be regularized under AKRAMA-SAKRAMA (when applicable).

  
  

• 3. E-Khata

  
  

  Definition: An electronic version of the A-Khata introduced by BBMP and other local bodies for transparency and efficiency.

  
  

  Purpose: Digitized property records accessible online. Part of Digital India and e-Governance reforms.

  
  

  Applicable Under: Same legal provisions as A-Khata, i.e., valid only for fully regularised properties. Maintained under the Property Tax System Rules framed by local municipal corporations.

  
  

  Process: Citizens can apply through the BBMP Sahaaya portal or Karnataka Municipal Reforms portal (KHAJANE-II integration). Upload supporting documents and track status online.

  
  

• Regularisation of B-Khata Properties

  
  

  Through Akrama-Sakrama Scheme (when in force): Allows compounding of building by-law violations and conversion of land use by paying penalties. Currently stayed due to court cases and public interest litigation.

  
  

Nambike Nakshe Scheme

Simplification and digitization of the building plan approval process within the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) limits in Bengaluru. Aims to streamline the process of obtaining building permits, reduce bureaucratic hurdles, enhance transparency, and combat corruption in the construction sector.

Key Features:

• It allows property owners to obtain provisional building plan approvals from authorized architects or engineers, which can then be uploaded online for final approval by the BBMP.

• The scheme eliminates the need for multiple physical visits to BBMP offices, reduces paperwork, and promotes a faster, more transparent approval process.

• The scheme applies to residential constructions on plots measuring up to 50x80 feet (4,000 square feet), which covers most plots developed by the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) and the Karnataka Housing Board (KHB).

• It is applicable for buildings with up to four units or four floors, primarily targeting independent houses and smaller residential projects.

• The scheme operates across all eight zones of the BBMP.

  
  

Online and Automated Process:

• Property owners can obtain a provisional building plan approval from a registered architect or engineer, who conducts mandatory site inspections and verifies documents.

• The approved provisional plan is uploaded to the BBMP’s online portal for final approval.

• The BBMP’s software automatically shares uploaded documents with the Karnataka State Remote Sensing Applications Centre (KSRSAC) to ensure compliance with regulations concerning stormwater drains, lakes, heritage buildings, and railway boundaries.

• The system scrutinizes plans for adherence to zonal regulations and building bylaws, ensuring a standardized and transparent process.

• Fees for building plan approvals are paid online, further reducing the need for in-person interactions.

  
  

Trust-Based Mechanism:

• The scheme empowers registered architects and engineers to self-declare building plans, subject to verification, fostering a trust-based system.

• BBMP engineers conduct inspections at a later stage to ensure compliance with the approved plan, rather than requiring upfront bureaucratic approvals.

  
  

Govt. Eases SEZ Norms for Chip, Electronic Units and a New SEZ Approved for Karnataka

• Reduced Land Requirement - Minimum land needed for semiconductor and electronics SEZs cut from 50 hectares to 10 hectares. Makes it easier for smaller companies to set up units.

• Eased Land Encumbrance Rules - SEZ land no longer needs to be completely free of legal disputes or debts. Land mortgaged or leased to central/state governments or their agencies can now be used.

• Domestic Market Access: Earlier they could only Export. SEZ units can now supply products to the Domestic Tariff Area (within India) after paying applicable duties (Customs duties applicable on similar imports from other countries).

• Eligible Products - Covers semiconductors, display modules, camera modules, printed circuit boards, lithium-ion batteries, and IT hardware components like hearables and wearables.

• Aequs to develop an electronics SEZ in Dharwad, Karnataka (11.55 hectares, ₹100 crore investment).

• Micron to set up a semiconductor SEZ in Sanand, Gujarat (37.64 hectares, ₹13,000 crore investment).

• NOTE - Karnataka has 51 notified SEZs, out of which 31 are operational.

  
  

GS - II

Krishna River Water Disputes Tribunal (KWDT)

Background

• Formation: The Government of India (GoI) constituted a common tribunal on 10 April 1969 to adjudicate river water disputes among Krishna and Godavari river basin states under the Interstate River Water Disputes Act, 1956.

• Tribunal Composition: Chaired by Sri RS Bachawat, with Sri DM Bhandari and Sri DM Sen as members.

• Urgency: Maharashtra, Karnataka, and erstwhile Andhra Pradesh pushed for a quick verdict to facilitate irrigation projects in the Krishna basin.

• Proceedings: Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal (KWDT) proceedings prioritized, with the final verdict submitted on 27 May 1976.

  
  

Krishna River Overview

• Geographical Scope: Second largest river in peninsular India, originating near Mahabaleshwar, Maharashtra.

• Course:

  • Maharashtra: 303 km

  • North Karnataka: 480 km

  • Telangana and Andhra Pradesh: Remaining 1300 km, emptying into the Bay of Bengal.

• Basin Area: 257,000 km²

  • Maharashtra: 68,800 km² (26.8%)

  • Karnataka: 112,600 km² (43.8%)

  • Andhra Pradesh: 75,600 km² (29.4%)

• Key Infrastructure:

  • Ujjani (Bhima) Dam and reserv

  • oir.

  • Prakasam Barrage, Vijayawada: Last barrage, 80 km upstream from the sea.

    
    

KWDT I Award (1973)

• Overview: Bachawat Commission (KWDT I) finalized its award in 1973, published in the Extraordinary Gazette on 31 May 1976.

• Schemes:

  • Scheme A: Divided available waters based on 75% dependability (2060 TMC total).

  • Scheme B: Proposed sharing surplus waters but excluded from the final award due to legal constraints.

• Water Allocation (Scheme A):

  • Maharashtra: 560 TMC

  • Karnataka: 700 TMC

  • Telangana & Andhra Pradesh: 800 TMC

• Usage Flexibility:

  • States can use allocated water for any project.

  • Carryover storage allowed for deficit years when yield exceeds 2130 TMC.

  • Surplus Water: Erstwhile Andhra Pradesh permitted to use unallocated surplus water until a new tribunal apportions it.

• Karnataka Allocation: Total 734 TMC (including regeneration), with Upper Krishna Project allotted 173 TMC.

  
  

Review of KWDT I

• Provision: Award allowed review after 31 May 2000, but no review occurred for over three years.

• KWDT II Formation: Constituted in April 2004 following requests from all three states, proceedings began on 16 July 2007.

  
  

KWDT II Draft Award (31 December 2010)

• Basis: Allocation based on 65% dependability, using 47 years of flow records.

• Allocations:

  • Andhra Pradesh: 1001 TMC

  • Karnataka: 911 TMC

  • Maharashtra: 666 TMC

• Environmental Flows: 16 TMC allocated downstream of Prakasam Barrage for minimum environmental flows.

  
  

KWDT II Final Award (29 November 2013)

• Changes: Minor adjustments; Andhra Pradesh allocation increased by 4 TMC, Karnataka reduced accordingly.

• Environmental Flows: Reduced to 171 TMC (including 16 TMC minimum), down from 448 TMC, prioritizing beneficial use over environmental and salt export needs.

• Criticism: Disregarded long-term ecological and productivity needs, especially in tail-end areas.

  
  

Legal and Administrative Developments

• Supreme Court Intervention: On 15 September 2011, the Supreme Court directed GoI not to accept KWDT II’s final verdict until re-examined for compliance with the 1956 Act (amended 2002).

  
  

• Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014:

  • Extended KWDT II’s term from 1 August 2014 to address project-specific allocations and operational protocols for deficit flows.

  • Established Krishna River Management Board (KRMB) in Andhra Pradesh to:

    • Regulate water supply to successor states per tribunal awards.

    • Regulate power distribution.

    • Oversee ongoing/new water resource projects.

    • Appraise new project proposals to ensure compliance with tribunal awards.

  • KRMB notified as an autonomous body after a 7-year delay following Andhra Pradesh’s writ petition.

    
    

• Telangana’s Demands:

  • As the fourth riparian state, Telangana demands fresh tribunal proceedings, not being party to KWDT I or II.

  • Karnataka and Maharashtra oppose, arguing the extension is only for resolving Andhra Pradesh-Telangana disputes.

  • KWDT II limited redistribution to Telangana and Andhra Pradesh.

    
    

• Revised Terms (6 October 2023): Unallocated water from KWDT I to be distributed only between Telangana and Andhra Pradesh.

Upper Krishna Project Explained

Stage I (Phase I)

• Planned in the 1970s and substantially completed by the 1990s, Stage I aimed to use 119 TMCFT of water to irrigate ~4,250 km² (approx 10.5 lakh acres) on the left bank of the Krishna.

• It involved construction of the Narayanpur Dam (Basava Sagar reservoir) to full height and Almatti Dam (Lal Bahadur Shastri reservoir) to a partial level (up to 519 m FRL).

• Major canals were built on the left bank, including the Narayanpur Left Bank Canal (NLBC) and its branches (such as the Shahpur, Mudbal, Indi, and Jewargi branch canals) to carry water to arid fields.

• Stage I ultimately brought ~4.25 lakh hectares under irrigation, utilizing the bulk of Karnataka’s originally allotted Krishna waters.

  
  

Stage II (Phase II)

• Launched in the 1990s, Stage II was designed to use an additional 54 TMCFT of water to irrigate ~1,971 km² (4.87 lakh acres).

• This phase focused on the right bank of the Krishna and higher-elevation areas by implementing lift irrigation. It completed Almatti Dam to its Stage II height (519 m) and constructed the Narayanpur Right Bank Canal (NRBC) and Almatti Right Bank Canal (ARBC).

• Several lift irrigation schemes were introduced, notably the Rampur LIS, Mulwad LIS, Indi LIS, etc., to pump water to uplands.

• With Stage II, the UKP’s cumulative irrigation reached roughly 6,221 km², nearly achieving the originally intended 1.536 million acres of irrigated area.

• Stages I & II together utilized about 173 TMCFT of water – the volume earlier allocated to Karnataka by the first Krishna Water Tribunal in 1976.

  
  

Stage III (Phase III)

• The proposed third phase is meant to fully utilize Karnataka’s additional share of Krishna water granted by a second tribunal. UKP Stage III plans to use 130 TMCFT of water (awarded by the 2010 Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal-II ruling).

• Karnataka unveiled this phase in 2011 as a five-year plan to maximize water usage in the Krishna basin. Stage III involves raising the Almatti Dam’s Full Reservoir Level (FRL) to 524 m (from the current ~519 m), which will significantly increase storage.

• This expansion will submerge about 1 lakh acres of land and require relocation of roughly 30 villages in the upstream area.

• Stage III is expected to irrigate ~5.94 lakh hectares (≈5,940 km², including new areas in the drought-prone Kalyana Karnataka region) by extending existing canals and adding new lift schemes.

• Key components proposed under Stage III include new lift irrigation schemes at Mulwad, Chimmalagi, and Indi, extension of the Narayanpur Right Bank Canal (including a Bhima river diversion), and expansion of earlier schemes at Rampur, Mallabad, Koppal, Herakal, etc.

• Karnataka gave administrative approval to Stage III in 2012 (initial cost ~₹17,510 crore), but implementation was delayed pending tribunal clearance.

  
  

Dams and Reservoirs

• The UKP is anchored by two major reservoirs on the Krishna. The Almatti Dam (Lal Bahadur Shastri reservoir) is the upper storage dam, while the Narayanpur Dam (Basava Sagar reservoir) downstream regulates releases for canals.

• These dams together enable year-round irrigation. An auxiliary Hipparagi Barrage was also built upstream (in Belagavi district) with ~4.9 TMC live storage to divert water into the Ainapur and Halyal lift canals, irrigating an additional ~60,000 acres.

  
  

Inter-State Issues and Disputes

• Tribunal Allocations: Karnataka’s rights to utilize Krishna water for UKP are defined by tribunal awards. The first Krishna Water Dispute Tribunal (KWDT-I) headed by R. S. Bachawat (award of 1976) allocated a share of water to Karnataka, out of which 173 TMCFT was earmarked for the Upper Krishna Project. This allowed Karnataka to proceed with UKP Stage I and II. Later, the second KWDT (KWDT-II, 2010 chaired by Justice Brijesh Kumar) awarded additional water to the states. It increased Karnataka’s share, permitting an extra 130 TMCFT for UKP Stage III (part of a total 173 TMCFT new allotment to Karnataka). However, this 2010 award has not been fully implemented, because it required formal notification by the central government and also got entangled in legal disputes after Andhra Pradesh was bifurcated.

• Telangana and AP’s Objections: The formation of Telangana (2014) created a new stakeholder in Krishna waters, leading to fresh disputes. Both Andhra Pradesh and Telangana have expressed concerns that Karnataka’s full use of 130 TMC in Stage III could reduce water available to them, especially in dry years. Downstream states historically opposed Karnataka raising the Almatti Dam to maximum height, fearing it would give Karnataka greater control over Krishna’s flow. In fact, the Almatti height issue was litigated in the 1990s and 2000s – interim arrangements capped the dam height until tribunal resolution. While KWDT-II eventually allowed Almatti’s FRL 524 m (with Karnataka ensuring downstream flow releases), Telangana and AP have sought to revisit parts of the allocation in light of Telangana’s creation. They demanded that the post-2014 Krishna water sharing be re-adjudicated. This led the Centre to extend the tribunal’s terms: as of 2023, KWDT-II was considering distribution between Telangana and AP without altering upstream states’ shares.

• Pending Notification: A major sticking point is that the 2010 KWDT-II award (finalized with a “Further Report” in 2013) has not been published in the official Gazette by the Union Government. Without this notification, Karnataka’s enhanced water rights (and projects like UKP Stage III) lack full legal backing. Karnataka has repeatedly demanded the Centre gazette the tribunal verdict, which includes permission to raise Almatti Dam and utilize the 130 TMC. The Union Government hesitated, largely due to objections from AP/Telangana and the ongoing tribunal reconsideration under the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014. In 2019, Karnataka’s CM even personally appealed to the Prime Minister for an early notification of the award and national-project status for UKP-III. By 2025, Karnataka leaders (across parties) were publicly critical that no notification had been issued to raise Almatti’s height despite a tribunal decision in their favor. This has become a political issue, with Karnataka accusing the Centre of stalling a vital state project.

  
  

GS - III

BioWISE Initiative

Launched by Biocon Foundation in collaboration with the National Centre for Biological Sciences (NCBS) and the Bengaluru Science and Technology (BeST) Cluster, is a program aimed at empowering disadvantaged female science students from tier 2 and 3 universities across Karnataka, India, to build careers in life sciences.

It targets 15 postgraduate and 10 undergraduate students from underserved communities, providing scholarships, extended internships (six months for PG students, three months for UG students), and mentorship.

Participants gain hands-on experience through lab visits, bio-incubation centre tours, soft skills training, and continuous mentor-mentee sessions with experts from Biocon Biologics, NCBS, and other partner institutions.

Biocon Foundation funds the initiative, with academic mentoring from NCBS and program design and management support from BeST Cluster.

BAMUL to Supply Milk in Biodegradable Packets

This is first in India.

Pilot - BAMUL has been supplying 120 such packets of milk everyday to Hunsenahalli near Kanakapura since June 5.

What is Biodegradable Plastic and How It is Made?

They are designed to undergo decomposition by the action of living organisms (primarily microbes), transforming into water, carbon dioxide (or methane in anaerobic conditions), and biomass.

Conventional plastic is made up of polyethylene, polypropylene, etc.

Biodegradable plastic is made up of Poly Lactic Acid (PLA), Poly Hydroxy Alkanoates (PHAs), Polybutylene Succinate (PBS) & Polybutylene Adipate-Terephthalate (PBAT).

Raw Materials:

• PLA - Fermentation of plant sugars (e.g., corn, sugarcane).

• PHAs - Microbial fermentation of organic substrates (e.g., vegetable oils, whey).

• Polybutylene Succinate (PBS) & Polybutylene Adipate-Terephthalate (PBAT) - Chemical synthesis from petroleum-derived monomers, but structurally designed for biodegradation.

Plastic Ban at Muzrai Temples (State-Run Temples) from Aug 15

Only in State Run Temples in Karnataka.

Attur Lake

Near Yelahanka new town.

Locals have turned the outer perimeter into a dumping ground. Heaps of garbage pile up daily, and the BBMP does not clean the spot consistently.

Adding to the problem is a drainage pipe discharging directly into the lake - This has turned the water into sickly greyish black.

Yettinahole Project

Union Environment Ministry accuses Karnataka of violating forest laws and damaging forests for Yettinahole Project.

It is a Drinking water project, NOT an irrigation project. Target areas include Kolar, Chickballapur, Bengaluru Rural, Ramanagara, Tumakuru, Hassan, and Chikkamagaluru districts. It plans to fill around 527 existing tanks in these regions (to serve as local storage and groundwater recharge).

The Yettinahole project aims to divert 24.01 tmcft (thousand million cubic feet) of water from four west-flowing tributaries of the Netravati River – Yettinahole, Kadumanehole, Kerihole, and Hongadahalla in the Western Ghats.

It is designed to lift this monsoonal water upstream in Sakleshpur (Hassan district) and route it eastwards to supply water to drought-prone districts in Karnataka.

It is an inter-basin transfer project - to transfer water from Netravati basin to Kaveri basin.

The project involves constructing eight small dams (weirs) in the forested hills.

Power requirements are enormous – the project will need around 370 MW of electricity for pumping water over the Ghats to the ridge and onward.

In Stage-1 (Western Ghats portion), water is pumped ~132 km to Vani Vilas Sagar reservoir (Chitradurga). Stage-2 (ongoing) will pump it another ~140 km towards Tumakuru and beyond.

Critical Analysis of the Project:

• Deforestation and Wildlife: The project required massive forest clearance in the Western Ghats. Officially, about 274.35 acres of forest diversion was sought for laying pipelines and other works (Deccan Herald). However, a recent environmental compliance report (2025) found major violations – 107.97 ha (~267 acres) of forest land in Hassan were used without adhering to all conditions.

• Hydrological & Biodiversity Concerns: Diverting 24 TMC of water from the Netravati tributaries could significantly alter downstream river ecology. Studies estimate the fresh water reaching the Arabian Sea at Mangalore would drop by ~30% if the project fully operates. This reduction in flow can increase estuarine salinity, affecting fisheries and livelihoods in coastal Dakshina Kannada. Aquatic habitats upstream will also be impacted – any variation in natural flow can disrupt breeding of fish and other biota.

• 24 TMC is Not Available: Field data indicate only ~9.5 TMC of water is actually available for diversion in these catchments during a normal monsoon.

• No Environmental Clearance (EIA): A major controversy is that Yettinahole bypassed the standard Environmental Impact Assessment process. The Ministry of Environment (MoEF&CC) in 2013-14 agreed with Karnataka’s claim that since it is a “drinking water supply scheme”, it does not attract EIA notification requirements.

• Western Ghats Impacts and Legal Action: Environmental groups have persistently raised legal challenges. Multiple petitions were filed in the National Green Tribunal (NGT) arguing that Yettinahole would ravage the Western Ghats (a UNESCO biodiversity hotspot).

• 
  

Bengaluru-Based SELCO Poised for a Hat-Trick of Green Oscars: Ashden Awards

SELCO Solar Private Limited is one of the finalists for 2025 award.

If it wins, then it will be its 3rd Ashden Award.

Only four such awards will be presented globally every year, and just two are reserved for organisations from the Global South.

Why SELCO?:

• Installed more than 24,000 decentralised solar systems for women-led micro-enterprises in agriculture, animal husbandry and food processing;

• Powered digital classrooms for over half a million rural students;

• Strengthened last-mile healthcare delivery for more than six million patients.

• 
  

Karnataka Seeks Rs 500-cr Central Funding for Proton Therapy in Kidwai Institute

What is Proton Therapy for Cancer?

An external-beam radiation treatment that uses positively-charged protons instead of X-rays/γ (gamma)-rays.

Unlike conventional radiotherapy, which uses high-energy gamma rays or X-rays — often impacting healthy tissues beyond the tumour — proton therapy delivers precise, targeted doses with significantly reduced collateral damage.

If approved, then it would be country’s first government-run proton therapy facility.

Karnataka Launches State’s Kusum-C Solar Substation

At Gauribidanur in Chikkaballapur district.

Capacity - 20 MW

It is largest solar installation under Kusum-C scheme in the state to date.

The Kusum-C scheme aims to provide farmers with reliable daytime electricity by installing solar electricity generating units near agricultural electricity feeders.

Under the scheme, the Central govt provides a subsidy of 1.05 crore for generating one MW of solar power.

In the first phase of KUSUM-C, Karnataka aims to generate 2,400 MW through solarization of agricultural feeders.

What is KUSUM Scheme?

Pradhan Mantri Kisan Urja Suraksha evam Utthaan Mahabhiyan (PM-KUSUM) Scheme

Launched - 2019

Ministry of New and Renewable Energy

To promote solar energy in agriculture, enhance farmers' income (Through solar power generation on their fields), and reduce dependency on diesel for irrigation.

The scheme targets adding 34,800 MW of solar capacity by March 2026.

Components of KUSUM

• Component A - Income Enhancement: Enable farmers to generate additional income by selling surplus solar power to the grid. Setting up 10,000 MW of decentralized grid-connected solar or renewable energy power plants (500 kW to 2 MW) on barren, fallow, or cultivable land (using stilts to allow farming underneath). Farmers, cooperatives, panchayats, or Farmer Producer Organisations (FPOs) can participate. Power generated is purchased by DISCOMs at a pre-fixed tariff.

• Component B - Provide farmers with reliable, renewable energy for irrigation. Installation of 14 lakh standalone (Not connected to the Grid) solar agriculture pumps (up to 7.5 HP) for off-grid irrigation. Farmers receive a 60% subsidy (30% central, 30% state), 30% as a loan, and pay only 10% of the cost.

• Component C - De-dieselisation: Replace diesel-powered pumps with solar-powered systems. Solarisation of 35 lakh existing grid-connected agriculture pumps (up to 7.5 HP), including feeder-level solarisation. Farmers can use solar power for irrigation and sell excess to DISCOMs.

  
  

Key Features of KUSUM Scheme:

• Subsidy Structure: Farmers bear only 10% of the cost for solar pumps or plants, with 60% subsidized and 30% covered by loans. In regions like North Eastern states, Jammu & Kashmir, and others, subsidies are higher (up to 50%).

• Eligibility: Individual farmers, groups, cooperatives, panchayats, FPOs, and Water User Associations can apply. No specific minimum land requirement exists.

• Income Generation: Farmers can sell surplus power to DISCOMs, providing a stable income source for 25 years, especially by utilizing barren land.

• Implementation: Requires consensus between central and state governments. States must ensure attractive tariff rates and coordination with DISCOMs.

• Modernization: Encourages drip irrigation alongside solar adoption to save water and enhance crop output.

  
  

Status of Implementation of KUSUM Scheme in Karnataka:

Currently, the KUSUM-B scheme (solar-powered agricultural pump sets) and the KUSUM-C scheme (solarisation of agricultural feeders) have been implemented while the A scheme - designed to promote local generation and consumption of solar power, particularly among farmers and rural communities - is yet to begin.

Meaning, Karnataka has not implemented Component A yet. They are in talks with central govt for this.

GS - IV

Notes on Communication Issues Contributing to the Bengaluru RCB Victory Celebration Tragedy (For UPSC Ethics Paper)

The tragic incident during the Royal Challengers Bengaluru (RCB) victory celebration at Chinnaswamy Stadium in June 2025, which resulted in 11 deaths and numerous injuries, highlights critical lapses in communication that exacerbated the situation. Below is an analysis of the communication-related issues, focusing on ethical dimensions such as responsibility, transparency, and public safety, without political references or names, as requested.

• 1. Lack of Clear and Timely Communication

  
  

  Issue: Conflicting messages about the event's logistics, particularly regarding the victory parade and entry protocols, created confusion among the large crowd of fans. Initial announcements suggested an open-bus parade, but subsequent clarifications indicated it was canceled, which was not effectively communicated to the public.

  
  

  Ethical Implication: Event organizers and authorities have a moral duty to ensure clear, consistent, and timely dissemination of information to prevent chaos. The failure to provide unified messaging violated the principle of transparency, leading to public mistrust and unsafe behavior.

  
  

  Impact: Fans gathered in large numbers expecting a parade, unaware of its cancellation, resulting in overcrowding and a stampede-like situation at the stadium gates.

  
  

• 2. Miscommunication Between Stakeholders

  
  

  Issue: There was a lack of coordination among event organizers, local authorities, and security personnel. Reports indicate that security agencies advised postponing the event due to logistical challenges, but these concerns were either ignored or not adequately conveyed to decision-makers.

  
  

  Ethical Implication: Ethical governance requires collaboration and respect for expert advice, especially when public safety is at stake. Disregarding security recommendations reflects a lack of accountability and prioritizing celebratory optics over human lives.

  
  

  Impact: The absence of a unified plan led to inadequate crowd control measures, overwhelming the limited infrastructure and personnel at the venue.

  
  

• 3. Poor Communication of Entry Protocols

  
  

  Issue: Ambiguity surrounding entry passes, including rumors of free tickets being distributed at specific gates, triggered a rush among fans. The stadium’s limited capacity (approximately 35,000) was insufficient for the estimated 2-3 lakh attendees, and unclear instructions about ticketing exacerbated the situation.

  
  

  Ethical Implication: Public safety demands precise communication of rules and limitations to manage expectations and prevent panic. Failing to clarify entry procedures violated the principle of beneficence, as it directly contributed to the hazardous conditions.

  
  

  Impact: Fans, unaware of restricted access, pushed against barricades and gates, leading to a deadly crush when entry was partially allowed.

  
  

• 4. Inadequate Real-Time Communication During the Crisis

  
  

  Issue: As the situation escalated, there was a delay in communicating the unfolding tragedy to both the crowd and the event organizers inside the stadium. This delayed the suspension of celebrations and the deployment of emergency services.

  
  

  Ethical Implication: Ethical crisis management requires swift and transparent communication to mitigate harm. The failure to promptly inform stakeholders and the public about the crisis reflects a lack of situational awareness and responsibility.

  
  

  Impact: The continuation of celebrations, even briefly, while chaos unfolded outside, deepened public distress and hindered immediate rescue efforts.

  
  

• 5. Over-Reliance on Social Media Without Follow-Up

  
  

  Issue: Social media announcements about the event, including parade plans and ticketing, generated massive excitement but lacked follow-up clarifications when plans changed. Deleted posts or unaddressed cancellations added to the confusion.

  
  

  Ethical Implication: Using social media as a primary communication channel carries the ethical responsibility to ensure accuracy and consistency. Neglecting to update or correct misinformation undermines public trust and safety.

  
  

  Impact: Fans relied on outdated or unverified information, leading to an uncontrolled influx of people to the stadium and surrounding areas.

  
  

• 6. Lessons for Ethical Communication in Public Events

  
  

  • Clarity and Consistency: Authorities and organizers must ensure all communications are clear, consistent, and accessible across multiple channels to avoid confusion.

  • Stakeholder Coordination: Ethical event management requires seamless coordination among all involved parties, respecting expert inputs to prioritize safety.

  • Proactive Crisis Communication: Real-time updates during emergencies can prevent escalation and enable swift response measures.

  • Public-Centric Approach: Communication strategies should prioritize public welfare, ensuring that information empowers individuals to make safe decisions.

  • Accountability for Miscommunication: Ethical responsibility includes acknowledging and rectifying communication failures to restore trust and prevent future incidents.