UPSC Mains Current Affairs for 27 September 2026

Western Ghats ESA: Why Karnataka Opposes the Kasturirangan Report

September 27, 2026

Understanding Karnataka's Objection to the Western Ghats ESA

Western Ghats ESA Latest News

Recently, the Karnataka Legislature unanimously passed a resolution rejecting the K. Kasturirangan Committee report on the Western Ghats in its current form.
This came in response to the seventh draft, published in July 2026, by the Ministry of Environment, Ecology and Climate Change, proposing to declare parts of the Western Ghats as an Ecologically Sensitive Area (ESA). The draft gave states a 60-day window to file objections.
This marks the seventh time Karnataka has rejected the draft since it was first published in 2014.
Successive governments have acknowledged the ecological importance of the Western Ghats but have repeatedly flagged the ESA's impact on lives and livelihoods.
Of the six Western Ghats states, Karnataka has the largest area proposed for ESA notification, spread across 10 districts.

Background: Kasturirangan Report

Space scientist K. Kasturirangan chaired the High Level Working Group (HLWG), tasked with reviewing the earlier Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel (WGEEP) report by Prof. Madhav Gadgil.
- WGEEP (Gadgil Committee): Submitted its report in 2011.
It was also tasked to recommend fresh protective measures for the Western Ghats — recognised by UNESCO as one of the world's ecological hotspots.
Set up in 2012, HLWG submitted recommendations in 2013. Of the 1.64 lakh sq. km Western Ghats area, the Kasturirangan Committee recommended declaring 59,940 sq. km — covering 4,156 villages across six states — as ESA.

How Much Area Is Involved, State-Wise

The committee identified natural landscape covering about 41% of the Western Ghats, of which 37% (≈59,940 sq. km) was biologically rich, with low fragmentation, low population density, and containing protected areas, World Heritage Sites, and tiger/elephant corridors.
[my_image src="https://vajiramias.sgp1.cdn.digitaloceanspaces.com/wp/current-affairs/2026/09/27085753/Original-State-wise-area.jpg?v=1790479672" size="full" align="none" width="auto" height="308px" alt="" title="Original State-wise area"]

Current Status

The area proposed for notification has reduced to 56,825 sq. km, mainly because Kerala conducted a ground survey and brought its area down to 9,993 sq. km.
Meanwhile, the number of villages has increased in Maharashtra and Goa, but decreased in Karnataka.
The latest draft covers 4,402 villages in total. Final area demarcation depends on state government recommendations, stakeholder views, and the ESA Expert Committee.

Key Recommendations of the Report

The Kasturirangan Committee proposes a mix of outright bans and regulated activities:
Banned entirely:
- Mining, quarrying, and sand extraction
- Setting up red-category industries
- Thermal power plants
- Construction of buildings beyond 20,000 sq. metres
- Township and area development projects
Regulated (not banned):
- Infrastructure and development projects — subject to environmental clearances
- Hydroelectricity projects — allowed with conditions
- Any project within 10 km of the ESA requiring clearance — regulated under the EIA Notification, 2006
The report also recommends financial incentives for "Green Growth" in the region and a decision-support and monitoring centre.

Kasturirangan vs Gadgil: The Key Difference

[my_image src="https://vajiramias.sgp1.cdn.digitaloceanspaces.com/wp/current-affairs/2026/09/27085722/Kasturirangan-vs-Gadgil.jpg?v=1790479641" size="full" align="none" width="auto" height="244px" alt="" title="Kasturirangan vs Gadgil"]
The Gadgil approach was broader and more stringent; the Kasturirangan approach is narrower but still contentious in the areas it does cover.

Karnataka's Specific Objections

Scope should be narrower: ESA should cover only notified forest areas and other forest areas — not plantations, agriculture/horticulture fields, or residential and public areas.
Methodology flaw: Areas were demarcated using satellite data, not a joint physical survey.
Land classification gap: No accurate bifurcation exists between revenue and forest land.
No livelihood alternatives: The draft provides no reference to alternative livelihood arrangements for affected people.
Unaddressed legal categories: Issues like Bagair Hukum (unauthorised cultivation claims), forest rights, deemed forest status, land grants, and pending legal appeals need examination.
Village-level objection: Karnataka opposes including entire villages under ESA merely because one-fifth of the village area might be forest.

Karnataka's Way Forward

Both Houses of the Karnataka Legislature have:
- Sought one year to conduct a physical survey of the area.
- Demanded that Karnataka's portion of the ESA not be finalised until this survey is complete.
- Announced a high-level committee headed by a retired judge, comprising all stakeholders, to review the report's shortcomings and recommend modifications.
Cutting across party lines, legislators have urged the government to follow the "Keralam model" — where physical verification was conducted on the ground and submitted to the Centre, resulting in a reduced ESA footprint for that state.

Source: TH

Western Ghats ESA FAQs

Q1: Why is Karnataka opposing the Western Ghats ESA proposal?

Ans: Karnataka opposes the Western Ghats ESA proposal over concerns about its scope, methodology, land classification, livelihood impacts and inclusion of entire villages.

Q2: What is the Kasturirangan Committee's recommendation for the Western Ghats ESA?

Ans: The Kasturirangan Committee recommended declaring about 59,940 square kilometres across six states as an Ecologically Sensitive Area.

Q3: What activities would be banned under the Western Ghats ESA proposal?

Ans: The Western Ghats ESA proposal would prohibit mining, quarrying, sand extraction, red-category industries, thermal power plants and large construction projects.

Q4: What is Karnataka's main methodological objection to the Western Ghats ESA?

Ans: Karnataka argues that ESA boundaries were identified using satellite data rather than a joint physical survey, creating concerns about accurate land classification.

Q5: What alternative has Karnataka proposed for the Western Ghats ESA?

Ans: Karnataka has sought one year for a physical survey and wants its ESA area finalised only after verification and stakeholder review.

Captive Power Plants (CPPs) – Maximising Power Generation Amid Unusual Demand Surge

September 27, 2026

Captive Power Plants (CPPs) Latest News

Amid an unusual surge in electricity demand in September 2026, the Centre has invoked emergency provisions under Section 11 of the Electricity Act 2003.
It directs around 112 coal-based captive power plants (CPPs) to operate at maximum available capacity from October 1 to December 31, 2026.
The move aims to maximise electricity generation, ensure adequate power availability and address the possibility of sustained high demand beyond the usual summer peak.

Electricity Demand

Unprecedented surge:
- Record peak demand: On September 10, 2026, India's peak electricity demand reached 269 GW, the highest ever recorded for September.
- Near-summer levels: The demand was close to the year's highest peak of 270 GW, recorded in May 2026.
- Unusual trend: Electricity demand generally declines after the summer months (April–July). However, demand has remained exceptionally high this September.
Factors behind the demand surge:
- According to power sector experts, the unusually high electricity demand is attributable to -
  - Persistent heat: Continued high temperatures have increased electricity consumption for cooling.
  - Deficient rainfall: Inadequate rainfall has contributed to higher demand for electricity.
  - Increased irrigation demand: Greater dependence on electric pumps for irrigation has added to the demand.
  - El Niño: Weather conditions associated with El Niño have potentially intensified heat and rainfall irregularities.
- September has recorded the year's highest peak demand only twice in recent years—in 2020–21 and 2023–24.

Emergency Directions to CPPs

Section 11 of the Electricity Act empowers the government to require generating companies to operate in extraordinary circumstances to ensure electricity supply.
The directive covers all coal-based captive power plants with an installed capacity of 50 MW or more.
Key provisions:
- Maximum generation: Captive power plants must operate at the maximum level of their available capacity.
- Surplus power supply: After meeting their own electricity requirements, plants must offer surplus electricity through power exchanges, in accordance with applicable regulations.
- Adequate coal stocks: Generators must maintain sufficient coal reserves to ensure uninterrupted operations and maximise electricity generation.
- Weekly reporting: Plants must submit weekly reports to the Central Electricity Authority (CEA), detailing electricity generation, captive consumption, surplus power sales, available capacity and coal stocks.
What are CPPs?
- These are electricity-generation facilities established and operated by industrial enterprises or groups of industries primarily to meet their own electricity requirements.
- Unlike conventional power plants, their primary purpose is not to supply electricity to the public grid.
- However, they can contribute to grid stability by supplying surplus electricity when required.

Other Measures

Extension of emergency provisions:
- The Ministry of Power has separately extended the emergency mechanism for Coastal Gujarat Power Ltd (CGPL), Tata Power's 4-GW imported coal-based power plant, until December 31, 2026.
- The plant has been operating under Section 11 directions since March 2026.
- Before March, it had remained largely idle for nearly six months because of high imported coal prices and the absence of a viable power purchase arrangement.
- The extension was limited to Tata Power's plant because other imported coal-based power plants were operational and were not facing similar difficulties.
Tariff determination:
- Invoking Section 11 for high-cost power plants can create financial challenges because imported coal and gas-based electricity are often more expensive than conventional domestic coal-based power.
- To address this, a committee chaired by the Chairman of the Central Electricity Authority (CEA) determines the tariff for electricity procured from such plants.
- The committee considers relevant input costs, including fuel expenses, while determining the procurement tariff.
- Tariff-related measures have been used to protect consumers from sudden increases in electricity prices.

Significance of the Government’s Intervention

Ensuring energy security: Mobilising captive power generation can help bridge the gap between electricity demand and available supply.
Improving grid reliability: Additional electricity from captive plants can strengthen the availability of power during periods of unusually high demand.
Efficient utilisation of generating capacity: Requiring plants to operate at maximum available capacity can help utilise existing infrastructure.
Supporting industrial and agricultural demand: Increased electricity availability can help meet the requirements of industries, households and irrigation.
Reducing supply disruptions: Mobilising surplus power through exchanges can provide additional electricity to the grid when required.

Conclusion

The Centre's decision to invoke Section 11 reflects the challenges posed by increasingly unpredictable electricity demand.
The unusual September demand surge highlights the importance of maintaining adequate generation capacity, fuel reserves and flexible power procurement mechanisms.
In the longer term, improving demand forecasting, diversifying energy sources and strengthening grid infrastructure will be essential for ensuring reliable and affordable electricity supply.

Source: IE

Captive Power Plants (CPPs) FAQs

Q1: What is Section 11 of the Electricity Act, 2003?

Ans: Under Section 11, the government directs power plants to maximise electricity generation during extraordinary circumstances.

Q2: What is the primary purpose of captive power plants?

Ans: They primarily meet industrial electricity requirements and can supply surplus power to the grid through power exchanges.

Q3: What factors contributed to India's unusually high electricity demand in September 2026?

Ans: Persistent heat, deficient rainfall, increased irrigation demand and weather conditions associated with El Niño.

Q4: Why did the Centre extend emergency provisions for Tata Power's Coastal Gujarat Power Ltd (CGPL)?

Ans: To ensure the continued operation of its 4-GW imported coal-based plant and maintain electricity availability.

Q5: What measures should India adopt to ensure reliable, affordable and sustainable electricity supply?

Ans: India should strengthen demand forecasting, diversify its energy mix, promote renewable energy and energy storage.

Enemy State Clause: Why Japan Wants the UN Charter Provision Removed

September 27, 2026

The Enemy State Clause - A Postwar Relic Back in the Spotlight

Enemy State Clause Latest News

In her first-ever address to the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), Japan's Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi called on the UN to remove references to "enemy states" in its Charter.
The label has recently been used by China and Russia to attack Japan's plans to raise defence spending.

About Enemy State Clause

World War II (1939–45) was fought between the Allied Powers (Great Britain, the Soviet Union, the United States) and the Axis Powers (Germany, Italy, Japan).
Japan was the last Axis power to surrender, in September 1945.
The UN Charter, drafted toward the war's end and in force from October 24, 1945, contains numerous references to "enemy states."
The Allies — who drafted the Charter and later took permanent UN Security Council (UNSC) seats — designed it as a mechanism to counter any re-emergence of militarism or fascism in the defeated Axis powers, without needing UNSC approval each time.
In other words, the UN Charter's "enemy state" clauses (Articles 53, 77, 107) let Allied powers take military or preventive action against defeated WWII Axis nations without needing prior UNSC authorization.

Where it Appears

The term features in three Articles: 53, 77, and 107.
Article 53: Permits enforcement action against an "enemy state" through regional arrangements without prior Security Council authorisation — an exception to the normal rule requiring UNSC approval for such action.
- Paragraph 2 defines enemy state as any state that was an enemy of a Charter signatory during World War II.
Article 107: States that nothing in the Charter invalidates or blocks action taken against a WWII enemy state by the governments responsible for such action as a result of that war.
- In effect, it gives the Allied Powers a legal right to act against defeated Axis states without UNSC approval.
Article 77(1)(b): Concerns the "trusteeship system" applied to territories detached from enemy states after WWII.
- Under the Charter, the UN was to establish an international trusteeship system (Article 75) for "trust territories" — places whose peoples had not yet attained full self-government (Article 73).
- There were 11 such territories, across Africa and the Pacific Islands.

Why Japan Wants It Removed

The UNGA recognised the clauses as obsolete in 1995.
A resolution in 2005 called for deleting enemy state references from the Charter.
Japan’s call to remove this cluse is being framed within a wider appeal for UN and UNSC reform, which she called "a matter of utmost importance.

The Geopolitical Backdrop

Japanese PM’s remarks come amid rising hostility with China and Russia, both exerting economic and military pressure on Japan.
With China: China has restricted access to rare earth magnets needed by Japanese manufacturers.
- Chinese fighter aircraft and warships have conducted military drills near the Japanese coast.
With Russia: Russia has conducted military exercises near Japan and criticised Japan's plans to raise defence spending.
- In August 2026, Russian President visited the disputed southern Kuril Islands. This led to strong protest by Japan.

How The Clause is Used Against Japan Diplomatically

China argues the clauses safeguard the postwar international order.
Russia argues the clauses invalidate Japan's territorial claims over the southern Kuril Islands.

Why Nothing Has Changed

Amending the Charter requires approval from all five permanent UNSC members, not just a General Assembly vote.
As experts explained, each P5 member must ratify the change domestically, not merely vote for it.
Analysts pointed to a specific factor too: Japan continues to host US troops on its soil, which may fuel Chinese and Russian reservations about removing the clause.
They add that the Big Five may fear that revising Charter language could open the door to broader demands — such as reforming UNSC composition itself — which would dilute their influence.

Conclusion

The "enemy state" clause is legally dormant but diplomatically alive — a rhetorical weapon precisely because it was never formally deleted.
Its survival for over eight decades reveals less about Japan's past than about the durability of the postwar order the Big Five still control.
Real removal would require the P5 to loosen a grip they show little sign of releasing.

Source: IE | TI

Enemy State Clause FAQs

Q1: What is the Enemy State Clause in the UN Charter?

Ans: The Enemy State Clause refers to provisions allowing certain actions against states that were enemies of Charter signatories during World War II.

Q2: Which UN Charter articles contain the Enemy State Clause?

Ans: The Enemy State Clause appears in Articles 53, 77 and 107, dealing respectively with enforcement action, trusteeship territories and wartime actions.

Q3: Why does Japan want the Enemy State Clause removed?

Ans: Japan wants the Enemy State Clause removed because the UN General Assembly has recognised it as obsolete, while China and Russia still invoke it diplomatically.

Q4: How has the Enemy State Clause been used against Japan?

Ans: China cites the clauses while Russia invokes them in discussions concerning Japan's territorial claims over the southern Kuril Islands.

Q5: Why has the Enemy State Clause not been removed?

Ans: Removing the Enemy State Clause requires approval and domestic ratification by all five permanent Security Council members, making Charter amendment difficult.

ECINET and Electoral Roll Revision – Explained

September 27, 2026

Electoral Roll Revision Latest News

The Election Commission has announced a review of ECINET and introduced procedural changes for voters flagged during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

ECINET: Digital Infrastructure for Electoral Administration

ECINET is the Election Commission's centralised digital platform used for various electoral processes and administrative functions.
The platform provides role-based access to field officers according to their statutory responsibilities and is intended to support the flow of electoral information between different levels of election administration.
The recent review is significant because electoral processes increasingly depend on digital systems for data management, voter enrolment, verification and communication.
The Election Commission has constituted a committee headed by a Senior Deputy Election Commissioner, with an independent expert from an IIT/IIIT, to examine whether ECINET complies with relevant Acts and Rules.
The Commission has also stated that further flexibility required by field officers will be incorporated where necessary. Future initiatives involving IT modules and portals are to be discussed by the Committee of Officers (COO) before approval.

Special Intensive Revision of Electoral Rolls

A Special Intensive Revision is a detailed exercise for reviewing and updating electoral rolls.
During the ongoing exercise, some electors have received notices based on categories described by the Election Commission as “unmapped” or involving “logical discrepancies.”
Unmapped Electors
- These are electors whose names did not appear in the rolls of the previous intensive revision and who were unable to provide the names of their parents or grandparents from that earlier revision.
Logical Discrepancies
- These refer to discrepancies identified by the Election Commission's centralised software, following which additional documentary evidence may be sought from the elector.

Changes in Hearing Procedure

The Election Commission has introduced a significant procedural relaxation for electors receiving such notices.
Under the revised arrangement:
- Booth Level Officers (BLOs) will visit the elector's residence to collect required documents.
- The documents will be uploaded on ECINET for consideration by the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO).
- The elector will generally not be required to appear personally before the ERO or Assistant Electoral Registration Officer (AERO).
- A hearing may be conducted in exceptional circumstances, preferably online.
- An adult family member may be authorised to attend the hearing on behalf of the elector.
This approach seeks to reduce the administrative burden on electors while retaining a mechanism for verification.

Form 6 and Voter Enrolment

Form 6 is the statutory form used for new voter enrolment under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.
During the SIR exercise, an additional declaration was incorporated into the online version of Form 6 concerning whether the applicant, parents or grandparents appeared in the rolls of the previous intensive revision.
The Election Commission has now clarified that Form 6 will revert to its original statutory format after the SIR.
For the SIR period, the Commission stated that the additional declaration has been upheld by the Supreme Court; outside the SIR exercise, the forms prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 will apply.

Institutional Processes Within the ECI

The recent meeting also addressed certain internal administrative procedures. The Commission stated that:
- Agendas for Commission meetings will be circulated in advance.
- Minutes of meetings will be issued.
- Annual Performance Appraisal Reports of officers will be completed within the stipulated period.
- Foreign travel of officers will require Commission approval.
- Directions issued by Election Commissioners to officers will be complied with.
These measures relate to institutional procedure, administrative accountability and coordination within a constitutional body.

Technology and Electoral Governance

The ECINET review highlights a broader issue in contemporary electoral administration: the need to balance digital efficiency with statutory safeguards.
Centralised platforms can improve data management, standardise processes and facilitate faster decision-making.
However, because electoral rolls directly determine eligibility to participate in elections, digital systems must operate within clearly defined legal authority, access controls, verification procedures and accountability mechanisms.
The inclusion of an independent technical expert in the ECINET review reflects the need for both legal and technological scrutiny of electoral systems.

Source : IE

Electoral Roll Revision FAQs

Q1: What is ECINET?

Ans: ECINET is the Election Commission's centralised digital platform used to support various electoral and administrative processes.

Q2: What is Special Intensive Revision (SIR)?

Ans: SIR is a detailed exercise undertaken to review and update electoral rolls through verification of electors and electoral information.

Q3: Who are “unmapped” electors?

Ans: They are electors whose names did not appear in the rolls of the previous intensive revision and who could not provide relevant parental or grandparental details from that revision.

Q4: What is Form 6?

Ans: Form 6 is the statutory application form used for new voter enrolment under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.

Q5: Why is ECINET being reviewed?

Ans: The Election Commission has constituted a committee to verify whether ECINET's functioning complies with the relevant Acts and Rules and to examine its operational requirements.