Why in news?

SEBI’s High-Level Committee has recommended major reforms to strengthen its conflict-of-interest and disclosure framework.

Key proposals include a multi-tier disclosure system requiring senior officials—from the chairman to chief general managers—to publicly declare their assets and liabilities. The committee also suggested investment restrictions, structured recusal norms, and a stronger whistle-blower mechanism to protect investors and ensure fair market functioning.

The reforms gain importance as the committee was formed after allegations of conflict of interest against former SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch. The expert panel reviewed existing rules and proposed measures to enhance transparency, accountability, and ethical governance within SEBI.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Background: The Formation of SEBI Committee
• Mandatory Public Disclosure for SEBI’s Senior Officials
• Uniform Investment and Trading Restrictions for Senior Officials
• Broader “Family” Definition to Strengthen Conflict-of-Interest Checks
• Other Key Proposals

Background: The Formation of SEBI Committee

• SEBI set up the High-Level Committee (HLC) in March after allegations by Hindenburg Research against former SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch.
• The short seller claimed that Buch and her husband had undisclosed stakes in offshore funds linked to the Adani Group and involved in an alleged money-siphoning scheme — allegations denied by both the Buchs and the Adani Group.
• The committee was tasked with reviewing SEBI’s conflict-of-interest and disclosure framework, assessing its adequacy, and recommending reforms to strengthen transparency, accountability, and ethical standards.
• The committee was chaired by Pratyush Sinha, former Chief Vigilance Commissioner and retired IAS officer. Its members included several eminent former regulators and industry leaders.

Mandatory Public Disclosure for SEBI’s Senior Officials

• The committee proposed that SEBI’s chairman, whole-time members, and chief general managers and above must publicly disclose their assets and liabilities due to their high decision-making powers.
• It also recommended that applicants for these senior roles reveal any actual, potential, or perceived financial and non-financial conflict-of-interest risks to the appointing authority.

Uniform Investment and Trading Restrictions for Senior Officials

• The committee recommended applying the same investment and trading restrictions to the SEBI chairman and whole-time members as those applicable to employees under existing rules.
• It proposed including them within the definition of “insider” under insider trading regulations.
• Senior officials may invest only in professionally managed pooled schemes regulated by financial authorities, with restrictions applying prospectively.
• Part-time members are exempt from these limits but must still disclose interests and avoid trading on unpublished price-sensitive information.
• The rules will also extend to spouses and financially dependent relatives.
• Upon taking office, the chairman and whole-time members must choose to liquidate, freeze, or sell their existing holdings — either through a trading plan or with prior approval.

Broader “Family” Definition to Strengthen Conflict-of-Interest Checks

• The committee proposed expanding SEBI’s definition of “family” for board members to align with employee rules and global best practices.
• Instead of limiting it to a spouse and minor dependent children, the revised definition includes anyone related by blood or marriage who is substantially dependent, as well as individuals for whom the member or employee is a legal guardian.
• This broader scope enhances transparency and ensures consistent conflict-of-interest safeguards for all board members and employees, including contractual and deputed staff.

Other Key Proposals

• The committee recommended a formal and transparent recusal system to manage conflict-of-interest situations.
• It suggested publishing an annual summary of recusals made by the chairman, whole-time members, part-time members, and senior SEBI officials (CGM level and above) in the SEBI Annual Report — a practice currently not followed.
• Secure and Anonymous Whistleblower Mechanism
  • The panel called for a strong whistleblower framework that ensures confidentiality, anonymity, and protection from retaliation.
  • It should enable reporting of potential, actual, or perceived conflicts of interest by SEBI officials, board members, intermediaries, market institutions, participants, and the general public, safeguarding institutional integrity beyond just serving as a complaint channel.
• Post-Retirement Cooling-Off Restrictions
  • The committee recommended a two-year ban on former SEBI members, employees, consultants, and advisors from appearing before or against SEBI in recognition, adjudication, settlement, or approval matters.
  • This is aimed at preventing undue influence and strengthening ethical governance.
• Ban on Gifts and Benefits
  • To avoid influence and conflicts of interest, the committee advised prohibiting the chairman and whole-time members from accepting any gifts, directly or indirectly, from people with whom they have official dealings — in line with existing SEBI employee regulations.
• New Ethics and Compliance Architecture
  • The committee proposed creating a dedicated Office of Ethics and Compliance (OEC) and an Oversight Committee on Ethics and Compliance (OCEC).
  • These bodies would strengthen ethical governance standards and monitor compliance with SEBI’s conflict-of-interest framework.
• Technology-Driven Conflict Monitoring System
  • A modern, secure system powered by artificial intelligence and data analytics was recommended to proactively detect, predict, and address conflict-of-interest risks.
  • This technology-based infrastructure aims to enhance transparency and safeguard market integrity.

Why in news?

US President Donald Trump signed a stopgap bill recently, ending the longest government shutdown in US history. A shutdown occurs when the government runs out of funds, forcing federal agencies to halt operations and hurting the economy.

Since the budget system began in 1976, the US has faced 11 shutdowns, with the latest lasting 43 days — surpassing the previous record of 34 days during Trump’s earlier term.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Why Government Shutdowns Happen in the US but Not in India?
• How the US Budget Cycle Works?
• Rising US Budget Deficit
• Presidential vs Parliamentary System: A Warning for India

Why Government Shutdowns Happen in the US but Not in India?

• A US government shutdown occurs not because the country runs out of money, but because the government loses legislative permission to tax and spend.
• Unlike India — where the Executive is part of Parliament and a budget failure forces the government to resign — the US President is separate from Congress.
• This separation means the President cannot ensure passage of the budget and need not resign if it fails.
• When Congress, divided along party lines, cannot agree on the budget, the federal government shuts down.
• In the recent shutdown, Republicans lacked the 60 Senate votes needed, and the deadlock ended only when eight Democrats supported the resolution.

How the US Budget Cycle Works?

• The US fiscal year runs from October 1 to September 30. The shutdown began on October 1 because the Trump administration could not get its budget approved by Congress in time.
• Budget Preparation Begins in February
  • The budget process starts much earlier. By the first Monday of February, the President must submit the budget proposal to Congress.
  • Both chambers — the House and the Senate — then engage in months of deliberations, debates, and amendments on taxation and spending priorities.
  • These discussions often become contentious.
• Source of Conflict in the Recent Budget Debate
  • A key point of disagreement during this shutdown was the scope and funding of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as the food stamps programme.
  • Such policy disagreements create delays in approving appropriations.
• October 1: The Hard Deadline
  • According to the Congressional Research Service, October 1 is a strict deadline for Congress to pass appropriations.
  • When the fiscal year ends, previous funding expires, and by law, the government cannot spend money without new appropriations.
• Why a Shutdown Happens?
  • If Congress does not approve funding by October 1 — creating a “funding gap” — federal agencies must begin shutting down affected programmes and activities.
  • This legal requirement triggers a government shutdown until a new budget or stopgap bill is passed.

Rising US Budget Deficit

• According to the Congressional Budget Office, the US recorded a $1.8 trillion budget deficit in FY2025.
• Government receipts were $5.2 trillion, while spending reached $7 trillion, creating a large fiscal gap.
  • For comparison, the entire Indian GDP is under $4 trillion, and the central government’s total budget expenditure is about $0.6 trillion.
  • This highlights the massive scale of US finances and deficits.
• The FY2025 deficit equalled 5.9% of US GDP, much higher than the long-term average of 3.8% (1975–2025).
  • A deficit means the government must borrow more to sustain its expenditure.
• Larger deficits add to the rising mountain of public debt. One consequence is rising interest payments, which have now become the second-largest expenditure item for the US government, as shown in official data.

Presidential vs Parliamentary System: A Warning for India

• The US shutdown illustrates how a presidential system can suffer severe governance breakdowns when the executive and legislature disagree.
• In contrast, India’s parliamentary system ensures continuity of government, even with its own limitations.
• While system choice depends on many factors, this episode highlights why a developing country like India may struggle to withstand long, disruptive shutdowns that a presidential model can trigger.

Context:

• Tamil Nadu’s climate strategy is built on ground-level leadership, ensuring policies translate into measurable action.
• To achieve this, the State established the Tamil Nadu Green Climate Company (TNGCC), one of India’s earliest dedicated climate coordination agencies.
• Through four missions — the Climate Change Mission, Green Tamil Nadu Mission, Wetlands Mission, and Coastal Restoration Mission — TNGCC leads efforts in reducing emissions, restoring ecosystems, and strengthening community livelihoods.
• This article explains how Tamil Nadu is creating a strong model for climate action at the district level.
• It shows how leadership on the ground, new climate institutions, detailed planning of emissions, and active community participation are helping the State move toward a net-zero future much before 2070.

Tamil Nadu’s Net Zero Roadmap: Ambition Ahead of 2070

• Tamil Nadu has released a comprehensive Greenhouse Gas (GHG) inventory (2005–2019) and a detailed Net Zero Pathway to achieve net zero well before India’s 2070 target.
• The inventory shows promising trends: though highly industrialised, Tamil Nadu contributed only 7% of India’s total emissions in 2019 and reduced its emission intensity to GDP by nearly 60% since 2005.
• Key Drivers of Emission Reduction
  • The State’s progress comes from strong sectoral interventions such as rapid expansion of renewable energy, improved energy efficiency, industrial decarbonisation, and an ambitious electric-mobility programme aimed at electrifying all public transport.
  • Renewable energy now makes up 60% of installed power capacity and 30% of total electricity generation in the State.
• Bottom-Up Climate Action: District-Level Decarbonisation
  • Tamil Nadu has launched a bottom-up climate action framework, including district-level decarbonisation plans and a real-time Climate Action Tracker developed with the Vasudha Foundation.
  • Four pilot districts — The Nilgiris, Coimbatore, Ramanathapuram and Virudhunagar — show potential to abate up to 92% of projected emissions by 2050 through clean energy, mobility transition, industrial efficiency and nature-based solutions.
  • These districts can also sequester nearly three million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent by 2050.
• Climate Risks: The Need for Urgent Action
  • The district Climate Action Plans are based on detailed GHG inventories and climate variability assessments.
  • Findings warn that if emissions remain unabated, warm days could rise by nearly 95% by 2100, accompanied by higher precipitation and wetter monsoons.
  • The impacts would be especially severe in vulnerable regions like The Nilgiris.

Sectoral Drivers of Emissions in Tamil Nadu’s Pilot Districts

• GHG emissions vary across the four pilot districts.
  • Nilgiris & Coimbatore: Road transport is the highest contributor (43% and 36%), followed by residential energy (20% and 12%).
  • Virudhunagar: Cement (37%), road transport (20%), and industrial energy (16%) dominate emissions.
  • Ramanathapuram: Public electricity generation (28%) and rice cultivation (12%) are major contributors.
• Using emissions trajectories and sector analysis, the action plans outline yearly, shovel-ready projects from 2025 in areas such as electric mobility, waste management, forest restoration and industrial decarbonisation.
  • Nilgiris: Can reach net zero by 2030 under a moderate scenario.
  • Ramanathapuram: Can achieve net zero by 2047 under an aggressive pathway requiring lifestyle shifts.
  • Coimbatore & Virudhunagar: With higher industrialisation, they can become net zero by 2055.
• The approach positions climate action as a catalyst for green growth that protects both people and nature, rather than viewing it as a development constraint. Tamil Nadu plans to replicate similar district-level climate strategies across all 38 districts.

Monitoring Progress Through the Climate Action Tracker

• A real-time Climate Action Tracker ensures transparency and accountability, based on the principle that “what gets measured, gets done.”
• A dedicated Project Management Unit (PMU) is being set up in each pilot district to support implementation.

Tamil Nadu’s Community-Centred, Nature-Driven Climate Strategy

• Tamil Nadu is advancing climate action through large-scale afforestation, mangrove and wetland restoration, and biodiversity protection.
• With 20 Ramsar sites and 30% of its land under protection, the State is also restoring coastal ecosystems along its 1,068-km shoreline while supporting local livelihoods.
• By expanding decarbonisation efforts to agriculture, livestock and waste, Tamil Nadu is widening the scope of its low-carbon transition.
• Central to this approach is community participation, ensuring climate action is visible, verifiable and locally driven.
• Tamil Nadu’s model demonstrates how national net-zero goals can be strengthened through local innovation and evidence-based governance.

Why in the News?

• The Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI) has announced a year-long National Migration Survey to be conducted from July 2026 to June 2027.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Migration in India (Background, Statistics)
• National Migration Survey (Introduction, Objectives, Evolution of Surveys, Key Features, Significance, etc.)

Migration in India

• Migration in India refers to the movement of people from one place to another within the country for reasons such as employment, marriage, education, or better living conditions.
• As per the Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS) 2020-21, 28.9% of India’s population were migrants.
• Female migration (48%) is far higher than male migration (5.9%) in rural areas, mainly due to marriage, while most male migration is employment-driven (67%).
• Major migration flows are rural-to-urban (for jobs and education) and inter-state, especially from states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, and Odisha to industrial hubs such as Delhi, Maharashtra, and Gujarat.
• Migration contributes to urbanisation, labour market flexibility, and remittance flows, but also poses challenges like informal employment, housing shortages, and social security gaps.

About the National Migration Survey 2026

• The survey will be conducted under the aegis of the National Sample Survey (NSS), which has been India’s principal source of household-level socio-economic data since 1950.
• It will cover almost all states and union territories, except the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, due to logistical constraints.
• The objective of the survey is to generate reliable and up-to-date estimates of:

• Migration rates and trends (rural-to-urban, inter-state, and intra-state)
• Short-term and seasonal migration patterns
• Reasons for migration (economic, social, educational, or marital)
• Employment and income profiles of migrants
• Return migration and its socio-economic effects
• Impact of migration on household welfare and community development
• MoSPI has already released a draft questionnaire and concept note on its website and invited public feedback and expert comments by November 30, 2025.

Evolution of Migration Surveys in India

• India has a long history of tracking internal migration through the NSS
• Migration data was first collected in the 9^th NSS round (1955), followed by dedicated surveys such as the 18^th round (1963-64) and the 64^th round (2007-08).
• Since 2008, migration data has only been gathered intermittently through:

• The Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS) 2020-21 estimated India’s migration rate at 28.9% of the total population.
• The Multiple Indicator Survey (2020-21) offered limited insights into internal mobility.

• However, experts have noted that India lacks a continuous and updated dataset on migration, especially post-pandemic, when labour displacement and reverse migration became major socio-economic concerns. The new survey seeks to bridge this gap.

Key Features of the 2026 Migration Survey

• Revised Definitions and Improved Coverage
  • The upcoming survey introduces updated definitions to capture modern migration trends more accurately.
  • A person will now be classified as a short-term migrant if they have stayed away from their usual residence for 15 days to six months within the last year for employment or job search, a shift from the previous threshold of one to six months.
  • The survey will also focus on individual migration patterns rather than entire households, as the proportion of households migrating together has historically been low.
• Comprehensive Scope of Data
  • The questionnaire includes new questions designed to assess the broader impact of migration on individual’s quality of life, such as:
    • Changes in income, healthcare access, and social stability post-migration.
    • Experiences with housing, employment, and local integration.
    • Challenges faced at the destination and the intent to relocate again.

• Integration with Policy Planning
  • MoSPI has emphasised that the data will support evidence-based policymaking in critical sectors:

• Urban Development: Informing city-level housing, transport, and infrastructure planning.
• Employment Generation: Identifying labour shortages and skill gaps across regions.
• Social Protection: Enhancing portability of welfare benefits for migrant workers.
• Regional Development: Assessing how migration affects remittance flows and rural economies.

Significance of the Migration Survey

• Migration is a vital dimension of India’s economic and social landscape. Internal migration contributes to:

• Urbanisation and industrial growth by supplying labour to construction, manufacturing, and services.
• Rural resilience through remittances that support education, healthcare, and household consumption.

• However, migration also poses challenges such as informal employment, lack of social security, and urban congestion. Comprehensive data is essential to address these issues effectively.
• The upcoming survey will fill a critical data gap since the last dedicated migration study conducted in 2007-08, helping policymakers design more targeted interventions in urban planning, labour mobility, housing, and social security.

Context

• The global nuclear landscape today is marked by a profound contradiction. On one hand, the world has not witnessed the use of nuclear weapons since 1945, and global stockpiles have declined dramatically.
• On the other, the international nuclear order is under severe strain, as treaties weaken and geopolitical tensions rise.
• Recent actions, especially those involving the United States under President Donald Trump, threaten to undermine decades of painstaking progress. 

Achievements Under Strain

• At first glance, the evolution of nuclear governance seems impressive.
• Nuclear arsenals have fallen from 65,000 warheads in the late 1970s to fewer than 12,500 today, and the number of nuclear-armed states has stabilised at nine, far below earlier predictions.
• The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) has played a central role in limiting proliferation.
• Yet despite these successes, the prevailing sense is that the nuclear order is fraying.
• Once reinforced by clear norms and strong arms-control frameworks, it now faces mounting pressure from political shifts, technological competition, and eroding trust.

Ambiguity and Escalation: Trump’s Nuclear Testing Announcements

• President Trump’s October 2025 declaration that the U.S. would resume testing our nuclear weapons on an equal basis with Russia and China ignited global concern.
• The ambiguity surrounding his words, whether he referred to explosive tests or systems tests, created alarm, especially given the tense strategic environment.
• His comments also revealed confusion regarding the institutional management of nuclear testing, referring incorrectly to the Department of War.
• Nevertheless, the announcement aligned with a broader pattern: all major powers are involved in nuclear modernisation, signalling a new era of destabilising technologies.
• Russia’s tests of the Burevestnik nuclear-powered cruise missile and the Poseidon underwater nuclear drone, along with China’s advances in hypersonic glide vehicles, exemplify this shift.
• Meanwhile, the U.S. is producing new low-yield warheads, weapons widely viewed as more ‘usable’, thereby threatening the long-standing nuclear taboo.

The CTBT: A Norm Without Force

• The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), intended to prohibit all nuclear explosions, remains unenforced nearly three decades after its negotiation.
• Although 187 states have signed it, key nuclear powers, including the United States and China, have not ratified it, while Russia withdrew its ratification in 2023.
• A major flaw lies in the lack of a definition of nuclear test. The U.S. pushed for flexibility, allowing zero-yield subcritical tests and thereby creating room for differing interpretations.
• As a result, the CTBT established only a partial norm, not a fully enforceable prohibition.
• The U.S. allegation in 2019–20 that Russia and China may have conducted low-yield tests deepened mistrust, even though the CTBT’s own monitoring system found no evidence of violations.

A Renewed Arms Race and Its Global Consequences

• The world stands on the verge of a new nuclear arms race.
• The New START treaty, the last remaining U.S.–Russia arms-control agreement, will expire in February 2026, with no replacement in sight.
• Meanwhile, China’s nuclear arsenal is expanding rapidly, expected to exceed 1,000 warheads by 2030.
• A resumption of nuclear-explosive testing, especially by the United States, would trigger cascading reactions:
  • China, having conducted only 47 tests, would gain valuable data.
  • India and Pakistan would likely resume testing to validate new designs.
  • North Korea could seize the opportunity to perfect its arsenal.
  • Other potential nuclear aspirants may view the breakdown of norms as permission to begin weapons programmes.
• Thus, the collapse of the CTBT norm risks the unravelling of the wider NPT-based non-proliferation system.

Technological Shifts and Doctrinal Uncertainty

• Emerging technologies, hypersonic missiles, dual-use unmanned platforms, low-yield warheads, and new capabilities in cyber and space domains, are reshaping nuclear strategy.
• These developments shorten decision-making time, increase the risk of misinterpretation, and blur the lines between conventional and nuclear conflict.
• In such an environment, any weakening of the nuclear taboo becomes extremely dangerous.

The Taboo and the Task Ahead

• For decades, the unwritten yet powerful rule that nuclear weapons must never be used has anchored global stability.
• But this nuclear taboo is not self-sustaining. It relies on political restraint, robust institutions, and sustained diplomatic engagement, conditions now in decline.
• The irony is stark: the United States, long the principal architect of the nuclear order, may now become the catalyst for its disintegration.
• As the UN Secretary-General warns of alarmingly high nuclear risks, the world faces a critical challenge: to rebuild and adapt the nuclear order for the fractured geopolitics of the 21st century while ensuring that the prohibition on nuclear use remains intact.

Conclusion

• The stability of the nuclear order is not guaranteed. It is the product of deliberate choices, shared norms, and cooperative frameworks that are now eroding.
• President Trump’s remarks on resuming nuclear testing highlight the fragility of the system: with each rhetorical or policy shift, the world edges closer to a renewed era of nuclear brinkmanship.
• The international community must act decisively to preserve and modernise the nuclear order. The stakes could not be higher, ensuring that nuclear weapons remain forever unused.

Why in News?

• The Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare has released the Draft Seeds Bill 2025 for public comments, aiming to replace the outdated Seeds Act, 1966 and the Seeds (Control) Order, 1983.
• The legislation seeks to modernise India's seed sector, ensure farmer protection, improve seed quality, and promote innovation and ease of doing business. 

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Background
• Key Features of the Draft Seeds Bill 2025
• Stakeholder Perspectives
• Challenges and Concerns
• Way Forward
• Conclusion

Background:

• India attempted to introduce a new Seeds Bill earlier in 2004 and 2019, but both were withdrawn after farmer protests.
• The 2025 draft seeks to align with evolving agri-technology, global seed markets, and domestic regulatory needs.

Key Features of the Draft Seeds Bill 2025:

• Ensuring quality and affordability of seeds:
  • Regulates sale, import, export, and distribution of seeds.
  • Mandatory adherence to Indian Minimum Seed Certification Standards (conforming minimum limit of germination, genetic purity, physical purity, seed health, traits).
• Mandatory registration of seed varieties:
  • All varieties (except farmers’ varieties and varieties produced exclusively for export) must be registered.
  • Existing notified varieties under the 1966 Act will be deemed registered.
  • Aims to ensure traceability and accountability.
• Registration of dealers and distributors: Every dealer/distributor must obtain a State government registration certificate before any seed-related business activity.
• Liberalised seed imports:
  • The Central Government may permit import of unregistered varieties for research and trials under regulated conditions.
  • Intended to promote innovation and access to global germplasm.
• Decriminalisation of minor offences: Minor and trivial offences are to be decriminalised to enhance Ease of Doing Business.
• Strict penal provisions for major offences:
  • Categories: Trivial, Minor, Major offences.
  • Major offences: Include sale of spurious seeds, sale of non-registered varieties, operating without registration, etc.
  • Penalties: Up to Rs 30 lakh fine, imprisonment up to 3 years.
• Institutional mechanisms: Establishment of Central and State Seeds Committees for policy coordination, regulation, and oversight.
• Farmers’ rights:
  • Ensures protection from poor-quality seeds.
  • Farmers retain the right to save, use, exchange and sell their own varieties (not branded seeds).

Stakeholder Perspectives:

• Farmer organisations:
  • Express apprehension that the Bill is "pro-corporate" and may favour multinational seed companies.
  • Past Bills were withdrawn due to farmer protests; similar resistance expected.
  • Concerns about potential restrictions on farmers’ autonomy and increased corporate control.
• Seed industry associations:
  • Welcome the Bill as a step towards modernisation, innovation, and improved regulatory clarity.
  • Federation of Seed Industry of India (FSII) appreciates recognition of research-based companies and streamlined procedures.

Challenges and Concerns:

• Farmer distrust and fear of corporate control: Historical resistance due to perceived dilution of farmers’ rights. Fear of monopolisation by private seed companies.
• Balancing regulation with innovation: Mandatory registration may increase compliance costs for smaller producers. Risk of stifling indigenous seed diversity.
• Implementation capacity: Ensuring uniform enforcement of quality standards across States. Need for adequate testing labs, certification agencies, and monitoring systems.
• Trade-off between decriminalisation and accountability: Decriminalising minor offences must not compromise farmer protection.
• Legal and federal challenges: State–Centre coordination is essential as agriculture is a State subject, while seed regulation falls under central domain.

Way Forward:

• Transparent and inclusive consultations: Incorporate feedback from farmer unions, seed companies, scientists, and civil society to ensure balanced legislation.
• Strengthening testing and certification infrastructure: Expand accredited seed labs and certification bodies across States.
• Protecting farmers' traditional rights: Clear provisions safeguarding saving, exchanging, and selling of farmers’ varieties. Avoid over-regulation of small traditional seed producers.
• Promote public sector seed research: Increase investment in ICAR and State Agricultural Universities to compete with private seed R&D.
• Awareness and capacity building: Educate farmers about registration, certification and grievance redressal mechanisms.

Conclusion:

• The Draft Seeds Bill 2025 represents a major attempt to modernise India’s seed regulatory framework by ensuring quality, traceability, and accountability.
• While it aims to protect farmers and promote innovation, its success will depend on transparent stakeholder consultations, balancing farmers' rights with industry interests, and establishing robust implementation mechanisms.

About DRISHTI System:

• It is an AI-Based Freight Wagon Locking Monitoring System.
• The Northeast Frontier Railway (NFR) joined hands with the Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati Technology Innovation and Development Foundation (IITG TIDF) to develop the system.
• The DRISHTI system aims to tackle operational challenges in identifying unlocked or tampered doors on moving freight wagons, a persistent safety and security issue in rail logistics.
• The new AI-based solution is designed to provide real-time monitoring, detect anomalies in door locking mechanisms, and automatically generate alerts without disrupting train movement.
• It uses AI-powered cameras and sensors strategically installed to capture and analyse door positions and locking conditions.
• It uses advanced computer vision and machine learning technology for the detection purposes.
• DRISHTI is expected to improve freight security, enhance wagon sealing integrity, and reduce dependency on manual inspection processes.
• Plans are underway to further refine and scale the system for wider adoption across NFR’s freight corridors after successful completion of ongoing trials.