About Bhakra Dam:

• It is a concrete gravity dam across the Sutlej River.
• It is located at a gorge near the upstream Bhakra village in the Bilaspur district of Himachal Pradesh.
• It is near the border between Punjab and Himachal Pradesh.
• It is the highest straight gravity dam in the world, with a height of about 207.26 meters.
• It is Asia’s second tallest dam, next to the Tehri Dam.
• History:
  • The Bhakra Dam is one of the earliest river valley development schemes undertaken by India after independence.
  • The construction of this dam started in 1948, when Jawahar Lal Nehru, the first prime minister of India, poured the first bucket of concrete into the foundations of Bhakra.
  • The dam was completed by the end of 1963.
  • Bhakra Dam was described as the ‘New Temple of Resurgent India’ by Jawaharlal Nehru.
  • Operation and maintenance of the Bhakra dam is done by the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB).
• The dam created the massive Gobind Sagar reservoir and plays a crucial role in irrigation, flood control, and hydroelectric power generation for Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh, and Chandigarh.
  • In terms of storage of water, it is the second largest reservoir in India, the first being Indira Sagar Dam in Madhya Pradesh with a capacity of 12.22 billion cu m.
• Nangal Dam is another dam downstream of Bhakra Sometimes both the dams together are called the Bhakra-Nangal Dam, though they are two separate dams.
  • It serves as an auxiliary dam to channel the water released from Bhakra Dam to two powerhouses.
  • The installed capacity of Bhakra Right Bank Power House is 785 MW, and that of Bhakra Left Bank Power House is 630 MW.

About Barren Island:

• It is a volcanic island located in the Andaman Sea.
• It is the emergent summit of a volcano.
• It is a part of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.
• It lies above the subduction zone of the India and Burmese plates.
• This island has a big crater of the volcano.
  • It is the only active volcano in South Asia. It is the only active volcano among the chain of islands from Myanmar to Sumatra.
  • It is a stratovolcano composed of lava, rock fragments, and volcanic ash.
  • It has erupted multiple times in recent history, with the most recent significant eruptions occurring in 2017.
• The volcanic zone is devoid of vegetation and covered in sharp basaltic rocks that cover nearly half its area.
• The island itself is extraordinarily remote and largely uninhabited.

About Kirthai-II Hydroelectric Project:

• It is a 930 MW hydropower project planned on the Chenab River in the Kishtwar district of Jammu and Kashmir.
• The project is being developed by Chenab Valley Power Projects.
• NHPC and Jammu and Kashmir State Power Development currently own the project having ownership stakes of 51% and 49%, respectively.
• It is a run-of-river project. The hydro reservoir capacity is planned to be 51.26 million cubic meters.

Key Facts about Chenab River:

• It is a tributary of the Indus River.
• Origin:
  • It is formed by the confluence of two streams, Chandra and Bhaga, in the Lahaul and Spiti Districts of Himachal Pradesh.
  • In its upper reaches, it is also known as the Chandrabhaga.
  • It flows through the Jammu and Kashmir union territory, Himachal Pradesh, and after receiving the Jhelum River near Trimmu, the Chenab empties into the Sutlej River.
• Major Tributaries:
  • Left Bank: Niru, Tawi, Neeru, and Liddrari
  • Right Bank: Ans, Bhut Nalla, Bichleri, Kalnai Marusudar, and Miyar Nalla.
• Major Dams on Chenab River: Salal (rockfill dam), Aalal (concrete dam), Baglihar, and Dul.

About Autoimmune Blistering Diseases (AIBDs):

• Autoimmune Blistering Diseases (AIBDs), also called autoimmune bullous disorders, are a group of rare skin diseases.
• They happen when immune system attacks skin and mucous membranes -- the lining inside mouth, nose, and other parts of body. This causes blisters to form.
• Symptoms:
  • The places on body where blisters form depend on which disorder one has.
  • Some AIBDs cause blisters to grow on the skin.
  • Other types cause them to form in the mucous membranes that line the mouth, nose, throat, eyes, and genitals.
  • They can be painful or itchy. They can break open and leave a sore.
• Although rare, AIBDs can be severe and even life-threatening if untreated because of:
  • Extensive skin loss
  • Secondary infections
  • Nutritional deficiencies
  • Damage to mucous membranes and eyes
• Treatment aims to suppress the abnormal immune response and prevent new blister formation:
  • Corticosteroids
  • Immunosuppressive drugs
  • Biologic therapies such as Rituximab
  • Wound care and infection prevention

About Jhajjar-Bachauli Wildlife Sanctuary:

• It is located in the Rupnagar district of Punjab.
• It lies near the Sutlej (Satluj) River in the foothills of the Shivalik Range.
• Vegetation: The sanctuary is characterized by dry deciduous forests.
• Flora: The sanctuary boasts a vibrant array of plant life, such as Eucalyptus, Khair, Neem, Shisham, and Amla, many of which hold medicinal properties.
• Fauna: It shelters various wildlife including Sambar deer, Barking deer, Hare, Jackal, migratory Leopards, Blue Bull (Nilgai), Mongoose, Jungle Cat, Porcupine, Pangolin, Wild Boar, and a variety of birds and reptiles like Python, Cobra, and Monitor Lizard.
• In January 2026, the Punjab State Board for Wildlife approved renaming the sanctuary as Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Wildlife Sanctuary in honor of Guru Tegh Bahadur.

Why in the News?

• The Supreme Court Collegium's acceptance of an Ordinance creating four additional judges' posts has raised significant questions about judicial independence, security of tenure, and the appearance of detachment from the executive.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Ordinances (Key Features, Judicial Precedents, etc.)
• News Summary (Latest Ordinance, Implications, Criticism, etc.)

About Ordinances in India

• An Ordinance is a temporary law promulgated by the President of India under Article 123 of the Constitution.
• It is an extraordinary legislative power that can be exercised when Parliament is not in session and when immediate action is necessary.
• Key Features of Ordinances

• Article 123: Empowers the President to promulgate ordinances when Parliament is not in session.
• Force of Law: An ordinance has the same force and effect as an Act of Parliament during its operation.
• Duration: An ordinance ceases to operate six weeks after Parliament reassembles, unless approved by both Houses.
• Withdrawal: The President may withdraw an ordinance at any time.
• Disapproval: Both Houses may disapprove it by resolution.
• Re-promulgation: While constitutionally permissible, repeated re-promulgation has been deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

Judicial Pronouncements on Ordinances

• The Supreme Court has, over time, established important principles to prevent misuse of the ordinance-making power:

• D.C. Wadhwa vs State of Bihar (1986): The Court held that governance by repeatedly re-promulgated ordinances is a "fraud on the Constitution."
• Krishna Kumar Singh vs State of Bihar (2017): A seven-judge Bench ruled against using the ordinance-making power as a parallel source of legislation, emphasising that ordinances are meant for exceptional circumstances.

Judicial Independence as a Basic Feature

• Constitutional Framework
  • Article 124(1) of the Constitution states that the Supreme Court shall consist of a Chief Justice and such other judges, not exceeding the number Parliament may prescribe by law.
  • The number of Supreme Court judges has been increased from time to time through legislation.
• The NJAC Judgment
  • In Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association vs Union of India (2015), the Supreme Court struck down the 99th Constitutional Amendment and the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act. Key observations included:
    • Judicial independence is part of the basic structure of the Constitution.
    • The NJAC, despite its seemingly neutral composition, allowed the Law Minister and one eminent person to potentially veto judicial appointments.
    • This was held to destroy the judiciary's primacy in its own appointments.

• The Court has consistently held that judicial independence is not just about freedom from external pressure but also about the appearance of detachment from the executive.

News Summary

• On May 16, 2026, the President promulgated an Ordinance lifting the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court from 34 to 38 judges. Following this:
  • Five judges took the oath in Delhi
  • Of these, two filled lawful vacancies that already existed (the Court was sitting at 32 against a sanctioned 34).
  • Three judges occupy chairs that no statute has created; they sit only by virtue of the Ordinance.

Constitutional Concerns

• The acceptance of the Ordinance by the Supreme Court Collegium raises several significant concerns:
• Security of Tenure
  • Three judges hold their positions based on an Ordinance that:
    • Can be withdrawn at any time by the President.
    • May be disapproved by either House of Parliament.
    • Will cease to operate six weeks after Parliament reassembles unless replaced by an Act.
  • A court that owes three chairs to a six-week renewable Ordinance holds them at the executive's sufferance.
• Judicial Independence
  • The fundamental concern is whether the court can hold its seats free of obligation to the political branch.
  • Judges whose tenure depends on the government's willingness to convert the Ordinance into an Act may face questions about their detachment in matters involving the Union government.
• Appearance of Bias
  • In matters touching the Union, the government whose parliamentary majority must regularise the appointments may appear before these judges.
  • A judge whose tenure lies, even loosely, in one party's gift cannot wear the detachment the office demands.

Potential Constitutional Challenges

• If the Bill Replaces the Ordinance
  • The anomaly closes.
  • The judges' positions are regularised through proper legislation.
  • Constitutional concerns are addressed.
• If the Bill is Not Passed
  • The apex court's strength reverts to 34.
  • The executive cannot bridge the gap by re-promulgation; this would be the "fraud" condemned in the Wadhwa case.
  • The status of judges appointed to Ordinance-created posts becomes uncertain.

Validity of Judgments

• The validity of judgments delivered by judges appointed to Ordinance-created posts is protected under the de facto doctrine, as affirmed in Gokaraju Rangaraju vs State of Andhra Pradesh (1981).
• This doctrine holds that acts of officials who hold office under colour of authority are valid, even if their appointment is later found to be defective.
• Removal Question
  • Whether a judge appointed to an Ordinance-created post can be removed once that post lapses remains constitutionally untested.

Broader Implications

• For Judicial Independence

• The acceptance of Ordinance-based appointments may weaken the structural independence of the judiciary.
• Sets a precedent for the executive to influence the composition of the court without parliamentary scrutiny.
• May affect the perception of judicial impartiality.

• For Constitutional Governance

• Raises questions about the proper use of ordinance-making powers.
• Tests the limits of the D.C. Wadhwa principle.
• Potential for further litigation on the validity of the Ordinance.

• For the Collegium System

• The Collegium's acceptance of the Ordinance may be seen as a calculated risk.
• Stakes the institution's reputation on the political process completing the transition to a statute.
• May affect future negotiations between the judiciary and the executive.

Concerns Raised by Experts

• Security of tenure is a cornerstone of judicial independence that may be compromised.
• The appearance of detachment from the executive is essential for public confidence in the judiciary.
• Historical precedents like the Roosevelt court-packing plan demonstrate the dangers of executive interference in court composition.
• The Supreme Court's own jurisprudence in D.C. Wadhwa and Krishna Kumar Singh warns against using ordinances as parallel legislation.

Context:

• The Union Cabinet approved the Mission for Cotton Productivity with an outlay of ₹5,659 crore for 2026–31.
• The mission aims to raise cotton lint productivity from 441 kg/hectare (ha) (in triennium ending (TE) 2025-26) to 755 kg/ha by 2031.
• There is a need to evaluate whether this target is achievable amid declining productivity, technological stagnation, and policy constraints.

India's Bt Cotton Success Story:

• A major turning point came in 2002, when the government approved the commercial cultivation of Bt cotton as cleared by the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC), marking India's entry into the biotechnology revolution in agriculture.
• Impact of Bt cotton (2002–2014):
  • Introduction of Bollgard (Cry1Ac gene) and later Bollgard II (stacked genes) helped control bollworm infestation.
  • Cotton production increased from 13.6 million bales (2002-03) to 39.8 million bales (2013-14).
  • Cotton acreage expanded by 56%, from 7.6 million ha to 11.9 million ha. Productivity rose by 88%, from 302 kg/ha to 566 kg/ha.
  • India emerged as the world's largest cotton producer and the 2nd-largest
• This period demonstrated how technological innovation can transform agricultural productivity and farmer incomes.

Policy Reversal and Innovation Slowdown:

• After Bollgard II, newer technologies such as Bollgard II with roundup ready flex (RRF) and Bollgard III (three stacked genes with herbicide tolerance), were developed (by MMB (Mahyco-Monsanto Biotech) India) but never commercialised in India.
• Role of price controls:
  • A series of government interventions reduced returns on innovation.
  • For example,
    • 2006: Andhra Pradesh capped seed prices at ₹750 per packet, significantly below market prices. Maharashtra and Gujarat adopted similar measures.
    • 2015: Cotton Seed Price Control Order reduced trait fees by 74%.
    • 2018: National seed price further reduced.
    • 2020: Trait fees were eliminated entirely.
  • As a result, private biotechnology firms withdrew advanced cotton technologies from regulatory consideration, making further innovation commercially unattractive.

Global Competitors Moved Ahead:

• While India halted technological progress, other cotton-producing countries continued adopting advanced biotechnology and precision agriculture.
• Cotton productivity (TE 2025-26 - lint yield (kg/ha)): Australia (2,340); China (2,311); Brazil (1,943); US (976); and India (441) [reported by the International Cotton Advisory Committee].
• The productivity gap reflects differences in technology adoption, R&D investment, regulatory support, and seed innovation ecosystems.
• Brazil, for instance, has leveraged advanced seed technologies and efficient agronomic practices despite having predominantly rainfed cotton cultivation.

Emerging Cotton Crisis:

• India's cotton sector has entered a phase of stagnation and decline.
• Key trends:
  • Cotton production has been declining by around 2% annually since 2014-15.
  • If the earlier growth trajectory had continued, output could have reached 65.3 million bales by 2026.
  • Actual production in 2025-26 stands at only 29 million bales.
  • India has shifted from being a net exporter to importing approximately 4 million bales of cotton.
• This reversal raises concerns about the competitiveness of India's textile value chain and long-term cotton self-sufficiency.

Evaluating the Cotton Productivity Mission:

• The mission's objective of increasing productivity to 755 kg/ha by 2031 is ambitious and welcome.
• However, significant concerns remain:
  • Lack of access to cutting-edge biotechnology available globally.
  • Absence of next-generation genetically modified cotton varieties.
  • Weak incentives for private-sector innovation.
  • Long and uncertain regulatory approval processes.
  • Inadequate public-sector agricultural R&D funding.
• Even if the target is achieved, India's productivity would remain well below current levels in Brazil, China, and Australia.

The Policy Dilemma:

• The cotton productivity cannot be sustainably improved without addressing the innovation ecosystem.
• Two possible pathways:
  • Revive private innovation: Reconsider the Cotton Seed Price Control Order. Strengthen intellectual property protection. Ensure innovators can recover R&D investments.
  • Expand public sector R&D:
    • Substantially increase government funding for biotechnology research.
    • Develop indigenous seed technologies and advanced cotton traits.
    • Strengthen agricultural research institutions and extension services.

Conclusion:

• The Mission for Cotton Productivity acknowledges the seriousness of India's cotton crisis, but productivity gains alone may be difficult without technological renewal.
• The long-term revival of the cotton sector requires a balanced framework that promotes innovation, biotechnology adoption, robust R&D investment, and farmer access to advanced seed technologies.
• Without addressing these structural issues, the mission risks treating the symptoms rather than the underlying causes of declining cotton competitiveness.