UPSC CSE Current Affairs — 27 July 2026

The Union Government has deferred its proposal to include the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Seats in Educational Institutions and of Appointments or Posts in the Services under the State) Act, 2022 in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution, citing pending judicial proceedings. The Ninth Schedule shields laws from fundamental rights challenges under Article 31-B. Karnataka's 2022 Act sought to increase OBC, SC, and ST reservations beyond the 50% ceiling set in Indra Sawhney.

The Karnataka Reservation Act, 2022 significantly enhanced reservation quotas for OBCs, SCs, and STs in state government jobs and educational institutions, pushing total reservations well past the 50% ceiling established by the Supreme Court in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992). Legally, any law breaching that ceiling is vulnerable to Article 14, 15, and 16 challenges in court.

Inclusion in the Ninth Schedule, introduced by the First Constitutional Amendment Act, 1951, immunises a law from judicial review on fundamental rights grounds under Article 31-B — a protection the Supreme Court itself qualified in I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007), holding that even Ninth Schedule laws enacted after April 24, 1973 (Kesavananda Bharati date) are subject to basic structure review.

The Union Government's decision to defer Ninth Schedule inclusion while Karnataka's Act faces active litigation is constitutionally significant: it acknowledges the Coelho caveat. If courts strike down the Act, Ninth Schedule inclusion would be moot. If courts uphold it, inclusion becomes a protective shield against future challenges.

For aspirants, this episode crystallises three intersecting doctrines — the 50% reservation ceiling, Ninth Schedule immunity, and its basic structure qualification — all of which examiners repeatedly mine. It also raises federalism questions: state reservation expansions require central backing for Ninth Schedule protection, revealing the Centre-State legislative interplay on social justice policy.

India's three-stage nuclear programme, conceived by Homi Bhabha, aims to exploit vast thorium reserves for long-term energy security. Stage 1 uses pressurised heavy water reactors (PHWRs) burning natural uranium; Stage 2 uses fast breeder reactors (FBRs) to convert thorium to U-233; Stage 3 employs advanced heavy water reactors running on U-233 and thorium. The Department of Atomic Energy promotes indigenous thorium-based technology for self-reliance. India holds approximately 25% of global thorium reserves.

India's nuclear fuel strategy is architecturally unique because it was reverse-engineered from resource reality, not geopolitics. India has very limited uranium deposits but roughly 10.98 million tonnes of thorium — the second-largest reserves on earth. Homi Bhabha designed a three-stage cascade in the 1950s to eventually make thorium, not uranium, the dominant fuel.

Stage 1 is already operational: 22+ PHWRs running on natural uranium produce plutonium-239 as spent fuel. Stage 2, now materialising with the Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR) at Kalpakkam, uses plutonium-239 to breed more plutonium and simultaneously convert thorium-232 into fissile U-233. Stage 3 will then burn U-233 in Advanced Heavy Water Reactors (AHWRs), closing the fuel cycle.

The strategic importance is immense: once Stage 3 is mature, India becomes virtually fuel-independent. The PFBR at Kalpakkam, managed by BHAVINI (Bharatiya Nabhikiya Vidyut Nigam Limited), reached criticality in 2024, marking a milestone for Stage 2. AERB (Atomic Energy Regulatory Board) oversees safety. The Atomic Energy Act 1962 and Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) govern the entire programme. For UPSC, the examiner angle is almost always count-format statements testing which stage uses which fuel, which reactor type belongs where, and which organisation manages which component.