Current Affairs 29th October 2025

1. 8th Cental pay commission

General Studies Paper II (Governance, Constitution, Polity, Social Justice, and International Relations)

Topic: Indian Polity – Public Policy & Governance: Institutions and Bodies (Pay Commissions, Public Sector reforms)​

Context :The Centre has formed and approved the Terms of Reference for the 8th CPC, tasked with recommending changes in pay and benefits for Central government employees.​​

• The commission’s formation impacts financial planning, social equity, and the structure of government expenditure, making it a significant governance milestone

 Background: Central Pay Commission

• The CPC is set up every 10 years to revise pay, allowances, and pensions for central staff and defence, based on inflation and economic realities.​
• Its recommendations, though advisory, typically shape national wage policy and uniformity across government sectors.​

 Constitutional & Administrative Basis

• Constitutional: Operates under Article 309, allowing service rules and pay revision by executive orders.​
• Administrative: Constituted by Ministry of Finance via Cabinet resolution; ToR crafted by JCM and approved by Cabinet.​

 8th CPC Composition: Table

(Pay: Chairperson ~Supreme Court Judge, others per commission norms)​

 Timeline: CPCs

 Scope & Main Functions

• Review pay, allowances, pensions, and work conditions for all Central staff and defence.​
• Consult stakeholders, assess fiscal impacts, and submit recommendations in 18 months, with interim reports if needed.​
• Align pay structures with inflation and private/PSU sector benchmarks.​

 Why CPC Matters?

• Protects real income, motivates staff, and boosts retention in government.​
• Ensures pay parity across sectors, supports economic stability, and addresses post-pandemic fiscal realities.​
• Key instrument for efficient, equitable public workforce management.​

 Challenges Before the 8th CPC

2. Subsidy for winter crops

General Studies Paper III (Indian Economy, Agriculture, Major Crops, Subsidies & Public Distribution System)

Context :Union Cabinet approved ₹37,952 crore fertilizer subsidy for Phosphatic & Potassic fertilizers for Rabi 2025-26 (Oct-Mar).

• Subsidy increased by ₹14,000 crore from last Rabi season; ₹736 crore more than Kharif 2025.
• Aim: Ensure affordable fertilizers, stabilize prices, support 14 crore farmers amid global cost surge.

 What is Fertilizer Subsidy?

• Government financial aid reducing farmer price burden on fertilizers.
• Subsidizes difference between production/import cost and MRP charged to farmers.
• Administered by Dept. of Fertilizers via Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) to manufacturers.
• Covers 28 P&K fertilizers under Nutrient-Based Subsidy (NBS); Urea has separate controlled scheme.

 Rabi and Kharif Crops: Seasons, Period & Major Crops

 Fertilizer Subsidy Rates (2025-26 Rabi vs 2025 Kharif)

 Why Was the Subsidy Increased?

• Global input price rise: phosphoric acid (19%), sulphur (92%), DAP (16%).
• Maintain affordable retail prices for 14 crore farmers.
• Encourage balanced nutrient use to improve soil health.
• Fiscal rationalization with increased budget but controlled leakages.

 Special Package Announced

• Extra ₹3,500/tonne subsidy on DAP and TSP fertilizers.
• Ensures no MRP increase despite rising import costs.
• Supports steady supply of essential fertilizers for wheat and pulses.

 Indian Fertilizer Subsidy: Background, Types, and Schemes

Background:

• Post-Green Revolution boost; subsidy started 1977, moved to market-linked post-1991.
• NBS introduced in 2010 for non-urea fertilizers; urea remains controlled.
• Current subsidy estimated ₹1.67 lakh crore for FY26.

Types of Fertilizers:

• Nitrogenous (Urea, Ammonium Sulphate) – 60% use.
• Phosphatic (DAP, SSP) – 25% use.
• Potassic (MOP, Sulphate Potash) – <5% use.
• Complex/Compound (NPK mixes) and bio-fertilizers as emerging alternatives.

 Economic & Policy Implications

 Challenges in Fertilizer Subsidy System

• Escalating fiscal burden due to import dependence.
• Imbalanced fertilizer use (NPK ratio distorted).
• Subsidy leakages (10-15% pre-DBT).
• Supply chain disruptions due to geopolitical risks.
• Regional usage disparities and environmental impacts.

 Reforms Needed: Way Forward

• Shift to direct farmer subsidy via Aadhaar-linked PoS.
• Include urea under NBS with gradual MRP adjustment.
• Promote bio and nano fertilizers for sustainability.
• Integrate soil health card data for precision input use.
• Expand domestic fertilizer production via incentives.
• Use blockchain and education for transparency and awareness.
• Cap subsidies to 1% GDP and link funding to performance.

3. HAL signs pact with Russia firm for civil aircraft productions

General Studies Paper 3 -science and technology

Context :India’s HAL signed a deal to produce SJ-100 aircraft domestically; production to begin soon (2025-26).

• This revives civil aircraft production after decades, supporting regional connectivity and aviation growth.

 About SJ-100 Aircraft: Features & Specifications

 Production Plan in India and Partners

• HAL to manufacture SJ-100 under license from Russia’s UAC.
• Production includes manufacture of systems and assembly in India.
• Partnership strengthens India-Russia aerospace ties.

 Significance for India

• Make in India & Atmanirbhar Bharat: Enhances domestic aerospace manufacturing, reducing imports.
• Revival of Civil Aircraft Production: First major civil aircraft manufactured in decades (last was AVRO HS-748).
• Boost to UDHAN/Regional Connectivity Scheme: Supports flights to smaller airports/metropolitan linkages.
• Employment Generation: Creates skilled jobs across aerospace value chain.
• Strategic Cooperation: Strengthens India-Russia defense and civil aerospace partnership.

 Historical Context: Indian Civil Aviation Manufacture

 Economic Significance

 Challenges Ahead

 India-Russia Beyond Aviation: Cooperation

4. India -European -Carbon Market

GS PAPER III : Environment & Biodeversity  -Conservation, Environmental Pollution & Degradation

Context: India and the European Union (EU) have announced plans for a comprehensive strategic agenda that connects India’s Carbon Market (ICM) with the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM).

• This marks the first global initiative to link a developing country’s carbon pricing system with a developed region’s carbon border tax.
• The partnership could help reduce carbon leakage, ensure fair trade, and promote global decarbonisation—though it faces considerable institutional, technical, and political challenges.

 Background

India’s carbon market is still developing under the Carbon Credit Trading Scheme (CCTS), whereas the EU’s Emissions Trading System (ETS) is among the world’s most established. Linking these two frameworks is a significant step for equitable carbon trade, allowing Indian exporters to gain credit for domestic carbon pricing. Yet alignment in regulation, pricing, and verification makes the process complex.

 Current Status of India’s Carbon Market

• Framework under Development: India’s CCTS is still evolving with limited sectoral coverage.
• Institutional Design: Based on auction mechanisms, cap setting, and third-party verification, but not yet fully operational across industries.
• Implementation Gaps: Focused mostly on project-based credits rather than an economy-wide emissions cap.
• Carbon Price Uncertainty: Absence of a defined and stable carbon price per tonne complicates linkage discussions.
• Weak Enforcement: Without strong penalty mechanisms, compliance remains a challenge.

 Why the EU–India Carbon Link Matters

• Relief for Exporters: Prevents double carbon charges for Indian firms trading with the EU.
• Clean Technology Incentive: Motivates industries to adopt low-carbon processes in anticipation of benefits.
• International Credibility: Positions India as a credible global carbon market participant.
• North–South Cooperation: Symbolises cooperation between developed and developing economies on climate action.

 Key Challenges in Linking CBAM and ICM

• Regulatory Compatibility: EU recognition depends on India achieving comparable market integrity and carbon standards.
• Technical Harmonisation: India must align its system with compliance-grade mechanisms similar to the EU ETS.
• Price Disparity: The large gap between EU (€60–80/tonne) and India (€5–10/tonne) carbon prices poses a hurdle.
• Competitiveness Concerns: Exporters risk bearing both CBAM and domestic costs.
• Political Resistance: Cooperation could be seen as indirectly endorsing an external carbon levy India has opposed at WTO and COP forums.

Strategic and Economic Implications

• Trade and Global Standing: Success could enhance India’s role as a model for developing nations on carbon-trade integration.
• Accelerated Industrial Transition: Would accelerate India’s path toward industrial decarbonisation and its Net Zero 2070 goal.
• Geopolitical Opportunity: Strengthens India–EU climate diplomacy and green investment flow.
• Trade Frictions Risk: Misalignment could cause disputes if the EU refuses carbon price deductions.
• WTO Challenges: Any inconsistency with trade rules could trigger broader trade and climate tensions.

 Way Forward

• Strengthen Institutions: Build a transparent, compliance-grade carbon market aligned with international standards.
• Refine Pricing Mechanisms: Ensure a stable and comparable domestic carbon price.
• Verification Standards: Create EU-recognised systems for monitoring and reporting.
• Sustained Diplomacy: Continue dialogue to balance India’s sovereignty with collaborative climate goals.
• Industry Support Measures: Assist exporters through transitional financial or policy support.

 Conclusion

The proposed EU–India carbon market linkage is a landmark initiative in global carbon governance. Its success depends on strengthening domestic institutions, aligning carbon pricing, and achieving political consensus. If executed well, it could serve as a benchmark for equitable climate cooperation between developed and developing economies.

5. The complicated history of U.S-Pakistan relations

GS paper II:  IR

CONTEXT :Amid renewed U.S. strategic recalibrations in South Asia, Washington is reassessing its engagement with Pakistan following renewed concerns over Pakistan’s ties with China, evolving regional security dynamics after the Afghanistan withdrawal, and the ongoing China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) expansion. The U.S.-Pakistan relationship is again at a crossroads, oscillating between limited cooperation and deep-rooted mistrust.

 Background

The U.S.-Pakistan relationship has historically shifted between cooperation and conflict. It originated during the Cold War for strategic containment of communism but has been repeatedly shaped by changing U.S. global priorities and Pakistan’s regional ambitions, especially its balancing act between Washington and Beijing.

 Early Strategic Collaboration

• Cold War Alignment: Pakistan joined Western blocs like SEATO (1954) and CENTO (1955), becoming a U.S. ally against Soviet expansion.
• Aid and Military Support: The U.S. provided substantial arms and economic assistance, strengthening Pakistan’s military establishment.
• Utility-Based Partnership: Mutual interests, not shared values, defined the relationship—Pakistan sought security; the U.S. sought regional influence.

 Shifts during and after the Cold War

• Afghan Jihad Cooperation (1979): The Soviet invasion revived U.S.-Pakistan ties as Islamabad facilitated CIA-backed Mujahideen operations.
• Sanctions and Fallout: Post-Soviet withdrawal, the U.S. imposed the Pressler Amendment (1990) sanctions over Pakistan’s nuclear ambitions, halting F-16 supplies.
• Recurring Cycle: Phases of collaboration consistently ended with Western sanctions, exposing fragile trust.

 Post-9/11 Strategic Realignment

• War on Terror Alliance: After 2001, Pakistan became a major non-NATO ally, receiving over $30 billion for counterterrorism cooperation.
• Operational Role: U.S. forces relied on Pakistani routes and intelligence networks in Afghanistan.
• Deepened Mistrust: Washington accused Pakistan of backing militant proxies despite receiving aid; the 2011 Osama bin Laden raid in Abbottabad worsened ties.

 Trump Era and Conditional Diplomacy

• Aid Suspension (2018): President Trump accused Pakistan of deception and halted over $300 million in security assistance.
• Double Game Narrative: Washington alleged Islamabad supported terror networks while claiming counterterrorism cooperation.
• Strategic Drift to China: U.S. outreach to India and anti-China policies prompted Islamabad to deepen Beijing ties.

 China Factor and Emerging Realignment

• Growing Sino-Pak Partnership: Under the CPEC framework, cooperation in infrastructure and defense has intensified.
• Post-U.S. Afghanistan Exit (2021): Pakistan regained regional leverage but faced renewed U.S. scrutiny over Taliban links.
• Balancing Power Centres: Islamabad now attempts to balance its reliance on China with limited U.S. engagement for strategic autonomy.

 Sanctions and Enduring Trust Deficit

• Repeated Sanctions: U.S. laws like Symington (1977), Pressler (1990), and Brown (1995) curtailed military and nuclear cooperation.
• Contradictory U.S. Policy: Despite sanctions, Washington continued logistical dependence on Pakistan during Afghan campaigns.
• Persistent Suspicion: Both sides remained mutually dependent but politically estranged, reflecting deep structural mistrust.

6. Big Techs contempt for Indian public health

GS PAPER 2 : SOCIAL JUSTICE : Health & Education

CONTEXT: Major concern has emerged over Big Tech platforms such as Meta and Google running sponsored advertisements for unapproved ayurvedic and homeopathic “cures” in India. These ads violate India’s Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 (DMRA), which bans claims of curing 54 specified diseases without scientific backing. Despite legal prohibitions, such promotions continue unchecked, reflecting a regulatory and governance breakdown in digital health advertising and exposing gaps in cross-border accountability.

 Background

India’s DMRA aims to prevent misleading medical advertisements. However, the digital revolution has outpaced its enforcement. Global tech platforms host health-related ads that bypass national laws, raising serious questions about public health ethics, corporate governance, and state sovereignty.

 Evolution of Health Advertising in the Digital Era

• Digital Shift: The move from print to online spaces has weakened traditional regulatory control.
• Big Tech Dominance: Platforms now routinely host or boost unverified “miracle cure” content.
• Regulatory Weakness: Cross-border operations make enforcement of Indian laws difficult.
• Public Health Risk: False medical promotion erodes trust in legitimate treatments and endangers lives.

 Reasons for Big Tech Non-Compliance

• Profit-Oriented Design: Algorithms prioritize engagement and revenue, not legal compliance.
• Liability Loopholes: Platforms claim “intermediary immunity” under Indian law, escaping accountability.
• Jurisdictional Barriers: U.S.-based corporate structures limit India’s enforcement reach.
• Lack of Unified Oversight: India has no single authority for digital advertisement regulation.

 Legal Frameworks Being Violated

• Drugs and Magic Remedies Act, 1954: Prohibits misleading medical ads for specific conditions.
• Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994: Forbids sex-selection related advertising.
• Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940: Mandates pre-approval and efficacy for all medicines before advertising.
• Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 79): Provides conditional immunity to intermediaries, often abused.
• U.S. Corporate Shield: American legal protection allows global platforms to evade Indian sanctions.

 Broader Governance and Sovereignty Concerns

• Regulatory Erosion: National capacity to impose law on multinational firms is diminishing.
• Public Interest Undermined: Health safety takes a backseat to corporate profits.
• Accountability Gaps: Indian regulators face challenges in summoning foreign executives.
• Uneven Legal Ground: Domestic firms face penalties while foreign entities remain largely unscathed.

 Policy and Institutional Reforms Needed

• Legislative Integration: Align DMRA and PNDT provisions with IT Act standards to plug liability gaps.
• Corporate Responsibility: Enforce executive-level accountability for recurring violations.
• Verified Health Advertising Rules: Require government-approved validation or disclaimers for all health ads.
• Digital Diplomacy Measures: Pursue India–U.S. agreements to ensure reciprocity in cross-border regulation.
• Dedicated Oversight Body: Establish a Digital Health Advertising Authority (DHAA) under the Health Ministry for continuous monitoring and regulation.

 Conclusion

The unchecked spread of unverified health advertisements by Big Tech exposes a fault line between digital innovation and public regulation. India’s challenge lies in asserting digital sovereignty, updating its health advertisement laws, and ensuring global technology companies adhere to domestic accountability norms. Effective coordination between health, IT, and diplomatic institutions will be critical to restore public trust and regulatory authority.

7. Electronics Components Manufacturing Scheme (ECMS).

Context: The Government of India has approved the first batch of seven projects worth ₹5,532 crore under the Electronics Components Manufacturing Scheme (ECMS). These projects are expected to generate production worth ₹36,559 crore and create more than 5,100 direct jobs. The move marks a major step in India’s shift from assembling finished products to manufacturing core components such as PCBs, Camera Modules, Copper-Clad Laminates, and Polypropylene Films, significantly reducing import dependence and strengthening high-tech manufacturing beyond metro hubs.

 Background

The ECMS, launched by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) in 2024, is designed to deepen India’s electronics value chain by developing a domestic ecosystem for components, sub-assemblies, and materials manufacturing.

 Key Objectives

• Promote domestic manufacturing of core electronic components and raw materials.
• Reduce import dependence and strengthen India’s position in global value chains.
• Encourage private investment in technology-intensive sectors.
• Boost domestic value addition in the electronics supply chain.

Scheme Tenure and Incentive Structure

• Turnover-linked Incentive: Available for 6 years (including a 1-year gestation period).
• Capex-based Incentive: Provided for 5 years.
• Hybrid Form Option: Available to balance investment and production-based support.

 Focus Areas

• Target Components: Multi-layer and HDI PCBs, Camera Modules, Copper-Clad Laminates, and Polypropylene Films.
• Base Material Manufacturing: Establish India’s first copper-clad laminate production unit and local polypropylene film facilities for capacitor components.
• Technology Upgradation: Support for capital equipment manufacturing and R&D capabilities.

 First Batch Approvals and Regional Spread

• Total Projects Approved: 7 projects worth ₹5,532 crore.
• Expected Output: Production worth ₹36,559 crore.
• Job Creation: Over 5,100 direct jobs in the first batch; long-term projection of 91,600 jobs.
• Location Distribution: Tamil Nadu (5 units), Andhra Pradesh (1 unit), and Madhya Pradesh (1 unit), promoting balanced regional industrial growth.

 Strategic and Economic Impact

• Domestic production to meet 20% of PCB demand, 15% of camera module demand, and 100% of copper-clad laminate demand.
• Improved supply chain resilience for defense, EVs, telecom, and renewable energy sectors.
• Encouragement of exports, with 60% of the production targeted for global markets.
• Strengthening India’s transition towards a complete electronics manufacturing ecosystem, from design to material production.

 Integration with Broader Initiatives

• Complements the Production Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme for electronics manufacturing.
• Supports the India Semiconductor Mission (ISM) by ensuring access to critical component materials.
• Contributes to India’s transformation into a “product nation” with end-to-end manufacturing capability