With reference to the Supreme Court ruling on inter-state electricity sharing, consider the following statements: 1. Himachal Pradesh was granted 11,973 MU of electricity from Punjab and Haryana over a 20-year period. 2. The BBMB manages the Bhakra Nangal and Beas hydro projects. 3. The power dues were settled at a rate of 10% based on a 2011 verdict. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Supreme Court grants Himachal Pradesh 11,973 MU of electricity from Punjab and Haryana

GS3Economy · S&T · Environment · Security· Cropping patterns & irrigation· Prelims + Mains· 7 November 2026

Inter-state resource allocation and judicial intervention in federal disputes: a GS3 and Federalism case study.

Why in news

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Himachal Pradesh, granting the state 11,973 MU of electricity from Punjab and Haryana over 20 years to settle BBMB arrears.

Background

The Supreme Court ruling follows a 2011 verdict regarding power dues since 1966 at a rate of 7.19%. The arrangement involves electricity from the Bhakra Nangal and Beas hydro projects.

Facts for Prelims

FactHimachal Pradesh was granted 11,973 MU of electricity from Punjab and Haryana over a 20-year period.
FactThe power dues were settled at a rate of 7.19% based on a 2011 Supreme Court verdict.
BodyBBMB (Bhakra Beas Management Board) manages the Bhakra Nangal and Beas hydro projects.
FactThe Kishau Dam project has a capacity of 440 MW.

Prelims practice question

With reference to the Supreme Court ruling on inter-state electricity sharing, consider the following statements:

Himachal Pradesh was granted 11,973 MU of electricity from Punjab and Haryana over a 20-year period.
The BBMB manages the Bhakra Nangal and Beas hydro projects.
The power dues were settled at a rate of 10% based on a 2011 verdict.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a)3 only
(b)1 and 2 only
(c)1 and 3 only
(d)2 and 3 only

Show answer

Answer: (b) 1 and 2 only — Statements 1 and 2 are correct. Statement 3 is incorrect: The power dues were settled at a rate of 7.19%.

For Mains

Q. Discuss the significance of inter-state power sharing agreements and the role of judicial intervention in resolving long-pending hydro-electric arrears between Indian states.

Dimensions to cover in your answer

Inter-state friction: Balancing regional hydro-power rights with state-specific development priorities.
Fiscal federalism: Impact of long-pending arrears on state revenue and infrastructure funding.
Judicial oversight: Role of the Supreme Court in mediating resource distribution disputes between federating units.

Keywords: Inter-state dispute · Hydro-electric power · Federalism · Resource allocation · Judicial intervention

Read the full news →Report a mistake in this note How notes are made Source: The Hindu ↗Also: GS2 · Federalism & Centre-State relations Also: GS2 · Judiciary & landmark judgments

More Agriculture notes

Cauvery Authority ratifies 3.88 tmcft water release for Karnataka despite Tamil Nadu's demand · 8 November 2026
Telangana to build scientific silos network at 20 locations to protect farmers · 7 November 2026
KLDB to establish CALPR at Mattupetty to boost farmers' income and research · 7 November 2026
Tamil Nadu sanctions ₹2,842.77 crore for revised crop loan waiver scheme · 7 November 2026
Maharashtra to lease reservoir land in 304 drought-declared talukas for fodder crops · 7 November 2026
Centre directs traders to declare rice and paddy stocks amid rising prices · 7 November 2026

All Agriculture current affairs →

Something wrong, or something missing?

Spotted a mistake in a note, or want a topic, format or PDF that would help your preparation? Write to us. We read every mail and fix errors fast.

Report a mistake →Ask for something →[email protected]

This note is generated automatically from SatyaDheesh's news feed and mapped to the UPSC CSE syllabus. Check facts against the original report or PIB before using them in an answer.