Government launches surgical strike on higher military service pay
Narendra Modi is the first PM to have used the army for political gains. He sought votes in the name of soldiers who were dying in Kashmir during the Lok Sabha elections. He had assured to avenge the death of our soldiers tooth to tooth and nail to nail. But then, he secretly went to Pakistan, accepted Nawaz Sharif's hospitality, ate biryani at his residence and returned home to hear about more soldiers being killed. Though this was humiliating for the government, he tried to take undue credit for the alleged surgical strike that was to have carried out by our soldiers.
Though he says our soldiers have destroyed the terrorist camps on Pakistan's side, the strikes still continue to claim the lives of our soldiers. Moreover, surgical strike is something that has been continuing since a long time through all other governments as well, including during the time or Manmohan Singh as the PM but the Congress had never used it for publicity. In fact, no Prime Minister in the past had ever used it for their benefit.
During the time of Indira Gandhi as the PM, Indian army separated Bangladesh and Pakistan through a war and brought freedom to Bangladesh. Even after that, Congress never used it for gains. But the central government sent out a circular insisting that surgical strike be celebrated as an annual occasion. BJP set the path to insult the supreme sacrifice made by the soldiers by using it for the benefit of the party. The party has made millions in profit for their most favoured company, Reliance ensuring they reap benefit in thousands of crores through Rafale deal. Unfortunately, Modi who speaks on anything and everything, has gone totally silent as far as Rafale is concerned.
Media has already reported that Bofors is nothing compared to the Rafal scam. By ensuring that no investigation takes place, the central government has indicated rather clearly that it has a big role to play in this scam. Pretending to be so caring about the army and other defence forces, Modi spends festivals with them and does not lose a single opportunity to pose for pictures with them for publicity. But the real concern of the government about military has come to light only two days ago. The government has flatly rejected the plea by armed forces that their Military Service Pay needs to be honest from Rs 5,500 to RS 10,000.
Office of Army Chief has expressed displeasure over this decision which has affected the lives of over 1.12 lakh army personnel who would have to live without a hike for some more time. The reason given by the government for this decision is that the the government would suffer a financial burden of Rs 610 cr. The politicians who roam in cars, enjoy facilities by the governor and literally live a life of luxury with regular pay hikes approved by their own self, They hardly spare a thought for someone else.
Why did the government think of financial burden only when it had to pay the army personnel? Soldiers don't just fight with enemies such as China or Pakistan, but also with rain, snow, bed bugs, mosquitoes and hunger, pain and most discomforting conditions that the normal people never get to face. The army men guard the border of the country under most dire conditions that are highly unimaginable too. Their hunger, need for sleep, time with family and other aspects affect them very badly. The number of soldiers killed owing to avalanche is much higher than those who died that the hands of enemies. We all know what happened go that soldier who exposed the poor quality of food served to the army men. At times like this, even a small hike in their salaries would have given them some relief and our acknowledgement of their supreme sacrifice would have brought them some relief.
We all need to remember one thing. Most of the soldiers serving in Kashmir borders usually reach home with a lot of I'll was plaguing their body. No media would ever show their struggles. There are so many who have lost their legs owing to conditions like braving the snow. A big number of soldiers are committing suicide every year owing to depression and other related psychological issues. To hike their pay, the government uses the pretext of financial deficit. But this financial burden was never an issue with the government deciding to erect the statue of Unity of Sardar Patel at a cost of more than Rs 3000 crores. The government is willing to spend a lot more money on the statue of Ram and Shivaji, setting up iron structures that serve no purpose to anyone. Those thousands of crores set aside for such statues can be used for the benefit of soldiers and their families.
Sardar Patel brought Goa and other territories using the same army. Helping the army with aid would have been beneficial and a befitting tribute to Sardar Patel and also to the the contribution of soldiers. The massive status is an insult done to Patel. The central government that uses the pretext of army at the drop of a hat, should know this decision to reject improved pay for the personnel is nothing less than a surgical strike on them. This is the heights of shamelessness of those who rule us.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
