People's referendum on Mandir is a bad precedence
It has been 26 years since Babri Masjid was demolished by karsevaks of Sangh Parivar in Ayodhya.
The minds that were broken on that day haven't healed yet. Those who razed the masjid aren't letting it happen. Sangh Parivar hasn't been able to construct a Ram Mandir in that site despite making it an issue during every election, reaping the benefits of increasing vote share. They don't even want that to happen. Because in the heart of hearts, they don't want a Mandir there, but they want to use the issue to pave way for a manuwadi Hindu nation in the meantime.
The day of December 6, 1992 wasn't just a day when a building was razed, but a day when a nail was driven into the coffin that would mark the end of democracy in India.
That incident was a blatant violation of democracy and constitution. Chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, Kalyan Singh deferred from his promise to Supreme Court that he would ensure karsevaks wouldn't render any damage to the Babri Masjid or the site. The masjid was razed to the ground in a matter of 20 minutes even as the police looked on. The then PM PV Narasimha Rao had given his silent concurrence to the whole incident.
The most celebrated leader of BJP, LK Advani who spearheaded a rath Yatra insisting on the construction of Ram Mandir has been relegated to sidelines. PM Modi who was alleged to be behind the Gujarat massacre is the PM now.
Inciting activities insisting on Ram Mandir have again begun. The Indian minds that had been angered post partition have flared up again. If the matter was just about construction of Ram Mandir, some understanding could have been reached. But one should have no doubt that even after a Mandir is constructed, Indians cannot ever be in peace.
The forces behind this are very clear about what they want to achieve. They want to end the constitutional system in the country by disturbing the social justice balance and want to bring back graded caste system in the name of hindu rashtra.
Hence Sangh Parivar has conspired to take up issues of Mathura Krishna Mandir and Kashi Vishwanath Mandirs in the due course of time.
People referendum or meetings to collect people's opinions are being held all over the country. Supreme Court is being criticized at every meeting for not respecting the choice of Hindus in taking up the case of Ram Mandir. RSS sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat has also voiced his anger against the Supreme Court. Forgetting the responsibility of his post, even PM Modi has said Congress is bringing pressure on SC to not hear the Mandir case.
In the last four and half years, Modi administration has been more than disastrous. Demonetisation and GST have dealt a very hard blow to common people. Gau Rakshaks are killing people in broad daylight in the guise of cow protection. Their main agenda is to divide people in the name of religion to create a hindu vote bank and create unrest in the society. They want BJP to assume power again under all circumstances. Secular parties that have to come together to counter them are all scattered. India will break into splinters should the plan of fundamentalists work to their satisfaction.
We should not allow this to happen. The issue of Babri Masjid should be concluded as per the court directive whenever it arrives. Ordinance has no space in legal system. Indians should give a befitting response to the demand of referendum in people's nation. BJP is conspiring to create unrest across the country by raking up such issues everywhere. BJP is forcing people to take law into their hands with respect to Baba Budangiri in Karnataka, Sabarimala in Kerala etc.
BJP national president Amit Shah is also adding fuel to the fire. With this, the number of devotees at Sabarimala has come down drastically. People of this country must insist to Election Commission to cancel the recognition given to BJP for continuously aiding unrest in the society in the name of Mandir or Masjid.
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)
