CAT stays suspension of IAS officer who checked PM's copter
Bengaluru, Apr 25: The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) bench here Thursday stayed the Election Commission order suspending IAS officer Mohammed Mohsin for checking prime minister Narendra Modi's helicopter in Odisha.
The officer from Karnataka cadre, deployed in Odisha as a general observer, was suspended on April 17 for checking Modi's helicopter in Odisha's Sambalpur in "violation" of norms for dealing with SPG protectees and sent back to the state.
The CAT maintained that during an election process while reasonable assurances of protection and security must be made available to SPG protectees, it cannot be said "they are eligible for anything and everything."
The bench also ordered issue of notice to the EC and "four others" and posted the matter for further hearing on June 6.
Mohsin had tried to check some luggage in the convoy of the Prime Minister during his campaign visit and the EC had said he had acted in violation of its existing instructions.
In its order, CAT member (Judicial) Dr K B Suresh noted there was a circular regarding the SPG protectees that they are exempted from certain examinations on certain grounds.
"We will not go into the SPG protectees guidelines as per the bluebook right now, but the rule of law must prevail," he said.
The CAT also took note of the plea of the applicant's counsel who said there were news about heavy packages unloaded from prime minister's cavalcade being taken away in other vehicle.
Questions were raised but apparently no action followed, it said.
Noting that under the Constitutional process of federal structure, even though the EC has supervisory powers over the employees under its control at that moment of time, the CAT said once they are out of it, the commission's powers would cease.
The tribunal said: "Thereforethe suspension order issued by the election commission cannot, on the face of it, lie. It is hereby stayed."
However, the CAT said it would look into this matter afresh once it received the response from the EC.
The tribunal said the applicant will be eligible to rejoin his former position under the Karnataka government "without any further ado about it".
Following the suspension, an EC source had said: "It has been laid down that SPG protectees are exempted from checking.
He (the officer) should have known the instruction being an observer. The reason for suspension is dereliction of duty."
IAS officer Mohammed Mohsin
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)
