Cong makes all out bid to pacify rebels against Deve Gowda to withdraw from contest
Tumkur LS Seat
Bengaluru, Mar 27: With two days left for withdrawal of nominations for the first phase of Lok Sabha polls in Karnataka, Congress leaders are making all attempts to pacify the party's rebel candidates against former Prime Minister H D Deve Gowda, the ruling alliance's nominee in Tumkur.
Defying the electoral arrangement under which Tumkur was allotted to JD(S), sitting Congress MP S P Muddahanumegowda filed his papers on Monday both as party candidate and also as an independent.
K N Rajanna, another Congress leader and former MLA, has also filed his nomination from Tumkur as an independent candidate, opposing Gowda.
Both leaders are upset against Congress' decision to cede the Tumkur seat to JD(S), despite the party having its sitting MP there.
Pradesh Congress Chief Dinesh Gudu Rao expressed confidence about solving the issue amicably.
"We are confident that it will be fine. I'm talking to him (Muddahanumegowda), I have hundred per cent faith that there won't be any problem," he said.
Responding to a question on Rajanna, he said, "I'm in touch with him and he has said that he will abide by the party's stand and won't take any decision against the Congress party...We will solve it definitely."
Deputy Chief Minister G Parameshwara, who hails from Tumkur, also expressed confidence that Muddahanumegowda would withdraw in the larger interest of defeating the BJP.
"I have spoken to Muddahanumegowda. I have also informed our high command and they will also speak to him.
I'm confident that Muddahanumegowda being a gentleman politician will withdraw in the larger interest to defeat the BJP," he said.
Muddahanumegowda is determined to contest, as he is the only member among 10 sitting Congress MPs from the state who have not got the ticket this time.
JD(S) bagged Tumkur seat after a hard bargain with Congress as the grand old party did not concede Mysore, another seat it had demanded, due to strong resentment from CLP leader Siddaramaiah, as it is his home turf.
Mysore and Tumkur both come under old Mysuru region, where the Vokkaliga community, seen as a strong vote bank of the JD(S), is dominant.
Congress too has considerable presence there.
Speaking to local news channels in Tumkur, Muddahanumegowda said that he will not backtrack and will contest the polls as per the wish of his voters and supporters.
Stating that he has filed his nomination, both as a Congress candidate and an independent, he said, "I did not get the Congress ticket till Tuesday evening (last day to file nomination), but both alliance partners still have a chance to declare me as their candidate."
Speaking to reporters Rajanna said his decision would depend on what Muddahanumegowda agrees to.
Stating that he supports Muddahanumegowda, he said "I will wait for his decision...
There is pressure on me to withdraw, but I have not decided yet...", he said.
Deve Gowda opted for Tumkur seat over Bangalore North, another option that was available before him, after giving up Hassan Lok Sabha seat that he had been representing to his grandson Prajwal Revanna.
If Muddahanumegowda contests from Tumkur as a rebel candidate, it will add to the Congress-JD(S) coalition woes as the alliance is facing a backlash at several places,including Mandya and Hassan, with party workers unhappy with the seat arrangements.
Tumkur will go to the polls in the first phase on April 18
The last date for withdrawal of nominations is March 29.
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)
