Ramesh Jarkiholi says he and members backing him would decide soon on quitting party
Bengaluru: Rebel Congress MLA Ramesh Jarkiholi Wednesday said he along with legislators who are with him would discuss and decide on resigning from the party soon.
Jarkiholi said he was only "technically" in the Congress and was firm on his stand to quit the party.
The former minister said his resignation was delayed because those with him suggested on quitting in bulk. "I have said what I had to yesterday and today, I willnot say anything more in front of media. I'm firm on my stand..
you will have to wait for my result..
you will get good news in a few days," Jarkiholi told reporters.
Stating that he had intended to resign earlier but decided to wait as his well-wishers and other legislators suggested about quitting in "bulk", he said "I'm only technically in Congress.... it is a group decision, not mine alone.
I will have to hear others also, we will all sit together today andtomorrow and take a decision," he said without divulging howmany are with him and any specific date.
Asked if any attempt was being made to destabilise the Congress-JDS coalition government, he said "I can't say anything as I'm still in Congress, I cannot speak against Congress."
Earlier too, Ramesh Jarkiholi had threatened to resign as Congress MLA, but had gone incommunicado after that.
Speaking to reporters at Belagavi earlier, Jarkiholi said he was heading for Bengaluru and would resign Wednesday itself, as he accused his brother and Forest minister Satish Jarkiholi of "cheating".
The Gokak MLA also said he would contest the by-election that will be necessitated by his resignation from the assembly segment itself, but would opt for Yemkanmardi, currently represented by Satish during the next election.
Amid speculation about the longevity of the Congress-JD(S) coalition government in the State once the Lok Sabha poll results are announced on May 23, Ramesh Jarkiholi had on Tuesday indicated about quitting Congress.
Accused of hobnobbing with the BJP, and not attending cabinet and party meetings, he was dropped in the rejig of the H D Kumaraswamy-led Congress-JD(S) coalition cabinet in December last yearthat saw induction of eight new ministers, including Satish.
Ramesh Jarkiholi has been claiming the support of a sizeable chunk of party MLAs and had come under the party's scanner over reports that the BJP was trying to tap him to remove the Kumaraswamy government.
Jarkiholi had even camped in Mumbai along with some Congress MLAs in January pushing the state into a political turmoil as it had threatened the government, and did not attend the budget session initially, for which Congress leadership has moved a disqualification motion against him andthree other MLAs before the speaker.
He also did not campaign for Congress candidates during Lok sabha polls and even stayed away from Rahul Gandhi's events. Hitting out at brother Satish, RameshJarkiholi accused him of starting the dissidence activities, while he was happy as Minister.
"I was cheated by Satish Jarkiholi and no one else, he (Satish) came home and cried saying don't sit thinking you have become Minister, we will face setback politically if we don't act now.
He was the one who started it, but now is projecting himself as loyal Congress man. Because of such people, the Congress has come to such a situation today....hecheated me and became the Minister," he added.
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)
