KDA seeks impartial probe into Leh violence, defends activist Sonam Wangchuk
Kargil (PTI): Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA) on Thursday demanded an impartial probe into the clashes between protesters and security personnel in Leh town of Ladakh and asked the Union Territory administration to stop “witch hunting” and “harassment” of people.
It also defended climate activist Sonam Wangchuk, who was blamed by government for making "provocative statements" leading to mob violence, and expressed sympathies with the families of four slain protesters, describing them as “heroes of Ladakh”.
“Instead of handling the situation in a proper manner, the administration used excessive force on the unarmed protesters...we want a thorough probe into the violence and legal action against those who ordered the firing,” co-chairman of KDA Asgar Ali Karbalai told reporters here.
The Leh Apex Body and the KDA have been jointly spearheading an agitation over the past four years in support of their demands including statehood for Ladakh and have held several rounds of talks with the government in the past.
Karbalai, who was flanked by other senior members of the KDA including Ladakh MP Hanifa Jan and prominent leader Sajjad Kargili, said whatever happened was unfortunate but the way the government handled the situation was like “rubbing salt into our wounds”.
“The UT administration and the Ministry of Home Affairs are equally responsible for the happenings. We have been agitating peacefully for the last more than five years in support of our four demands including statehood, extension of Sixth Schedule, public service commission and separate Lok Sabha seats for Leh and Kargil.
“We are holding hunger strikes, demonstrations and long marches but the government’s failure pushed the youth to the wall. No job was made available to the local youth and deliberate attempts were made to delay the talks,” he said.
After May 27 talks, the Centre promised next round within a month but “maintained dead silence” despite back-to-back hunger strikes – first in Kargil and later in Leh, he said.
Wangchuk-led hunger strike was going on since September 10 but instead of convening a meeting in near future, the Centre called for talks on October 6 when already 11 days of hunger strike have passed, Karbalai said.
“Two elderly participants fell seriously ill and had to be shifted to a hospital, leading to concern among the people,” he said.
“They are trying to save themselves by blaming Wangchuk and others. It is the failure of the UT and Ministry of Home Affairs,” he said, adding the government is claiming that they were apprehensive of violence but why necessary security measures were not taken in advance.
“We reject their charges blaming Wangchuk and others for the violence,” he said.
MP Hanifa Jan said the people of Ladakh felt ignored after the MHA failed to convene next round of talks.
“The government must stop harassment of youth, hold free and fair investigation and restart dialogue with all seriousness to resolve pending demands,” he said.
Kargili alleged that the failed policy of the government was responsible for all the happenings.
“People felt frustrated without jobs. They (BJP) have included the demand (for extension of Sixth Schedule) in their manifesto but never kept their promise,” he said, adding “we never endorsed violence but they need to act with wisdom and restart the dialogue”.
He said the narrative to blame Wangchuk and others is “baseless and not acceptable to us”.
The KDA leaders also accused the government of witch-hunting, harassment of people associated with Leh Apex Body and mass detention of youth.
The government should immediately put an end to all this and restart dialogue with the people of Ladakh in a sincere manner, they said.
They said the people of Ladakh stand with the bereaved families of four persons who lost their lives.
“They are our heroes and their sacrifice will be remembered for ever,” Karbalai said.
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)
