Sukhjinder Singh Randhawa frontrunner for Punjab CM's post: Congress sources
Chandigarh(PTI): Sukhjinder Singh Randhawa, a minister in the outgoing cabinet of Amarinder Singh, is likely to be the state's new chief minister, Congress sources said on Sunday.
Randhawa, the Jails and Cooperation Minister in the outgoing cabinet, has emerged as the frontrunner for the post of Congress Legislature Party (CLP) leader, who will be the next chief minister, the sources said.
Earlier, when asked that his name was among the frontrunners, Randhawa had said he or his family "never hankers for any post".
When the mediapersons here had asked that can it be assumed that they were talking to the future chief minister, Randhawa quipped, " You are talking to a Congressman".
In a veiled dig at Amarinder Singh, he then added, "A chief minister remains (in his post) only till the time when his party, people of the state stand by him".
Congress veteran Capt. Amarinder Singh resigned as chief minister of Punjab with less than five months to go for the Assembly polls after a bruising power struggle with state party chief Navjot Singh Sidhu, and had said that he felt "humiliated" over the way the party handled the protracted crisis.
Asked how soon can one expect the name of new CLP leader to be announced, Randhawa said, "We have authorized Congress president in this regard."
He said the party senior leadership has not only to talk to the MLAs, but other stalwarts too before finalizing the name.
Asked why so much time is being taken to announce the CLP leader, he said, "If you have to make a village sarpanch, sometimes it takes 20 days to decide".
However, he assured the new CLP leader's name will be announced later in the day.
On Amarinder Singh saying he felt humiliated, Randhawa replied, "So far, the BJP has changed five chief ministers. And in the Congress too, some chief ministers have been changed. In Congress, Amarinder Singh has the maximum tenure of nine-and-half years as chief minister. The honour he got, I think no other chief minister got so much."
To a question over what caused differences with Amarinder Singh, he said, "When we felt that promises which were made and elections were near and the Congress high-command and we too felt worried".
Randhawa had earlier this year joined hands with Navjot Singh Sidhu, and had targeted his own government over alleged failure to fulfil the promises made in the run-up to the 2017 polls including those related to the sacrilege incidents (in 2015).
On Amarinder Singh's outbursts against Navjot Singh Sidhu after he resigned as chief minister, Randhawa termed it as "unfortunate" that a senior leader had used such words.
"I think it is unfortunate that such words have been used against Punjab Congress chief by a senior leader," he said.
"Even when there were differences with Amarinder Singh since April 26, but you must have never heard me speak any word against him in a disrespectful manner," said Randhawa.
"Even today, I consider him like a father," said the Jails and Cooperation minister in the outgoing cabinet of Amarinder Singh.
"...Till the time we (Amarinder Singh and Randhawa) were together, you saw that I was very close to him. When he hurt me, then I followed my conscience," Randhawa said.
The names of former Punjab Congress chief Sunil Jakhar, the party's current state unit president Navjot Singh Sidhu, Tript Rajinder Singh Bajwa and Sukhjinder Singh Randhawa are doing the rounds.
The 79-year-old Amarinder Singh, one of the Congress' powerful regional satraps, had put in his papers after speaking to the Congress president and shortly before a crucial meeting of the CLP here on Saturday evening.
He had later launched a no-holds-barred attack against Sidhu, describing his bete noire, a cricketer-turned-politician, as a "total disaster".
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)
