Three JeM terrorists killed in encounter in J-K's Pulwama
Srinagar(PTI) Three Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) terrorists, including one who was behind the killing of BJP worker Rakesh Pandita in June, were gunned down in an encounter with security forces in Jammu and Kashmir's Pulwama district on Saturday, officials said.
Security forces personnel had launched a cordon-and-search operation in the upper reaches of the forest area of Nagbaeran Tral in the south Kashmir district following inputs about the presence of ultras there, they said.
The officials said the search operation turned into an encounter when the terrorists fired upon the security personnel, who retaliated.
"In the ensuing gunfight, three terrorists affiliated with JeM outfit were killed," they said.
Inspector General of Police (IGP), Kashmir, Vijay Kumar said one of the slain ultras has been identified as Wakeel Shah.
"Shah is one of the terrorists included in the recently released list of top 10 terrorists wanted by the police. He was involved in the killing of BJP leader Rakesh Pandita. It is a huge success," the IGP told reporters at a press conference at the Army's Victor Force headquarters at Awantipora.
GoC, Victor Force, Major Gen Rashim Bali also addressed the media.
Kumar said there was no collateral damage in the operation.
"It was a very difficult operation and concluded without any collateral damage. We cordoned off the target area, offered them surrender, but they fired and were killed in retaliation," he said.
The IGP said the terrorists used to exploit the families of the Gujjar community where they were hiding.
In a stern message to the ultras, he said there was no hiding place for them.
I want to tell the terrorists and their families that do not think that you will hide in the mountains after killing civilians and no one will do anything. Our force is professional and we will track you there also and neutralise you like we have been, Kumar said.
Major Gen Bali said the militants were operating in the area for a long time.
A solid message from us has gone out through this operation that there is no place for them, not even in the forests. We will get information about them and we will neutralise them. We will continue eliminating them by launching suitable operations whenever there is any information, he said.
The GoC said two AK 47 rifles, an SLR, a UBGL and a huge amount of ammunition were recovered from the encounter site.
Asked if there were inputs on the presence of more RPGs in the valley after it was recovered from the site of an encounter in Kulgam on August 13 where Pakistani militant Usman was killed, IGP Kumar said the security forces have no information about the presence of such a weapon in the hinterland.
We have activated our intelligence and will neutralise any such threat if there is. The forces are ready and the counter-insurgency grid has been made stronger, and if there is any such threat we will neutralise that timely, he added.
Replying to another question, Kumar said so far, only one foreign terrorist was killed this year who had recently infiltrated .
The foreign terrorist killed in Bandipora was a recent infiltration, all the others were either six months ago or one-and-a-half years ago, he 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)
