Mangaloreans want environmental friendly development; demand saving trees during NHAI work
Mangaluru: Environmental activists from the city have opposed all developmental projects that involve felling of trees and which lead to an ecological imbalance. They were expressing their opinions on the National Highway Authority of India's (NHAI) decision to cut down 99 trees for the expansion of a stretch of the highway, from KPT to Nanthoor, at a grievance redressal meeting organized at the Range Forest Office at Hoige Bazar in Mangaluru on Monday.
"The city struggles to get water in the summer and fears floods in the rainy season. We have the disasters that happened at Shirur and Wayanad before our own eyes, this monsoon. We don't oppose any developments but we are against any developments that destroy trees. Let the development happen along with the conservation of trees", the activists demanded.
Assistant Conservator of Forests (ACF) Clifford Lobo said that NHAI had identified 99 trees to be felled in the 350 metre stretch of the highway. As the regulations mandated seeking of public opinion when more than 50 trees were cut down, the current meeting was being held, he said.
ALSO READ: Moodbidri: PU student goes missing, complaint lodged
National Environmental Conservation Federation (NECF) Convenor Shashidhar Shetty objected to the cutting down of hundreds of trees along the stretch of the road even before any expansion works ensued. He said that the NHAI was not following the green policy and the trees could be shifted to a different location. A notice had been issued against the forest department by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) for its negligence in connection with the Shirur landslide, he said. "Rs 17 crore green cess collected by Mangaluru City Corporation during 2004-2017 isn't being used for providing a green cover to the city. It is used for some other purpose", he accused.
Corporator Manohar Kadri opposed the opinions of the environmental activists who were allegedly silent on the vast number of trees cut down during the building of apartments in the city. He said that the current extension work was of paramount importance as the traffic congestion in Nanthur junction was even affecting ambulances carrying patients in critical conditions.
Harish Raj, a NECF representative, sought information about the places where trees where being planted for the ones cut down in the name of development. "Where will the trees that can be transferred from the location be shifted to?" he asked. Activist Kishor Attavar highlighted the need of a ring road to alleviate the traffic issues in the Nanthoor junction.
Seeking public cooperation for places to plant more trees in the next three years for those cut down for the project, ACF Clifford Lobo assured that he would personally inspect how many trees among the ones marked for felling could be saved or translocated.
NHAI Manager Chandrashekhar said that the KPT-Nathur road would be 40 metre wide in the middle, along with an 8 metre wide service road. "The highway will go across an underpass and the vehicles travelling towards Bengaluru will take the service road. All necessary structural designs including underground sewage system has been planned in the underpass to avoid clogging", he said.
Bhuvan, a youth attending the meeting, said that it was of no use if a tree was planted in Vamanjoor for the one that was cut in Mangaluru as a tree also sheltered a vast amount of birds and insects. "Mangaluru has only 6.2% of tree cover while the actual amount essential for an urban area is 33%. So we must plan for planting more trees while trying to conserve the existing ones", he said.
Referring to the politicians' dreams to make a Singapore out of Mangaluru, environmental activist Jeeth Milan Roche reminded attendees that Singapore had 44% tree cover while Mangaluru had only 6.2%. "2 lakh people die due to air pollution every year in the country. And it’s wrong to say that trees cause accidents on the road. Trees must be saved, and caution must be exercised about pot holes and unscientific projects", he added.
Range Forest Officer (RFO) Rajesh Baligar, NHAI site engineer Naveen and plantation expert Ashika were present.
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)
