BJP may field ex-CMs Jagadish Shettar and Basavaraj Bommai in LS polls
Bengaluru, Mar 7: BJP that has plans to win big time in Karnataka in the upcoming Lok Sabha polls, may field two of its former Chief Ministers -- Basavaraj Bommai and Jagadish Shettar, who come from the dominant Lingayat community, counted by the party as its core vote-base.
Giving indications about this, veteran party leader B S Yediyurappa on Thursday said discussions have taken place regarding candidates for all 28 Lok Sabha seats in the state including Bommai and Shettar, with Union Home Minister Amit Shah and the party's national president J P Nadda, but no final decision has been taken.
The former Chief Minister, who is a member of BJP's Parliamentary Board and Central Election Committee, also hinted that BJP may allot two-three seats to its alliance partner JD(S) in Karnataka, on which party's national leadership including Prime Minister Narendra Modi will be taking a final decision.
BJP leaders from various States are meeting Shah and Nadda, ahead of the party's Central Election Committee, which includes Modi and other senior leaders, holding its second meeting later this week for finalising the party's candidates for the Lok Sabha polls.
ALSO READ: Karnataka Deputy CM DK Shivakumar claims several opposition leaders will join Congress
It has so far announced candidates for 195 Lok Sabha seats out of the total 543 across the country.
"Yesterday Amit Shah ji, Nadda ji and all of us together discussed candidates for all 28 Lok Sabha seats. Who should be given the ticket has not yet been finalised. All of that will be discussed with the Prime Minister, and we might get clarity in two-three days," Yediyurappa told reporters in the national capital.
He said, "Everything has been discussed, but who will be given a ticket from where has not yet been finalised. Discussions have happened about Bommai and Jagadish Shettar."
Speculations are rife within the state BJP circles that Bommai, who is currently MLA from Shiggaon, may be fielded from Haveri, with party's sitting MP Shivakumar Udasi announcing retirement from electoral politics after the current term ends.
Shettar may be fielded from Belgaum (Belagavi), currently represented by Mangala Angadi, the widow of former Union Minister of State Suresh Angadi. She had won with a margin of over 5,000 votes in 2021 bypolls against the Congress strongman Satish Jarkiholi, when after the seat fell vacant due to her husband's death.
BJP wants to replace Mangala with a strong candidate to retain the seat, and Shettar's name is doing the rounds as he also happens to be a relative of the Angadi family and was the poll incharge of this seat when she faced the bypoll.
Shettar, who had quit the BJP to join the Congress ahead of the state assembly polls last year on being denied the ticket, rejoined his old party in January.
Both Bommai and Shettar are from the Lingayat community, which is seen as the strong vote-base of the BJP in Karnataka.
According to party sources, the community "slightly moving away" from the saffron party in the Assembly polls last year is said to be one among the major reasons for its defeat. Yediyurappa is also a Lingayat.
According to Yediyurappa, there will be another round of discussions with BJP's central leadership on Thursday at which some decisions may be taken. He also expressed confidence about winning at least 25 seats, and noted that efforts are on in this direction.
Regarding the seats that will be given to JD(S), he said the decision that will be taken by Modi and Shah is final.
"It is not yet finalised as to which seats will be given to them. Two to three seats may be given to them," he added.
BJP and JD(S) have had discussions on seat sharing. However, there is no official announcement yet.
As per information available so far, JD(S) may contest in three seats -- Mandya, Hassan and Kolar.
There may also be possibility of a candidate from the JD(S) contesting on the BJP symbol, according to sources, and it is likely to be noted cardiac surgeon and former Prime Minister H D Deve Gowda's son-in-law Dr C N Manjunath from Bangalore Rural segment, where sitting MP and Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar's brother D K Suresh is likely to be the Congress candidate once again.
There is also pressure from party workers on Gowda's son -- former CM and JD(S) state President H D Kumaraswamy -- to contest from the Vokkaliga bastion of Mandya, JD(S) sources added.
The BJP wants to repeat or surpass its 2019 Lok Sabha polls performance, when it had swept the state, by winning 25 out of total 28 seats, and had ensured the win of a party supported independent candidate in Mandya.
The Congress and the JD(S), which were running a coalition government back then and fought the election together, had come a cropper winning just one seat each.
But the political scene has changed significantly; the Congress scored a thumping victory in the Assembly elections in May last year and now appears battle-ready, determined to put up a strong show in the Lok Sabha polls.
It is also a role reversal of sorts for JD(S) which joined the BJP-led NDA in September last year and wants to prove that it's still a force to reckon with, particularly in South Karnataka.
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)
