BJP MLA distances himself from Tejasvi Surya’s stance on Hanuman Chalisa row
Says issue was blown out of proportions to gain electoral gains
Bengaluru: On Wednesday, BJP MLA Uday Garudachar addressed the recent incident involving an attack on a shop owner in Nagarathpete, clarifying that it was not related to the playing of Hanuman Chalisa or azan. Garudachar emphasized that the issue had been blown out of proportion as the elections approached.
In an interview with a private news channel, Garudachar stated, "It's untrue that the telecom shop owner in Nagarathpet was attacked for playing Hanuman Chalisa. I have reliable information as it falls within my constituency. There was no need to exaggerate the issue." He stressed that it was unfortunate that the incident had been politicized during the election season.
Asserting his commitment to secularism and communal harmony, Garudachar affirmed, "I will never attribute the attack to individuals of another faith. I believe in the coexistence of all communities in peace." He mentioned that he had communicated this stance to Tejasvi Surya when the latter reached out to him earlier in the day. Garudachar advised Surya to allow the authorities to handle the situation within the framework of the law.
ALSO READ: Union Minister Shobha Karandlaje says people from TN plant bombs in Karnataka, Stalin fumes
The Congress party took to social media platform X to highlight Garudachar's statement and condemn Tejasvi Surya's involvement in the incident. The party accused Surya of attempting to fuel communal tensions for electoral gain and criticized his lack of substantial achievements. Referring to Surya as a 'foolish baby,' the tweet denounced his actions as mere theatrics to sway voters.
Earlier, BJP MP P C Mohan, along with Tejasvi Surya, Shobha Karandlaje, and MLA Suresh Kumar, along with supporters of the sangh parivar, staged a protest in Nagarathapete, alleging an attack on Mukesh for playing Hanuman Chalisa in his mobile shop. The demonstration included slogans such as 'Jai Sri Ram, Jai Hanuman,' and criticized what they perceived as the government's anti-Hindu stance. However, the situation escalated, leading to the arrest of several leaders and protesters by the police, including Tejasvi Surya, Shobha Karandlaje, and Suresh Kumar, who were later released.
ಚಿಕ್ಕಪೇಟೆ ವಿಧಾನಸಭಾ ಕ್ಷೇತ್ರದ ನಗರ್ತಪೇಟೆಯ ಶಾಸಕರು ಬಿಜೆಪಿಯವರೇ,
— Karnataka Congress (@INCKarnataka) March 20, 2024
ಬಿಜೆಪಿ ಶಾಸಕ ಉದಯ್ ಗರುಡಾಚಾರ್ ಅವರು @BJP4Karnataka ಪ್ರಾಪಗಾಂಡಾಗಳಿಗೆ ತಪರಾಕಿ ನೀಡಿದ್ದಾರೆ,
ಇದು ಬಿಜೆಪಿಯವರು ಚುನಾವಣೆಗಾಗಿ ಹಚ್ಚಿದ ಕೋಮು ಬೆಂಕಿ ಎನ್ನುವುದಕ್ಕೆ ಪುಷ್ಟಿ ನೀಡಿದ್ದಾರೆ.@Tejasvi_Surya ಎಂಬ ಅವಿವೇಕಿ ಶಿಶುವಿಗೆ ಈ ಗಲಾಟೆಯ ವಿಷಯದಲ್ಲಿ… pic.twitter.com/xH0XEpsnNO
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)
