CM Bommai rejects rail infra proposals of Kerala govt, flags concerns over damage to environment
Bengaluru, Sep 18: The bilateral talks held between the governments of Kerala and Karnataka here on Sunday on various projects failed to yield results as Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai turned down the proposals of his counterpart Pinarayi Vijayan, citing environmental concerns.
Bommai rejected all the key infrastructure related proposals of Kerala, saying it will damage the eco-sensitive zones and wildlife sanctuaries.
Vijayan called on Bommai in the city this morning to hold discussions on various projects and issues of mutual interest, as decided at the South Zonal Council meeting.
The projects that Vijayan and Bommai discussed were Kanhangad-Kaniyoor Railway Line via Panathur, Thalasseri-Mysuru Railway Line, underground tunnel passing through Bandipura National Park and proposal to increase bus services at night in this eco-sensitive zone.
Addressing reporters after the meeting, Bommai said, the Kerala government sought co-operation for its various railway projects including Kanhangad-Kaniyur Rail Line route, and other highway projects. The proposed Kanhangad-Kaniyur rail line project has a 40 km route in Kerala and 31 km in Karnataka." "However, this project is not very beneficial for Karnataka. Besides, it will pass through the rich bio-diversity and ecologically sensitive areas of the Western Ghats. So, the Kerala CM was clearly told that it was not possible for the State of Karnataka to give extended co-operation for this project." ... the Railways had said that it will review the project if both the states agree to it. We rejected it because there is no benefit to Karnataka from this Railway Line, he said.
Another Railway project that the state rejected was the Thalaseri-Mysuru Railway Line.
Vijayan discussed the old project of Tellicherry-Mysuru rail line route and he was told that it was not possible to give permission as the proposed rail route will traverse through Bandipur-Nagarhole National Parks and it will cause great damage to flora and fauna, Bommai said.
The Kerala CM proposed the construction of an underground rail route and even it was rejected flatly as it would damage the environment during the construction activities. Vijayan was informed that presently, two buses are operated during night through Bandipur National Highway, but he sought permission to allow four buses and that proposal was also rejected, Bommai pointed out.
He said Vijayan also told him that the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) has proposed a new alignment touching the NH-73. He also apprised the Karnataka chief minister that this new alignment will not pass through the eco-sensitive zones.
We don't know what proposal the NHAI officials are coming up with. Let the NHAI give us a proposal. However, we will not allow any project in eco-sensitive zone, be it Nagarhole or Bandipur National Park, Bommai clarified.
However, a statement issued by the Kerala Chief Minister's Office said that both the states will jointly request the NHAI to implement the alignments from Tholpetti to Purakattiri and Sultan Batheri to Malappuram of the Mysore Malappuram Economic Corridor project as an alternative to the NH 766, passing through the tiger reserve, where night time travel restrictions are in place.
The Pinarayi Vijayan government also stated that Bommai has agreed to examine the proposed Kanhangad-Panathur-Kaniyoor railway line project, which will connect north Kerala and south Karnataka, and also seriously consider providing the necessary financial assistance for it.
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)
