If a Dalit is not made deputy CM, it will spell trouble for Cong, warns Parameshwara
Bengaluru (PTI): Senior Congress leader G Parameshwara on Thursday cautioned the party's central leadership that if a Deputy Chief Minister (DCM) post is not given to a Dalit, there would be adverse reaction and it would spell trouble for the party.
The 71-year-old Parameshwara, a Dalit, was deputy chief minister during Congress-JD(S) coalition government led by H D Kumaraswamy. He was also the longest-serving Karnataka Pradesh Congress Committee chief (eight years).
His veiled warning came hours after the Congress announced that Siddaramaiah would be chief minister and DK Shivakumar would be his only deputy.
To a question about Shivakumar having allegedly put a condition to the leadership that he should be the only DCM, Parameshwara said, "What he has said might be right in Shivakumar's point of view, but high command's viewpoint should be different. High Command has to decide, we expect them (high command) to..."
On whether injustice has been done to Dalits by not giving a DCM post to the community, he said the people, especially the Dalit community, have huge expectations.
"Understanding these expectations, our leadership will have to make a decision. If it doesn't happen, naturally there will be reactions for it. There is no need for me to say it. Instead of realising it later, if they rectify it now it will be better. Or else it may cause trouble for the party. I would like to tell them to understand it," Parameshwara said.
He said he was an aspirant for both the posts of CM and DCM.
"I was both chief minister and deputy chief minister aspirant but now we have to abide by the decision of the high command, so let's see what they will do in the days to come. For now they have made announcements about the two, we will have to wait and see how they will do justice during the cabinet expansion," he said.
Speaking to reporters here, he said, "The high command has announced CM and DCM. Siddaramaiah is becoming CM for the second time from our party, we expect him to provide good administration. Expectations of people are huge on us because of the promise of good administration in our manifesto. I welcome the decision and expect them to take all of us into confidence in giving good administration."
Parameshwara, who represents Koratagere in Tumakuru district, had lost the 2013 assembly polls, when he was KPCC president. He was a contender for the chief minister's post then, but as he was defeated, he was made an MLC and a minister in the Siddaramaiah government (2013-2018).
Responding to a question about "none of them" (Dalits) having asked for the DCM post with a strong voice, Parameshwara said a strong voice doesn't mean shouting with a demand.
"We have asked (for posts)...I hope the high command will pay attention to it, as people have voted for us and have contributed to Congress coming to power. We have to keep this in mind and move ahead," he said.
Earlier in the day, before Congress's official announcement naming Siddaramaiah and Shivakumar as CM and DCM, respectively, Parameshwara in response to a question on whether he would ask for a DCM post, said, "What is there to ask? They should give. As I was DCM earlier, I expect them to give. Let's see..."
Objecting to Shivakumar's alleged demand that he alone should be DCM, he said, "One person alone should be in power (and) others should not be is not a right stand. Everyone has contributed towards the party coming to power. All communities have contributed, and naturally, justice should be done to them."
Pointing out that Dalits, Lingayats, and minorities have strongly stood by the Congress party in the polls, he said the Congress has won in 35 out of 51 Dalit seats.
"Along with that, in two general seats the community candidates have won, so it is totally 37. The Dalit votes have made an impact in several other segments," he said.
In the May 10 elections to the 224-member Assembly, the Congress scored an emphatic victory by bagging 135 seats, while the ruling BJP and former Prime Minister H D Deve Gowda-led Janata Dal (Secular) secured 66 and 19 seats respectively.
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)
