Karnataka Minister Rajanna asks Shivakumar not to 'misuse' AICC, high command's name
Bengaluru, Feb 17 (PTI): The power tussle within the ruling Congress in Karnataka seems to be intensifying with Cooperation Minister K N Rajanna on Monday hitting back at Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar, urging him not to "misuse" the name of the AICC and the party high command.
He was reacting to Shivakumar's statement on Sunday—in which he indirectly hit out at Rajanna and other party leaders and ministers considered close to Chief Minister Siddaramaiah—stating that there is no need for anyone to make statements 'misusing' the name of the CM, the undisputed leader of the Congress party in Karnataka.
Shivakumar's statement was in response to a section of party leaders who have been advocating for Siddaramaiah to complete his full term as Chief Minister, stating that his leadership is crucial for the party to retain power in the next election amid speculations about a potential leadership change in Karnataka later this year.
ALSO READ: Siddaramaiah is our leader, no need to 'misuse' his name: Karnataka Deputy CM DK Shivakumar
The state Congress chief, Shivakumar who has made no secret of his ambition to become the CM, chose not to respond to Rajanna's comments.
He merely said that he doesn’t want to indulge in discussions at the moment and would address the issue after returning from his Kerala and Rajasthan tour.
Addressing media here, Rajanna said, "I too agree that the Chief Minister's name should not be misused. We should also tell him (Shivakumar) not to misuse the AICC and high command's name, as he repeatedly mentions the AICC and the high command. For everything, he refers to the AICC—will the AICC come and speak on every issue? If issues are brought to their notice, they may give their opinion or instructions."
"We will all abide by the high command's directive and that’s a different matter. In politics, people misuse things according to their convenience."
Asked whether he was alleging that Shivakumar was misusing the AICC's name, the Minister replied, "Yes, it is not an allegation, but a fact."
Rajanna, in response to a question, remarked that having served in the Congress party for nearly 50 years and being a senior member, he need not learn about party discipline from anyone else.
Asked whether Shivakumar's statement not to misuse CM Siddaramaiah's name was a warning directed at him and others, he replied that it is only a statement and warnings won't work.
"If we have done wrong, a warning may be given. But what have we done wrong," he asked.
Regarding the demand for CM Siddaramaiah to complete a full five-year term, Rajanna said it is the opinion voiced by other senior ministers and that he too has expressed his agreement with it.
"Whatever our opinion may be, ultimately the decision is made by the high command. Siddaramaiah himself said during the Congress Legislature Party (CLP) meeting that—regardless of our aspirations, he will ultimately abide by the instructions of the Congress high command. When the CM himself says he will abide by the high command, we will also abide by it," he said.
He added that the high command would decide after gathering legislators' views.
There was stiff competition between Siddaramaiah and Shivakumar for the CM's post after the declaration of the Assembly election results in May 2023.
The Congress managed to convince the latter and appointed him as the Deputy Chief Minister.
At the time, reports were suggesting that a compromise had been reached based on a 'rotational chief minister formula,' according to which Shivakumar would become CM after two and a half years.
However, these reports have not been officially confirmed by the party.
Rejecting any personal differences or disgruntlement with Shivakumar, Rajanna in his reply to a question said there may be issue-based differences.
"Shivakumar is a good organiser, and I appreciate that. I have no jealousy towards him. Am I wishing to become Chief Minister? No. When there is a difference of opinion on issues I express my opinion. It is not the government's or anyone else's opinion; it is my opinion," he said.
Asked whether expressing his personal opinion was impacting the party and the government, the Minister clarified that he only speaks out on matters that will have a positive impact, not negative ones.
Rajanna has also been insisting that Shivakumar should not hold two positions—Deputy CM and Karnataka Congress president—in keeping with the party’s ‘one man, one post’ policy.
In response to a question on this matter, Rajanna said that a press statement was released by the party in Delhi on May 18, 2023, based on which he has raised certain points, and that there was nothing personal in it.
"At that time, they (the high command) stated in the release that Shivakumar would continue as president until the Parliament elections," he explained, adding that the AICC president had recently indicated that a change in the state president would occur at the right time.
"We will wait for that moment," he said.
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_28.jpeg)
