Man who threw eggs on Siddaramaiah's car a Congress worker, claims BJP leader
Madikeri, Aug 20: A man who hurled eggs at Leader of Opposition in the Karnataka assembly, Siddaramaiah's car during his visit to Kodagu district to inspect rain-related damages, was a Congress worker, a BJP MLA claimed on Saturday.
Sampath was among a number BJP activists who were arrested for staging a protest against Siddaramaiah on August 18.
A video of the incident in which Sampath is purportedly seen throwing eggs on Siddaramaiah's car has gone viral. However, maintaining distance from Sampath, BJP legislator M P Appachu Ranjan claimed that Sampath was not a BJP activist but a Congress worker.
Responding to the MLA's claims, Sampath said he is indeed a Congress worker and was upset with his party leader Siddaramaiah's alleged remarks made in the past that the Kodavas eat beef.
"I threw eggs because of Siddaramaiah's statement, not because of the protest (organised by BJP). Because of his (Siddaramaiah's) derogatory comments that the people of Kodagu eat beef and statements in favour of Tipu Sultan," Sampath told reporters here.
Sampath said many people in Kodagu dislike Tipu Sultan, the 18th century Mysuru ruler. "I did not like his (Siddaramaiah's) statements. I am a Hindu first and then a Congress worker," he added.
"There are photos of Sampath holding the Congress flag, shawl and banner. If it is proved that he is our party member, then we will expel him...," Ranjan told reporters.
According to the BJP MLA, Sampath is in the construction industry and works as a bar bender, while adding that Sampath's father Sundaramurthy was in the BJP.
Sampath said he had come from Somawarpet to Madikeri, the district headquarter town of Kodagu, for some personal work. He went to have food near the place where he supposedly saw the Bharatiya Janata Party Youth Wing activists protesting against Siddaramaiah's visit.
During his visit to Kodagu to inspect the rain-related damage two days ago, Congress stalwart Siddaramaiah faced the ire of the BJP Youth Wing activists who blocked the road and raised slogans against him.
The BJP leaders vented their anger against Siddaramaiah's statement following violent clashes in Shivamogga on August 15 questioning the saffron party workers for putting up Hindutva ideologue Vinayak Damodar Savarkar's poster in an area predominated by Muslims.
They were also opposing him for organising Tipu Jayanthi when he was the Chief Minister of the state. As CM, Siddaramaiah had started Tipu Jayanthi celebrations to pay tribute to the 18th century ruler of Mysuru.
Some Hindutva activists in Kodagu allege that Tipu Sultan had carried out large-scale conversion and killings of Kodavas, the native community of Kodagu district, during his rule.
During Tipu Jayanthi in November 2015, which the then Congress government had organised, widespread protests broke out in many parts of Karnataka, especially in Madikeri.
Meanwhile, Siddaramaiah and his loyalists are mulling over taking out a Madikeri Chalo', a march to Madikeri.
It is expected to be similar to the 'Ballari Chalo' movement taken out by Siddaramaiah in September 2010 against the rampant illegal mining of iron ore in the district.
ಮೊಟ್ಟೆ ಎಸೆದಿದ್ದು ಕಾಂಗ್ರೆಸ್ ಕಾರ್ಯಕರ್ತ ಎಂಬ ಕಾಗಕ್ಕ ಗುಬ್ಬಕ್ಕನ ಕತೆ ಕಟ್ಟಿರುವ @BJP4Karnataka ಉತ್ತರಿಸಬೇಕು.
— Karnataka Congress (@INCKarnataka) August 20, 2022
ಅವರು ಕಾಂಗ್ರೆಸ್ ಕಾರ್ಯಕರ್ತರೇ ಆಗಿದ್ದರೆ ಬಿಜೆಪಿ ಶಾಸಕ ಅಪ್ಪಚ್ಚು ರಂಜನ್ ಠಾಣೆಯಿಂದ ಜಾಮೀನು ಕೊಟ್ಟು ಕರೆತಂದಿದ್ದೇಕೆ?
ಕಾಂಗ್ರೆಸ್ ಕಾರ್ಯಕರ್ತನಾಗಿದ್ದರೆ ಆತ ಅಪ್ಪಚ್ಚು ರಂಜನ್ಗೇಕೆ ಆಪ್ತನಾಗಿದ್ದಾನೆ. pic.twitter.com/t1FWjZFvDk
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)
