Nikhil Kumaraswamy demands Congress to drop Greater Bengaluru Project, announces agitation
_vb_38.jpeg)
Bengaluru: JD(S) Youth Wing State President Nikhil Kumaraswamy has demanded that the Karnataka Congress government scrap the proposed Greater Bengaluru Integrated Township (GBIT) project at Bidadi, warning of a massive agitation until the project is withdrawn.
Addressing reporters at the JD(S) state office, JP Bhavan, on Saturday, Nikhil said, “Starting tomorrow, we will launch a large-scale protest. We will stand as the backbone of the farmers until this project is scrapped. No matter how far this fight has to go, JD(S) will be there.”
He accused the state government of betraying farmers' trust and escalating their fears. “For months, farmers in the Bidadi area have been living in constant anxiety about losing their lands. Instead of alleviating their worries, the government is fueling their anger,” he charged.
Drawing a parallel to the farmers’ protest at Channarayapatna in Devanahalli, where farmers had demonstrated for 1,000 days, Nikhil said JD(S) is prepared to fight the Bidadi project with the same intensity and take it to a “logical end.” Former Prime Minister H.D. Deve Gowda and JD(S) leader H.D. Kumaraswamy will join the protest via video conference, while several farmer leaders will take part on the ground, he added.
Nikhil challenged the government to first implement a pilot project on the 900 acres already allotted to the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (KIADB). “Show us how it works there first. The GBIT lacks experience, manpower, and financial backing. Where are your resources? The government must answer these questions,” he demanded.
He criticized Deputy Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar, alleging that despite repeatedly meeting farmers, Shivakumar has failed to hold any meaningful discussions about compensation. “You have challenged us to stop you, but have you taken any steps to protect farmers' lands from being sold? What are your plans for the future of their children? What is the hidden agenda behind rushing this project?” he asked.
According to Nikhil, nearly 80 percent of the farmers strongly oppose the land acquisition process. He called for an immediate halt to the acquisition and urged action against GBIT and police officials who are allegedly intimidating farmers. He also demanded that the government make public the project report prepared by the Boston Consulting Group.
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)
