No question of banning Bajrang Dal if it plays by rule-book: Congress leader Veerappa Moily
Bengaluru(PTI): There is no question of banning the Bajrang Dal if it plays by the rule-book and behaves itself, senior Congress leader M Veerappa Moily said on Friday, as his party's manifesto proposing to outlaw the outfit continues to come under fire from the BJP.
Speaking to PTI, Moily said the reference should be viewed as the Congress issuing some kind of a notice and warning to Bajrang Dal, and not as if the party is going to ban it if it's voted to power in the May 10 Assembly elections in Karnataka.
On this issue, the former Chief Minister indicated that the Congress would adopt the approach of the then Home Minister Vallabhbhai Patel who, he said, lifted the ban on RSS after receiving an undertaking from the organisation that it would not indulge in "illegal activities".
The Congress in its manifesto for the Assembly polls released earlier this week said it was committed to take firm and decisive action against individuals and organisations spreading hatred amongst communities on grounds of caste and religion.
The party said: "We believe that law and Constitution are sacrosanct and cannot be violated by individuals and organisations like Bajrang Dal, PFI or others promoting enmity or hatred, whether among majority or minority communities. We will take decisive action as per law including imposing a ban on such organisations."
Moily said the "well-drafted" manifesto says organisations and individuals indulging in hate-crimes and illegal and anti-national activities would be severely dealt with and in that context PFI and Bajrang Dal were mentioned, and that the party would go to the extent of imposing a ban. "That does not mean we have done it, we are going to do it (ban)."
The former Union Minister said the Congress party has got its "own culture".
When Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated, Patel banned the RSS, and an order to outlaw the organisation was issued, Moily said. But the then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru took the view that "we will not take that kind of decision, because everybody belonging to RSS is not bad, only a few people may indulge in that. Don't have them (ban) like that and that's how he wanted the Home Minister to lift the ban."
"Before lifting the ban, Patel got an undertaking from the RSS that they will not indulge in politics or any such illegal activity. That undertaking was given (by the RSS). On that condition, the ban was removed. That is how graciously the Congress has dealt with the situation. In future, we will also do the same thing (in case of Bajrang Dal).
"If Bajrang Dal doesn't involve themselves in hate crimes, anti-national or anti-Constitutional issues, or they don't involve themselves in crimes, there is no question of ban, let them behave themselves, that's all, this (manifesto) is some sort of a notice given to them," Moily said.
He said the proposal of the Congress to ban Bajrang Dal would have no adverse impact on the party's electoral prospects in next week's elections.
"People of Karnataka are vigilant, and they are understanding, they realise the importance of it. It's only a warning to those bodies (such as Bajrang Dal) and individuals to behave themselves and work as per Constitution and also go by the rule of law of the country," Moily added.
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)
