'Not consulted' over key appointments in boards, corporations, says Home Minister G Parameshwara
Bengaluru: Even as deliberations are on to finalise the appointment of Congress legislators and workers to key positions in various state-run boards and corporations, some senior leaders have expressed discontent, with Home Minister G Parameshwara openly saying he was not consulted.
Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, however, tried to clarify, saying that no leader has been contacted, as the process is still in the ''preliminary stage''.
Congress General Secretary in-charge of Karnataka Randeep Singh Surjewala is in the city today to discuss the exercise with the party's state leadership. He had been here last week as well for such a meeting.
The appointments are among the issues on which Chief Minister Siddaramaiah and Shivakumar have certain differences of opinion, according to party sources.
Speaking to reporters, Home Minister Parameshwara said in response to a question: ''No, I have not been consulted. If consulted, it would have been good. I was party president for eight years and could have given suggestions as to who would be politically beneficial in the current situation and also on seniority.'' He continued, ''They (party leadership) too are aware of it, but if we were also consulted it would have been good. They may finally decide after taking the high command's consent; let them do it.'' The minister also said he was not aware of when the list would be finalised. There has been some disgruntlement and growing impatience within a section of the Congress party. Some legislators who did not make it to the cabinet and were aspiring for key posts in boards and corporations are unhappy about the delay in appointments.
Other party members are also upset about the ''delay in rewarding loyal workers'' despite the Congress having been in power for more than six months now. Responding to a question on Parameshwara's comments, Siddaramaiah said, ''Not only Parameshwara, no one's opinion has been taken yet. It (discussion) is still at the preliminary stage... The list has not yet been finalised, so for me to comment on it will not be right.'' Meanwhile, Deputy Chief Minister and state Congress President D K Shivakumar said discussions about the appointments are on. The list, once finalised, would be sent to the party's high command for approval, he added.
''It is our routine work, it's party work... He (Surjewala) was busy (all these days). We have held two to three rounds of meetings. Today also we will be meeting. The list has to go to Delhi. After that, we will make the information known,'' Shivakumar told reporters here in response to a question on his meeting with Surjewala.
The party's state unit president had recently indicated that about 15 to 20 party MLAs and MLCs would be accommodated in key positions, and the rest of the posts would be distributed among loyal party workers.
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)
