Prioritise improvement in human development index in Kalyana Karnataka: CM Siddaramaiah
Bengaluru, Jun 14: Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah on Friday said priority should be given to the implementation of complementary projects to improve the Human Development Index of the Kalyana Karnataka region.
The suggestion came as he reviewed the progress of Kalyana Karnataka Regional Development Board at his home office Krishna here.
He said emphasis should be laid on areas in which we are lagging behind. Emphasis should also be on infrastructure development at hostels, anganwadis and residential schools.
In a statement issued by the Chief Minister's Office, Siddaramaiah said the available grants should be spent on a priority areas. Roads, drinking water, irrigation and other infrastructure should also be prioritised.
ALSO READ: K'taka Medical Education Minister directs officials to seal nursing colleges with no amenities
"It is our responsibility to give the necessary approvals from the finance department. The district in-charge minister should review the progress once a month and send the report to the board. District in-charge secretaries should also conduct progress review. Anganwadis, hostels, schools, hospitals should be visited and inspected," he said.
Siddaramaiah also pointed out the need for coordination between district in-charge ministers and secretaries.
He told officials that tenders should be called immediately for the approved works for which tenders have not been called and said they (works) should be evaluated.
According to officials, for the year 2023-24, the largest grant of Rs 3,000 crore has been released to Kalyan Karnataka Regional Development Board (KKRDB). A sum of Rs 2009.53 crore including initial charges have been spent during this period.
Chairman of the board Ajay Singh said this is the highest expenditure incurred till now since the formation of the board.
He further said Rs 2,885.9 crore is currently available with the board. Since the formation of the board, till now, 35,724 works have been approved and 26,418 works have been completed. In the year 2023-24, out of 6,468 works, 136 works were completed and 3,226 were in progress.
He explained that 3,106 works are to be started. Regular progress review of pending works should be done and any bottlenecks in implementation should be removed.
The Chief Minister has directed that the pending 3,528 works should be started by July-end.
In the meeting with KKRDB officials, which was also attended by some Ministers, Siddaramaiah suggested more emphasis should be given to education, health and job creation.
Singh said there is a demand for primary health centres and added that it has been decided to focus on this.
The Chief Minister has directed to submit a proposal for setting up primary health centres as per prescribed norms.
The CM has also suggested focus should be on development of schools in Kalyana Karnataka region under the corporate social responsibility and the administrative departments should sanction the establishment of high school, undergraduate and graduate colleges, he directed.
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)
