WPL: MI post decent 160/6 against UPW after early jitters
New Delhi, Mar 7: Mumbai Indians overcame early jitters to post a decent 160/6 against UP Warriorz in a Women's Premier League match here on Thursday.
While Nat Sciver-Brunt (45 off 31) and skipper Harmanpreet Kaur (33 off 30) added 59 off 46 balls for the third wicket to steady MI's ship, the innings got impetus due to Amelia Kerr (39 not out off 23 balls) and rising star Sajeevan Sajana (22 not out off 14 balls) adding 43 in 4.2 overs towards the end.
MI did not have the best of starts after opting to bat as they lost both the openers Yastika Bhatia and Hayley Mathews inside the fourth over.
Both the batters were dismissed by Chamari Athapaththu as they looked to go big against the Sri Lankan off-spinner.
While Sciver-Brunt played her shots during her aggressive knock, which was laced with eight hits to the fence, Harmanpreet preferred to play the role of an anchor.
But just when the partnership was looking threatening, Sciver-Brunt was cleaned by left-arm spinner Rajeshwari Gayakwad, a bowler who was punished by the batter in her first couple of overs.
Sciver-Brunt was deceived by quicker delivery, which pitched on fuller length and kept a tad low.
Harmanpreet then took the onus of upping the ante in company of Kerr, who used the long handle to good effect.
The MI skipper first swept Gayakwad to deep mid-wicket and three balls later got down on her knee to hit her for a maximum.
UP skipper Alyssa Healy made a terrific bowling change bringing in Saima Thakor in the 15th over and the medium pacer went through Harmanpreet's defence with opening delivery.
Harmanpreet's innings had three fours and one six.
Amanjot Kaur then spooned a Deepti Sharma delivery to Thakor to make matters worse for MI.
But Kerr rode on two dropped chances -- first when Healy dropped her in the 17th over and then Sophie Ecclestone an over later -- to play her shots and help MI cross 150-mark.
Kerr and Sajana hit 10 boundaries between themselves to take MI's total to 160.
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)
