Virat Kohli withdraws from first two Tests against England; Patidar, Sarfaraz in contention
New Delhi, Jan 22: India's batting mainstay Virat Kohli has pulled out of the first two Tests against England due to personal reasons which "demand his presence and undivided attention", the BCCI said on Monday.
The BCCI urged the fans and media to refrain from speculating about the exact reason for his forced break before the five-match series begins in Hyderabad on January 25. The Board said it will name a replacement for the star batter soon.
"Virat Kohli has requested the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) to be withdrawn from the first two Tests of the upcoming IDFC First Bank Test series against England, citing personal reasons," BCCI secretary Jay Shah said in a statement.
The BCCI also said that Kohli has discussed his decision with skipper Rohit Sharma and the team management.
"Virat has spoken to captain Rohit Sharma, the team management and the selectors and has emphasized that while representing the country has always been his top priority, certain personal situations demand his presence and undivided attention," the release further stated.
Shah also said that BCCI completely backs its star player and has faith in the team and its ability to get results even without its best batter.
"The BCCI respects his decision and the Board and team management has extended its support to the star batter and is confident in the abilities of the remaining squad members to step up and deliver commendable performances in the Test series," the secretary said.
He also urged everyone to respect Kohli's privacy.
"The BCCI requests the media and fans to respect Virat Kohli's privacy during this time and refrain from speculating on the nature of his personal reasons.
"The focus should remain on supporting the Indian cricket team as they embark on the upcoming challenges in the Test series," Shah said.
It has been learnt that both Shah and chairman of selectors Ajit Agarkar were kept in loop about the possibility of Kohli needing a break at some point during the England series.
Recently, Kohli also skipped the first T20I game against Afghanistan due to "personal reasons".
Before that, he had taken a short break, again for personal reasons, during India's tour of South Africa where he missed an intra-squad practice game and flew to London, within days after arriving in South Africa.
The last time he took a break, which was not linked to any injury, during a Test series was a paternity leave in 2021 when his daughter Vamika was born. He only played the first Test of that series.
Rajat Patidar vs Sarfaraz Khan as replacement
It is understood that one among the two heavyweight India 'A' performers -- Rajat Patidar of Madhya Pradesh and Sarfaraz Khan of Mumbai -- are frontrunners to replace Kohli.
Patidar recently scored 151 against the England Lions in an unofficial Test and Sarfaraz scored a half-ton in the second innings of the same game.
There is talk of including veteran Cheteshwar Pujara in the line-up considering his experience of 20,000 plus first-class runs, including 7000 in Tests.
However, it will be interesting if the current selection committee under Agarkar is ready to look back or move forward.
The batting line-up for first Test will comprise Yashasvi Jaiswal, Rohit Sharma, Shubman Gill, KL Rahul, Shreyas Iyer, Ravindra Jadeja, and KS Bharat (wk).
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)
