E-Paper
Congress calls VBSA Bill “constitutional overreach”, flags autonomy risk
Congress says VBSA Bill risks IIT, IIM autonomy, alleges constitutional overreach and lack of state consultation in higher education reforms
Prefer HTon Google
The Congress on Thursday opposed the proposed Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan (VBSA) Bill, 2025, alleging it amounts to “constitutional overreach” and could “compromise” the academic and institutional autonomy of Institutes of National Importance (INIs), which include the Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs), Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs), and National Institutes of Technology (NITs), among others.
The VBSA Bill, introduced in the Lok Sabha in December 15 2025 and referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee a day later, seeks to replace the UGC, the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE). It provides for the repeal of the UGC Act, 1956, the AICTE Act, 1987, and the NCTE Act, 1993, and the dissolution of these bodies.
In a statement issued on the VBSA Bill on Thursday, the party alleged that the Union education ministry “has not consulted state governments in the drafting of this bill,” even though education is in the Concurrent List of the Constitution and the bill directly impacts state universities. It argued that the provisions go beyond Parliament’s mandate, adding, “The Bill is therefore violative of the federal structure of the Constitution.”
Education ministry officials did not respond to HT’s queries for comment.
The party cited a parliamentary panel report released on Wednesday which highlighted a “shockingly high number of vacancies in key regulatory agencies like the University Grants Commission (UGC) and the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE)” at a time when “there is already a move to restructure the architecture of higher education regulation.” The Parliament Standing Committee on Education, Women, Children, Youth and Sports, in its report on Wednesday, flagged 67.6% staff shortages at the UGC and over 63.6% vacancies at AICTE.
The Congress also pointed to deviations from the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, which “expressly envisioned a Higher Education Council of India with four verticals.” Instead, the Bill excludes a dedicated funding body, meaning “grant-giving powers will be returned from autonomous bodies… to the ministry that is run by politicians.” This, it warned, marks “a departure from current practice and a violation of the NEP.”
Further, the party criticised the proposed bureaucratic control, stating “the administration of education should be done by academics… rather than by bureaucrats.” It warned that bringing premier institutions under tighter regulation “may compromise their academic and institutional autonomy.”
Emphasising institutional independence, the statement concluded that the policy direction contradicts NEP’s vision, which “calls for greater autonomy to institutes of higher education – not tighter control.”
The VBSA Bill is an overhaul of India’s higher education regulatory structure driven by NEP 2020. The proposed 12-member VBSA commission will coordinate the functioning of three councils: the Regulatory Council (Viksit Bharat Shiksha Viniyaman Parishad), the Standards Council (Viksit Bharat Shiksha Manak Parishad), and the Accreditation Council (Viksit Bharat Shiksha Gunvatta Parishad). The first will authorise institutions to award degrees, the second will define learning outcomes and faculty qualifications, and the third will design and oversee the accreditation framework.
Unlike the UGC, the new regulator, according to the Bill, will not have a dedicated funding arm, even though NEP 2020 envisaged a separate grants council under the new regulatory framework. The Bill also does not empower the regulatory council to fix fees, limiting it instead to framing a policy to “prevent commercialisation of higher education.”
After objections from several MPs, the Bill was sent to a 31-member parliamentary joint committee headed by BJP MP Purandeswari on December 16. The committee held its fourth sitting on March 17.
The Union education ministry “did not provide any concrete details on the funding mechanism” under the VBSA framework and “remained silent” on the role of states in the councils under VBSA, despite several committee members seeking clarity on the issue during the meetings, people aware of the matter told HT .
