NEW DELHI: As the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) examining the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan (VBSA) Bill, 2025, is set to adopt its report on July 17, several stakeholders, including Opposition parties, NDA-ruled states such as Andhra Pradesh, universities, and industry bodies have raised concerns in their submissions over provisions to grant sweeping powers to the Centre to override policy disagreements, supersede regulators and control funding.
The VBSA bill proposes a reset of higher education by establishing a new central regulatory framework that replaces bodies such as UGC, AICTE, and NCTE with VBSA and three councils.
Key clauses on central powers include Clause 45, which gives the power to the Centre to issue directions. Bodies under the Act must follow Centre’s directions on policy matters. If there is disagreement on what constitutes a policy issue, the Centre’s decision is deemed final. The government can also assign additional functions to the commission.
In her submission, TMC MP Sagarika Ghose said the proposed single regulator concentrates excessive powers in the Union government and undermines federal structure. State governments, public universities, and elected bodies must have statutory representation and decision-making powers.
Under Clause 47, if the Centre believes the VBSA commission or councils have failed in their duties or ignored directions, it can supersede them. This involves removing the chairperson, members, and the government taking over functions until reconstitution.
In its submission, ASSOCHAM said excessive concentration of authority may erode institutional trust and generate constitutional litigation. “Insulate academic standards and institutional autonomy from excessive executive discretion,” it said.
The body said the bill enables foreign universities in India and Indian universities abroad, but does not expressly state a level-playing-field principle. Clause 49 prevails over conflicting laws, including state acts or prior regulations like the UGC Act, 1956, AICTE Act, 1987, the NCTE Act, 1993, giving central oversight precedence in higher education standards and coordination.
Congress MP Digvijay Singh said the UGC Act, 1956, was enacted when education was a subject in the State List. The parliamentary deliberations, which formed the basis for the UGC Act, 1956, make it clear that establishment of a central mechanism for determination of standards was not considered an infringement of state rights but as a constitutional responsibility to address the absence of a common framework.
Andhra’s reservations
The Andhra Pradesh government said that a single rotating member representing the entire state and UT system in the common regulator is a significant regression from the State representation provided under the AICTE Act and NCTE Act. This is inconsistent with federal character of education under the Concurrent List.