NDA-ruled states join opposition to centralisation in new higher education Bill
Several states ruled by the ruling National Democratic Alliance (NDA), including Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Meghalaya, have raised objections to key provisions in the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025. In submissions to a parliamentary panel, these states argued that the proposed law would centralise powers over higher education regulation, undermining state autonomy.
The Bill aims to overhaul higher education by repealing the Acts governing the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), replacing them with a single apex body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan (VBSA). It is currently under review by a joint parliamentary committee headed by BJP MP D. Purandeswari, which is in the final stages of preparing its report.
Apart from state governments, several central and state universities and institutes also criticised the Bill. Their concerns include the Centre's broad powers under the proposed law, the absence of state representation in the regulatory structure, lack of clarity about the Bill's scope, and worries about the transition process as the UGC, AICTE, and NCTE are wound up.
Andhra Pradesh, ruled by the Telugu Desam Party—a BJP ally—submitted some of the strongest objections. It argued that many provisions could render the state's legislative competence in higher education 'a dead letter.' The state sought mandatory consultation with state governments before decisions affecting state universities are taken. It also cautioned against Clause 11, which allows the Regulatory Council to bypass state universities in granting degrees, warning it could lead to 'constitutional friction.' Andhra Pradesh further proposed a clause explicitly preventing the Centre from taking action prejudicial to the autonomy and functioning of state institutions, and mandatory consultation before any action against a state institution.
Madhya Pradesh, governed by the BJP, raised concerns over limited state representation in the proposed regulatory council. Meghalaya, led by the National People's Party (another BJP ally), recommended an explicit provision defining the respective powers of the Centre and states. It proposed that the Centre handle coordination, standards, accreditation, and quality assurance, while states retain authority over establishment, governance, administration, staffing, financing, and overall functioning of state universities.
Central universities and institutes such as Banaras Hindu University (BHU), the Central University of Rajasthan, and the Indian Institute of Information Technology (IIIT), Chittoor, along with state universities in Assam, Maharashtra, and Jammu and Kashmir, objected to provisions they say could increase centralisation. Several institutions told the panel that clauses requiring the new regulatory structure to follow directions from the Centre represented the Bill's 'most critical vulnerability.'
Some universities cautioned that dismantling the UGC, AICTE, and NCTE simultaneously could cause 'significant institutional disruption.' Others argued that the Bill concentrates regulatory powers and creates the possibility of 'arbitrary interventions.' Institutions called for phased implementation, parliamentary oversight of powers exercised by the Centre under the Bill, and mandatory notice and consultation with state governments before such powers are invoked.
BHU noted that Clause 45 gives finality to the Centre's policy directions and binds the VBSA to them, 'effectively subordinating the regulatory independence' of the new body. The submissions highlight a broad consensus among states and institutions that the Bill, as drafted, threatens the federal balance in higher education governance.
