A joint parliamentary committee has expressed concern that the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, could centralise excessive regulatory powers and affect institutional autonomy. The panel also recommended safeguards on penalties, appointments and vacancy-filling while reviewing the proposed higher education reforms
Published Date – 17 July 2026, 09:00 AM
New Delhi: The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, will lead to the concentration of extensive regulatory powers in a single central regulator, thereby affecting institutional autonomy, a joint committee of Parliament has noted.
According to the draft report of the joint panel circulated to members, the graded penalty architecture proposed in the Bill cannot be imposed arbitrarily.
The Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha in December last year, following which it was referred to a joint committee of Parliament.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan (VBSA) Bill, 2025, proposes a massive overhaul of India’s higher education sector by dissolving the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) to create a single, unified regulatory commission.
On Thursday, the government listed the Bill for consideration and passage after the report is adopted.
“The Committee expressed apprehension that concentration of extensive regulatory powers in a single central regulator could lead to bureaucratic or ideological overreach, thereby affecting the institutional autonomy presently available under the existing UGC framework,” the draft report said.
The committee noted that the Bill has proposed a graded penalty architecture but flagged that penalties cannot be imposed arbitrarily by the Regulatory Council.
The committee also recommended that the ministry frame appropriate rules to ensure that the process of filling predictable vacancies, such as those arising from retirement or superannuation, is initiated at least six months in advance and completed within 90 days of the occurrence of the vacancy.
“Penalties are linked to proven violations of norms. The main purpose of having a penalty system is to strengthen deterrence against institutions that habitually and repeatedly violate the norms. The Committee observed that, on the aspect of individual and institutional accountability, the provisions of the Bill remove the ‘corporate veil’ often used by promoters of fraudulent institutions.
“Furthermore, even for legitimate HEIs (higher education institutions), repeat contraventions now carry the risk of the removal of specific personnel found responsible for the violation, shifting the burden of compliance onto individual leaders and trustees,” it said.
The committee accepted that the presidents and full-time members of the council be appointed by the President of India on the recommendation of the search-cum-selection committee.
“However, in the case of the other members of the Commission and the Councils, other than the ex-officio members and the Member Secretary of the Commission and the Councils, the Committee suggested that they may be appointed by the Central Government rather than by the President of India on the recommendation of the Central Government, as many central institutions are currently suffering because of delays in the appointment of members and the long time involved in the process,” it said.
The Bill aims to implement the National Education Policy (NEP), 2020, by dividing higher education oversight into three specialised councils for regulation, accreditation and standards.
