Subscribe
Follow TNM’s WhatsApp channel for news updates and story links.
One of the most important pieces of legislation the monsoon session of the Parliament, which had a stormy start on July 20, is likely to deliberate on is the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan (VBSA) Bill, 2025.
Envisioned as a key reform under the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, the VBSA Bill proposes replacing the country's existing multi-regulator framework with a single umbrella body that would oversee regulation, accreditation and academic standards across higher education institutions.
The Bill is being seen as an attempt by the Union government led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to restructure India's higher education system.
The Bill has triggered an intense debate with several arguing that instead of streamlining governance, it would infringe on autonomy of universities and federal rights of states. While the Union government says the proposal will eliminate overlapping regulations and improve quality, opposition parties and academics argue that it concentrates excessive powers with the Union government.
Following disagreements in the Parliament, when the Bill was introduced last year, the legislation was referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC), chaired by BJP MP Daggubati Purandeswari on December 16, 2025.
The JPC report was to be presented in the Lok Sabha on Monday, July 20 but has been postponed.
What does the Bill propose?
At the heart of the legislation is the creation of the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan, an apex commission that would replace multiple existing regulators.
These include:
1. The University Grants Commission (UGC), the body which coordinates higher education in the country by providing recognition and funds to legitimate institutions.
2. The All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), the national level council for technical education
3. And the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), the body responsible for regulating and standardising teacher training programs across India.
The proposed commission would instead, function through three specialised councils with distinct responsibilities:
a) the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Viniyaman Parishad, which would serve as the common regulator to oversee institutions, ensure transparency and curb commercialisation;
b) the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Gunvatta Parishad, which would be responsible for accreditation through an outcome-based quality assurance framework;
c) and the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Manak Parishad, which would set academic standards, prescribe learning outcomes and standardise qualifications such as certificates, diplomas and degrees.
The Bill has also drawn criticism over the extent of the Union government's influence over the proposed commission's composition. While the President of India formally appoints the Chairperson and most members, they are made on the recommendation of the Union government, which also directly appoints the Member Secretary — the commission's chief executive.
In addition, the heads of the three statutory councils, who serve as ex-officio members of the apex body, are selected through a search-cum-selection process in which the Union government plays the dominant role.
The Union government argues that the existing system suffers from fragmented oversight, duplication of responsibilities and inconsistent standards. A unified regulator, it says, would simplify governance, improve transparency, reduce compliance burdens and create a more coherent higher education ecosystem aligned with the goals of NEP 2020.
Why has it become controversial?
Critics contend that the proposed overhaul goes far beyond administrative reform and significantly expands the Union government’s influence over universities.
One of the principal concerns is that the Bill vests extensive powers in the proposed commission and, by extension, the Union government. Opponents argue that while education is a subject shared between the Union and the states (as per the Concurrent list brought about by the 42nd amendment in 1976), the legislation reduces the role of state governments in the governance of universities, particularly state universities that educate the majority of India's students.
Another criticism relates to the appointment and functioning of the new regulatory bodies. Although the councils are described as autonomous, critics point out that the Union government would retain significant control over appointments, policy directions and, in certain circumstances, the functioning of the commission itself. They argue that such provisions could weaken institutional independence and academic freedom.
Several leading institutions, including the IITs, IIMs, and IISERs, had urged the parliamentary panel to keep them outside the ambit of the proposed regulatory framework. While IIT-Kanpur, IIT-Hyderabad, IIM-Sambalpur and IISER-Mohali sought a complete exemption from the Bill, the IIT-Madras request that IITs be exempt from specific provisions governing regulatory approvals for online programmes, the establishment of new campuses, and the Bill's penal clauses.
Multiple states including Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, and Meghalaya, have objected to the Bill, stating that the centralisation of education governance weakens the federal principles of the country. According to reports, the strongest opposition comes from Andhra Pradesh, a state governed by the Telugu Desom Party (TDP), which is the BJP’s largest ally in the National Democratic Alliance.
Trinamool Congress MP Sagarika Ghose, who has submitted a dissent note to the committee, has argued that while higher education reforms are necessary, they should preserve India's federal structure, protect institutional autonomy and safeguard academic freedom.
Congress leader Jairam Ramesh argued that the Bill exceeds Parliament’s powers under Entry 66 of the Union List, which is limited to coordination and determination of standards in higher education. He argues that the proposed framework encroaches on powers that belong to state governments, including matters relating to the incorporation, regulation and winding up of universities.
