The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhikshan Bill impact on higher education is emerging as one of the most contentious education policy debates in recent years.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhikshan Bill marks a decisive shift in India’s higher education governance. The Union Cabinet approved the bill as a reform to simplify regulation. However, many academics see it as a dangerous centralisation of power. Instead of strengthening universities, the bill risks weakening India’s academic foundations.
Earlier known as the Higher Education Commission of India (HECI) Bill, the legislation replaces the UGC, AICTE, and NCTE. The government claims this merger will reduce red tape and improve efficiency. In practice, critics argue it dismantles institutional autonomy. It also places universities under unprecedented political supervision.
The bill changes the state’s role from regulator to controller. It allows the Centre to influence curricula, funding, and institutional survival. As a result, universities may hesitate to challenge official ideology. This shift has serious implications for academic freedom, equity, and democracy.
Centralisation of Power and the End of Independent Regulation
On paper, merging multiple regulators into one appears logical. Overlapping mandates have long slowed decision-making. However, the structure of the new commission tells a different story. The body will be dominated by government-appointed members and senior bureaucrats.
Independent academics will form a small minority within the commission. Even those academics will be selected by the government. This departs sharply from the UGC Act’s limited attempt at balance. Academic voices now risk being reduced to token representation.
A key clause makes the commission bound by central policy directions. In case of disagreement, the government’s decision becomes final. This removes any real regulatory independence. Every major academic decision becomes an extension of executive authority.
Parliament’s Standing Committee warned against excessive centralisation in early 2025. It also flagged weak state representation. The government ignored these concerns. Consequently, higher education regulation shifts firmly to Delhi.
Institutional Autonomy, Federal Balance, and Public Education at Risk
Universities currently retain limited freedom over syllabi, hiring, and research priorities. The new bill significantly narrows this space. The commission can prescribe norms for fees, curricula, and operations. It can also suspend or shut institutions for non-compliance.
Such powers create a climate of fear. Universities may avoid innovation to remain compliant. Faculty may hesitate to publish critical research. Rural and resource-poor colleges face closure instead of support.
The bill also removes the UGC’s grant-giving role. Funding now shifts toward loan-based mechanisms like HEFA. Universities must borrow for infrastructure and staffing. This pushes institutions toward commercial behaviour.
Higher fees will follow. Public universities serve SC, ST, OBC, and low-income students. Rising costs will restrict access and deepen inequality. Education loans may trap students in long-term debt.
States also lose influence under this framework. Education remains a Concurrent List subject. Yet state representation in regulation and funding becomes marginal. Regional priorities, languages, and research needs face uniform national templates.
The bill fails to address core problems in higher education. Public spending remains far below the promised 6 percent of GDP. Faculty shortages, contractual hiring, and weak research funding persist. Political appointments continue to erode institutional credibility.
Instead of solving these issues, the bill tightens political control. It centralises authority, commercialises public education, and weakens federal balance. This is not structural reform. It is administrative dominance.
In the long run, historians may view this bill as educational subjugation, not reform. Universities thrive on autonomy and dissent. When regulation replaces freedom, knowledge production suffers. India’s democratic future depends on what happens next.
Also watch: /https://newshashtag.com/the-dark-side-of-chatgpt/
A seasoned journalist with over 30 years of rich and diverse experience in print and electronic media, Prabha’s professional stints include working with Sahara English Magazine, Pioneer and JAIN TV and All India Radio. She has also been writing in Pioneer. She has also produced several documentary films through her self-owned production house Gajpati Communications. She is also the Station Director of Aligarh-based FM Radio Station, and the General Secretary of WADA NGO.
