The third pillar is the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Gunvatta Parishad, or the Accreditation Council. This council will design and oversee the accreditation framework, which is the process of evaluating and certifying the quality of educational institutions. For example, it would assess an engineering college's infrastructure, faculty, and curriculum to grant it an accreditation status, similar to how NAAC currently functions for universities.

Unlike the vision of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, which envisioned a separate grants council, the VBSA Bill does not include a dedicated funding arm. This means the power to disburse grants would revert from autonomous bodies like the current UGC to the Union Education Ministry, raising concerns about potential political influence over funding decisions for universities and colleges.

The Bill limits the Regulatory Council's power to fixing fees. Instead, it can only frame a policy to "prevent commercialisation of higher education." This approach aims to curb exploitative practices without directly dictating fee structures, which some argue might not be sufficient to control exorbitant fees charged by private institutions.

A significant criticism is that the Bill could compromise the academic and institutional autonomy of Institutes of National Importance (INIs) such as the IITs, IIMs, and NITs. These premier institutions currently enjoy a high degree of self-governance, and tighter regulatory control under the VBSA framework is seen as a threat to their independent functioning and innovation.

Critics, including the Congress party, have argued that the Bill amounts to "constitutional overreach" because education falls under the Concurrent List of the Constitution. This means both the Union and state governments can legislate on it. The alleged lack of consultation with state governments in drafting the Bill, despite its direct impact on state universities, is seen as a violation of India's federal structure.

The Bill has been criticized for potentially shifting the administration of education from academics to bureaucrats. The argument is that educational policy and oversight should be primarily managed by experienced academics who understand the nuances of the field, rather than by administrative officials, to ensure decisions are grounded in educational best practices.

The Bill's introduction comes at a time when existing regulatory bodies like the UGC and AICTE face significant staff shortages, with 67.6% vacancies in UGC and 63.6% in AICTE. While not explicitly stated as a provision, the Bill is implicitly a response to the need for a more efficient and well-staffed regulatory architecture that can overcome such administrative bottlenecks.

Following objections from several Members of Parliament, the Bill was referred to a 31-member Joint Parliamentary Committee. This parliamentary process allows for detailed examination, stakeholder consultation, and potential amendments before the Bill can be passed into law, reflecting the democratic process of legislative review.

The third pillar is the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Gunvatta Parishad, or the Accreditation Council. This council will design and oversee the accreditation framework, which is the process of evaluating and certifying the quality of educational institutions. For example, it would assess an engineering college's infrastructure, faculty, and curriculum to grant it an accreditation status, similar to how NAAC currently functions for universities.

Unlike the vision of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, which envisioned a separate grants council, the VBSA Bill does not include a dedicated funding arm. This means the power to disburse grants would revert from autonomous bodies like the current UGC to the Union Education Ministry, raising concerns about potential political influence over funding decisions for universities and colleges.

The Bill limits the Regulatory Council's power to fixing fees. Instead, it can only frame a policy to "prevent commercialisation of higher education." This approach aims to curb exploitative practices without directly dictating fee structures, which some argue might not be sufficient to control exorbitant fees charged by private institutions.

A significant criticism is that the Bill could compromise the academic and institutional autonomy of Institutes of National Importance (INIs) such as the IITs, IIMs, and NITs. These premier institutions currently enjoy a high degree of self-governance, and tighter regulatory control under the VBSA framework is seen as a threat to their independent functioning and innovation.

Critics, including the Congress party, have argued that the Bill amounts to "constitutional overreach" because education falls under the Concurrent List of the Constitution. This means both the Union and state governments can legislate on it. The alleged lack of consultation with state governments in drafting the Bill, despite its direct impact on state universities, is seen as a violation of India's federal structure.

The Bill has been criticized for potentially shifting the administration of education from academics to bureaucrats. The argument is that educational policy and oversight should be primarily managed by experienced academics who understand the nuances of the field, rather than by administrative officials, to ensure decisions are grounded in educational best practices.

The Bill's introduction comes at a time when existing regulatory bodies like the UGC and AICTE face significant staff shortages, with 67.6% vacancies in UGC and 63.6% in AICTE. While not explicitly stated as a provision, the Bill is implicitly a response to the need for a more efficient and well-staffed regulatory architecture that can overcome such administrative bottlenecks.

Following objections from several Members of Parliament, the Bill was referred to a 31-member Joint Parliamentary Committee. This parliamentary process allows for detailed examination, stakeholder consultation, and potential amendments before the Bill can be passed into law, reflecting the democratic process of legislative review.