UP government grants permission for 2 new private universities
Maharishi Mahesh Yogi Ramayan University
in Ayodhya and issued a letter of intent for the creation of the
Ajay Kumar Garg University
in Ghaziabad.
The establishment of the Ramayan University in Ayodhya and an engineering-focussed university in an industrial city like Ghaziabad is a clear indication that the "New Uttar Pradesh" is rapidly moving toward becoming a frontrunner in the field of higher education, the government said in a statement on Friday.
Under the leadership of
Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath
, the government is putting in efforts to make education more accessible, inclusive and modern, the statement said.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Buy the Dip: Top 5 Dividend Stocks with Growth Potential
Seeking Alpha
Read More
Undo
State Higher Education Minister Yogendra Upadhyay said the government is encouraging innovation and infrastructure development in higher education through private-sector participation.
In the coming years, Uttar Pradesh is set to become a leading state in the field of education, the minister asserted.
Live Events
In order to improve the quality of education and provide youngsters with access to higher-education institutions at the local level, both university proposals were approved through a time-bound process, he added.
The minister informed that the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi Ramayan University has been officially notified and granted permission under the Uttar Pradesh Private Universities (Amendment) Act, 2025. The university will now be able to operate formally in accordance with the set conditions and official notification.
Similarly, the Ajay Kumar Garg University, proposed by the Indian Institute of Management and Engineering Society, Ghaziabad, has been issued a letter of intent under Section 6 of the Uttar Pradesh Private Universities Act, 2019.
To establish a university, an institution must meet certain requirements, including a minimum endowment fund of Rs 5 crore, 20 acres of land in an urban area and at least 24,000 square metres of academic infrastructure.
Minister of State for Higher Education Rajni Tiwari, Principal Secretary of Higher Education M P Agrawal, Special Secretary Nidhi Srivastava and other departmental officials were present on the occasion, the statement added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
16 minutes ago
- The Hindu
A deliberate strategy to usher in a communal order
On the eve of the 75th anniversary of the Indian Constitution, the Supreme Court of India reaffirmed the foundational character of the Indian Republic by upholding the inclusion of the words 'secular' and 'socialist' in the Constitution's Preamble. These words, introduced through the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976, by the Indira Gandhi-led government during the Emergency, have been the target of repeated political and legal attacks by right-wing forces. Dismissing a batch of petitions challenging these additions, a Bench of the Supreme Court recently upheld the addition of these words, arguing that the mere absence of these terms in the original Preamble adopted on November 26, 1949, cannot invalidate their inclusion. This legal reaffirmation was a powerful signal from the judiciary. But the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the ideological backbone of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), chose to launch a fresh offensive on the very idea of India as enshrined in the Constitution. RSS General Secretary Dattatreya Hosabale made a brazen demand: the removal of 'secular' and 'socialist' from the Preamble, which, according to him, were alien to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar's constitutional vision. The Vice-President of India, Jagdeep Dhankhar, went a step further, terming the insertion of these words as 'sacrilege to the spirit of Sanatan'. It is no coincidence that these statements are being made from some of the highest offices of the land. This is not an intellectual debate. This is a deliberate political strategy to delegitimise the modern, plural, democratic republic of India and to usher in a communal and hierarchical order. An agenda, from fringe to mainstream When the Constitution was being framed, the Constituent Assembly, emphatically and unanimously, supported the idea of a secular state. Not a single member argued for a theocratic state. The idea of India was built on the foundations of unity in diversity — a rejection of colonial divide-and-rule, of communal politics, and of caste and religious supremacy. Today, the RSS-BJP establishment is working relentlessly to dismantle that consensus and impose the idea of a Hindu Rashtra. This agenda has moved from fringe rhetoric to the political mainstream. On the day of the consecration of the Ram temple in Ayodhya, Prime Minister Narendra Modi made a provocative statement equating 'Ram with Rashtra and Dev with Desh'. This kind of fusion of religion and state is exactly what the framers of the Constitution warned against. It is also directly in contradiction to the Supreme Court's ruling that secularism is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution — something that cannot be amended or erased, even by Parliament. Leaders and their warnings The warnings of our national leaders resonate even more forcefully today. In 1931, Mahatma Gandhi, in his resolution on Fundamental Rights, insisted that the state must remain neutral in religious matters. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar too reflected this in the line, 'The State shall not recognise any religion as State religion.' What is particularly instructive,and ironic, is that the Hindu Mahasabha, which boycotted the freedom movement and opposed secular nationalism, included a similar provision in its 1944 Hindustan Free State Act. The Constituent Assembly Debates further highlight the intent of India's founding generation. On August 27, 1947, Govind Ballabh Pant posed a direct question: 'Do you want a real national secular State or a theocratic State?' He warned that if India became a theocracy, it could only be a Hindu state, raising questions about the status and security of those who would be excluded from such a polity. Jaspat Roy Kapoor, on November 21, 1949, noted that Gandhi had made it clear: religion should be a personal matter. On November 22, 1949, Begum Aizaz Rasul called secularism 'the most outstanding feature' of the Constitution and expressed hope that it would remain 'guarded and unsullied'. On October 14, 1949, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel reassured the nation that the Constitution of free India would not be 'disfigured by any provision on a communal basis.' And on November 23, T.J.M. Wilson warned that the clouds threatening India's secular character were already forming. These warnings were not alarmist but were deeply perceptive, and speak with urgency to our times. The present RSS-led campaign is also aimed at discrediting and eliminating the socialist orientation of the Constitution. Dr. Ambedkar, in the Constituent Assembly, clearly noted that the Directive Principles of State Policy enshrined in Part IV of the Constitution were rooted in socialist ideals. The Supreme Court's recent decision, rightly interpreted the term 'socialist' in the Preamble as synonymous with a welfare state. This vision resonates with B.R. Ambedkar's own emphasis on the social and economic transformation of India — an end to caste exploitation, landlessness, poverty, and discrimination. Socialism means creating conditions for equality and justice — not the importation of any foreign ideology, but the realisation of the promises of the freedom struggle. In this regard, B.R. Ambedkar issued perhaps the most unambiguous warning ever — in Pakistan or the Partition of India, he wrote: 'If Hindu Raj does become a fact, it will, no doubt, be the greatest calamity for this country… Hindu Raj must be prevented at any cost.' That cost is now upon us. The RSS's demand to remove the terms 'secular' and 'socialist' from the Constitution is part of a long-term project to dismantle the very edifice of the modern Indian Republic and to institutionalise a new order built on religious supremacy, caste hierarchy, market fundamentalism, and political authoritarianism. The need for resistance This must be resisted — through public awareness, legal challenge, political mobilisation, and mass democratic struggle. The Constitution is not just a legal document. It is a political, social, and moral covenant forged in the crucible of our freedom struggle. It embodies the dreams of countless martyrs, revolutionaries, and constitutionalists who envisioned an India that belonged to all its people. To defend secularism and socialism today is to defend democracy itself. It is to defend the right of every citizen — regardless of faith, caste, class, or gender — to live with dignity, equality, and freedom. The Republic must be protected, nourished, and, if necessary, defended against those who seek to destroy it from within. Let us rise to that responsibility, with courage, with clarity, and with collective resolve. D. Raja is General Secretary, Communist Party of India
Time of India
20 minutes ago
- Time of India
Israeli military kills 15 in Gaza as Trump awaits Hamas reply to peace proposal
TEL AVIV/CAIRO: At least 15 Palestinians were killed overnight in an Israeli airstrike in Gaza, according to local health officials, as US President Donald Trump said he expected Hamas to respond to his "final proposal" for a ceasefire in Gaza in the next 24 hours. Health officials at the Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis , southern Gaza, said the Israeli military had carried out an airstrike on a tent encampment west of the city around 2 a.m., killing 15 Palestinians displaced by nearly two years of war. The Israeli military had no immediate comment. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like The Most Successful Way of Intraday Trading is "Market Profile" TradeWise Learn More Undo Later on Friday, Palestinians gathered to perform funeral prayers before burying those killed overnight. "The ceasefire will come, and I have lost my brother? There should have been a ceasefire long ago before I lost my brother," said 13-year-old Mayar Al Farr as she wept. Her brother, Mahmoud, was among those killed. Adlar Mouamar said her nephew, Ashraf, was also killed. "Our hearts are broken. We ask the world, we don't want want them to end the bloodshed. We want them to stop this war." Live Events Trump earlier said it would probably be known in 24 hours whether Hamas has accepted a ceasefire between the Palestinian militant group and Israel. On Tuesday, the president announced that Israel had accepted the conditions needed to finalise a 60-day ceasefire with Hamas, during which the parties would work towards ending the war. Hamas, which has previously declared it would only agree to a deal for a permanent end to the war, has said it was studying the proposal, but given no public indication whether it would accept or reject it. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is yet to comment on Trump's ceasefire announcement. While some members of his right-wing coalition oppose a deal, others have indicated their support.
Time of India
20 minutes ago
- Time of India
SC junks plea over error in NEET-UG 2025 answer key
The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a plea by a student seeking correction of an alleged error in the final answer key for the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test undergraduate exam 2025 ( NEET UG 2025 ). A division bench comprising Justice PS Narasimha and Justice R Mahadevan observed that it would not interfere with the results of a nationwide examination based on an individual's grievance, even if the error claimed was genuine. Petitioner and candidate Shivam Gandhi Raina had challenged the correctness of one question of the NEET-UG 2025 question paper. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Experience cinema like never before Boat Buy Now Undo He claimed that the answer marked by the National Testing Agency (NTA) was flawed. The petitioner sought a stay on the ongoing counselling process and revision of the result. The bench said it cannot entertain such individual challenges once the results are declared for a pan-India competitive examination . The petitioner's counsel argued that the SC had intervened in NEET-UG 2024. Live Events The petitioner's counsel contended that the instant matter affects the career of students. "One mark difference will mean a lot. So many students are affected by this," the petitioner's counsel said, demanding the constitution of an expert committee to examine the said question. The court, however, drew a distinction between last year's case and the current one. The Bench said the top court's intervention in 2024 was due to widespread grievances regarding the discrepancies and shortcomings in the conduct of the exam.
