The Supreme Court has been moved challenging the University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, seeking to put on hold their implementation. The plea contends that, in the name of equity, the regulations create a grievance redressal mechanism for protecting Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, socially and educationally backward classes, and economically weaker sections but exclude students and staff belonging to the general category.
The UGC regulations, notified on January 13, 2026, apply to all higher educational institutions across the country. Their stated objective is to eradicate discrimination in higher education on grounds such as religion, race, gender, place of birth, caste, or disability, with particular emphasis on protecting Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, socially and educationally backward classes, economically weaker sections, and persons with disabilities, and to promote equity and inclusion on campuses.
To achieve this, the regulations mandate every higher educational institution to establish an Equal Opportunity Centre, tasked with overseeing policies for disadvantaged groups, providing academic and social counselling, and fostering diversity within campuses.
However, the petitioners contend that the grievance redressal mechanism created under the regulations is restricted in scope and effectively excludes students and staff who do not belong to SC/ST or OBC categories, thereby denying them institutional protection even in cases of alleged caste-based hostility or discrimination.
Assailing the regulations, the plea seeks a direction restraining their implementation in the present form and a declaration that denial of access to the grievance redressal mechanism on the basis of caste identity amounts to impermissible State discrimination.
The petition argues that the UGC framework under challenge rests on an untenable presumption that caste-based discrimination can operate only in one direction, thereby foreclosing, as a matter of law, the possibility that persons belonging to general or upper castes may also be subjected to caste-based abuse, intimidation, hostility, or institutional prejudice.
“This selective framework not only condones but effectively encourages unchecked hostility against non-reserved categories, rendering the regulations a tool for division rather than equity,” the plea states.
The regulations have triggered protests in several places, with members of dominant castes alleging that the framework is one-sided and vulnerable to misuse against them in educational institutions.
Multiple petitions and applications have now been filed before the Supreme Court, raising similar concerns.