New Delhi – The University Grants Commission‘s newly notified Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions Regulations, 2026, designed to strengthen safeguards against caste-based discrimination on campuses, have triggered widespread protests and legal challenges. The regulations, intended to promote inclusion and accountability, have instead become the center of a heated debate about how caste-based discrimination should be defined and addressed in educational institutions.
Background of Anti-Discrimination Framework
The regulations addressing caste-based discrimination were notified on January 13, replacing the UGC’s 2012 anti-discrimination guidelines. These new rules mandate creation of Equity Committees, Equity Squads, helplines, and monitoring mechanisms in colleges and universities to address complaints of caste-based discrimination, particularly those faced by Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, and Other Backward Class students.
The framework for combating caste-based discrimination was developed following a Supreme Court order on a petition seeking effective implementation of the 2012 guidelines. This petition was filed by the mothers of Rohith Vemula and Payal Tadvi, two students whose tragic deaths highlighted the severity of caste-based discrimination in educational institutions.
Tragic Cases That Prompted Reform
Rohith Vemula, a PhD scholar at the University of Hyderabad, died by suicide in 2016 allegedly after facing caste-based discrimination and harassment. In 2019, Payal Tadvi, a resident doctor at Mumbai’s Topiwala National Medical College and BYL Nair Hospital, also died by suicide, with allegations of sustained casteist abuse by her seniors. These cases brought national attention to the issue of caste-based discrimination in higher education.
Controversial Definition of Caste-Based Discrimination
The central controversy surrounding the new regulations concerns Regulation 3(c), which defines caste-based discrimination specifically as discrimination only against SC, ST, and OBC communities. Critics argue that this narrow definition of caste-based discrimination excludes students from the general category and restricts who can seek redress under the framework.
This definition of caste-based discrimination has become the focal point of legal challenges, with petitioners arguing that it wrongly assumes such discrimination flows in only one direction. The regulation thus legally recognizes victimhood only for certain communities, leaving others without access to grievance redressal for caste-based discrimination.
Supreme Court Petitions Challenge Regulations
Two separate petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the caste-based discrimination regulations have been filed in the Supreme Court. These petitions are likely to be mentioned before Chief Justice of India Surya Kant for directions on listing and hearing.
The first petition against the caste-based discrimination regulations was filed by Mrityunjay Tiwari, a post-doctoral researcher at Banaras Hindu University. He contends that the regulation wrongly assumes caste-based discrimination flows in only one direction, leaving general category students without protection.
Second Petition Challenges Constitutional Validity
The second petition addressing caste-based discrimination was filed by advocate Vineet Jindal, who describes the provision as arbitrary, unconstitutional, and beyond the UGC’s powers. Jindal argues that limiting protection to SC, ST, and OBC students violates the constitutional guarantee of equality before the law.
Jindal has requested the court either to strike down the clause defining caste-based discrimination or to reinterpret it in a caste-neutral manner, extending protection to anyone facing discrimination regardless of caste. The petitions also seek an interim stay on enforcing the provision.
Education Minister’s Assurance
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan sought to address concerns about the caste-based discrimination regulations, assuring that the rules would not be misused. “I want to humbly assure everyone that no one is going to face any harassment. There will be no discrimination and no one will have the right to misuse the regulation in the name of discrimination,” Pradhan stated.
Pradhan added that the Centre, UGC, and state governments would ensure the regulations addressing caste based discrimination remain “within the ambit of the Constitution of India.”
Legal Expert’s Perspective
Senior advocate Indira Jaising criticized protests against the caste based discrimination regulations and calls for rollback. Referring to the original petition filed in 2019, she noted that the 2012 regulations had been found inadequate. “It appears to be a very ‘upper caste’ reaction to the efforts of the SC, ST and OBC communities to deal with issues of discrimination,” Jaising observed.
While acknowledging that the caste based discrimination regulations may still be inadequate, Jaising expressed hope that the Supreme Court would address the matter rationally.
Political Reactions Mixed
Political reactions to the caste based discrimination regulations have been mixed. Rajya Sabha MP Priyanka Chaturvedi suggested the regulations should be “withdrawn or amended as necessary.” She raised questions about implementation, false accusations, guilt determination, and how caste-based discrimination should be defined—through words, actions, or perceptions.
Student Concerns and Protests
Protesting students have detailed their apprehensions about the caste based discrimination regulations. Alokit Tripathi, a PhD student at Delhi University, described the regulations as “draconian in nature,” arguing that the definition of victim is predetermined.
“With the proposed Equity Squads, it will be akin to living under constant surveillance inside the campus,” Tripathi stated, expressing concern that regulations addressing caste-based discrimination could create chaos by shifting the burden of proof entirely onto the accused without adequate safeguards.
Broader Implications
The controversy over these caste based discrimination regulations highlights the complexity of addressing historical inequities while ensuring equal protection under law for all students. As the matter proceeds to the Supreme Court, the outcome will likely have significant implications for how educational institutions across India address and prevent caste-based discrimination in the future.
