UGC Equity Regulations and Battle for Social Justice

Dinesh Sreerangaraj

The UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, have generated widespread debate and protest, particularly in North India. This time, those who are opposing these regulations are Hindutva-backed reactionary organisations. What is it about these regulations that has made them so anxious and pushed them to mobilise protests? Why have these organisations gone all the way to the Supreme Court and obtained a stay against these regulations? Did the UGC voluntarily come forward to frame these regulations? Are these regulations sufficient to eliminate caste discrimination within educational campuses? Many such questions arise.

Caste remains deeply rooted in Indian society. For generations, education was treated as the exclusive privilege of the upper castes. Even epic and mythological stories have narrated what happened to figures like Shambukan and Ekalavya, who dared to pursue learning beyond caste boundaries. If today's education has become accessible to all, it is only because of the continuous struggles for social justice led by leaders such as Singara Velar, Dr B.R. Ambedkar, Periyar, Savitribai Phule, and many others.

Despite overcoming numerous obstacles and opening the doors of classrooms that were once denied, caste discrimination continues to persist even today within educational spaces. At the University of Hyderabad, Rohith Vemula, a Dalit PhD scholar, was subjected to caste discrimination by the university administration and died by suicide in 2016. His death shook the entire nation. Since it was the result of sustained institutional pressure and targeting, it is widely regarded as an institutional murder.

Similarly, in Mumbai in 2019, Dr Payal Tadvi, a postgraduate medical student from the Bhil Muslim tribal community studying at Topiwala National Medical College and BYL Nair Hospital, died by suicide after facing caste discrimination. The names of Fathima Latheef (IIT Madras, 2019), Muthukrishnan (JNU, 2017), Darshan Solanki (IIT Bombay, 2023), and Senthil Kumar (University of Hyderabad, 2008) are among the few cases that received at least some media attention. These were students studying in some of India’s most prestigious higher education institutions. If one were to conduct a nationwide accounting, the list of those whose names never reached public or media attention would be far longer.

The UGC regulations, framed in 2012, failed to prevent caste discrimination on educational campuses. It was only as a result of the Public Interest Litigation filed in the Supreme Court by Radhika Vemula, the mother of Rohith Vemula, and Abeda Salim Tadvi, the mother of Dr Payal Tadvi, that the UGC was compelled to draft the 2026 regulations. The UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, have been framed with several shortcomings and loopholes. Under these regulations, every educational institution must establish an Equity Committee. Action must be taken within 15 days of an affected student filing a complaint. Colleges must submit periodic reports to the UGC, and institutions that fail to comply fully with the regulations may face strict action by the Commission.

Under the 2012 regulations, only SC and ST categories were included. Under the current regulations, Clause 3(1)(c) includes broader categories such as SC, ST, OBC, minorities, women, persons with disabilities, and EWS. In the Supreme Court, through the case Mritunjay Tiwari vs. Union of India & Anr. (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 101 of 2026), the petitioner has legally challenged Clause 3(1)(c) of the UGC Regulations, 2026, on the ground that it wrongly assumes caste discrimination to be unidirectional. The petitioner contends that individuals belonging to the general or non-reserved categories may also face caste-based discrimination, and therefore, excluding them from the protective framework fails to uphold the constitutional guarantees of equality and non-discrimination under Articles 14, 15(1), and 21 of the Constitution. Taking note of these, the Supreme Court has kept the implementation of these regulations in abeyance.

This development raises serious concerns regarding the Court’s broader understanding and approach towards the entrenched structural realities of caste discrimination. Even today, if one closely examines every part of India, one can clearly observe, with supporting evidence, how caste discrimination and untouchability persist in increasingly repugnant and newer forms. This truth becomes apparent if one studies the proportion of cases registered under untouchability and caste atrocity laws, including those filed in relation to honour killings targeting inter-caste love marriages, and further examines the rate of proper investigation and conviction delivered in these cases.

The UGC Equity Regulations contain serious loopholes and institutional weaknesses. Allowing college authorities to head these committees undermines the very possibility of impartial inquiry and erodes students’ trust in the grievance redressal process. These regulations are inadequate to effectively address caste discrimination in educational institutions. Only a comprehensive law enacted by Parliament, similar to the Karnataka model, can provide a stronger and more enforceable safeguard against caste oppression.

On April 16, 2026, the Karnataka State Cabinet approved the Rohith Vemula Bill, which introduces several significant legal provisions to prevent caste-based oppression and discrimination in higher educational institutions. In particular, the Bill seeks to establish a legal framework to prevent exclusion, harassment, and discrimination against students belonging to SC, ST, and other marginalised communities.

Most importantly, the Bill emphasises monitoring inquiries and actions taken on complaints of caste discrimination in educational institutions, while ensuring that this information is publicly accessible in a transparent manner. Further, institutions that fail to address complaints properly, suppress incidents of caste discrimination, or refuse to implement the recommendations of inquiry committees may face stringent penalties, including fines of up to ₹10 lakh and suspension of government grants provided to the institution.

Therefore, the enactment of dedicated special legislation in Parliament, in the name of Rohith Vemula, as a nationwide law aimed at eradicating caste discrimination on university campuses, remains the most decisive and enduring solution.