The University Grants Commission’s (UGC) newly notified Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions Regulations, 2026, intended to strengthen safeguards against caste-based discrimination on campuses, have instead triggered protests and a legal challenge in the Supreme Court.
While the UGC says the regulations are meant to promote inclusion and accountability, critics said the framework adopts a narrow definition of caste-based discrimination, effectively excluding large sections of students and faculty from its protection, news agency PTI reported.
The matter has also reached the Supreme Court. Let's break it down as protests escalate:
What are the equity regulations?
TL;DR: These bodies are meant to address complaints of discrimination, particularly those faced by Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and Other Backward Class (SC, ST, OBC) students.
Notified on January 13, the regulations replace the UGC’s 2012 anti-discrimination guidelines and mandate the creation of Equity Committees, Equity Squads, helplines and monitoring mechanisms in colleges and universities.
These bodies are meant to address complaints of discrimination, particularly those faced by Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and Other Backward Class (SC, ST, OBC) students.
The rules were framed following a Supreme Court order on a petition seeking effective implementation of the 2012 guidelines. That petition was filed by the mothers of Rohith Vemula and Payal Tadvi.
Vemula, a PhD scholar at the University of Hyderabad, died by suicide in 2016, allegedly after facing caste-based harassment. In 2019, 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.
Two petitions against the regulations
TL;DR: However, the new regulations have now themselves landed before the Supreme Court.
However, the new regulations have now themselves landed before the Supreme Court.
Two separate petitions challenge their constitutional validity and are likely to be mentioned before Chief Justice of India Surya Kant later this week for directions on listing and hearing, HT has reported.
At the centre of the challenge is Regulation 3(c), which defines “caste-based discrimination” as discrimination only against SC, ST and OBC communities.
Petitioners argue that this definition excludes students from the general category and restricts who can seek redress under the framework.
One of the petitions has been filed by Mrityunjay Tiwari, a post-doctoral researcher at Banaras Hindu University.
HT has reported that he contends that the regulation wrongly assumes caste-based discrimination flows in only one direction, and the rule thus legally recognises victimhood only for certain communities, leaving others without access to grievance redressal.
The second petition, filed by advocate Vineet Jindal, describes the provision as arbitrary, unconstitutional and beyond the UGC’s powers under its parent law.
Limiting protection to SC, ST and OBC students, he argues, violates the constitutional guarantee of equality before the law. Jindal has asked the court either to strike down the clause 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 and urge that equity mechanisms be made available to all students until the issue is decided.
Political row over UGC regulations
TL;DR: Union education minister Dharmendra Pradhan sought to allay concerns on Tuesday, assuring that the rules would not be misused.
Union education minister Dharmendra Pradhan sought to allay concerns on Tuesday, 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 told reporters, adding that the Centre, the UGC and state governments would ensure the rules remain “within the ambit of the Constitution of India”.
Senior advocate Indira Jaising, however, criticised the protests and calls for a rollback. Referring to the original petition filed in 2019, she said the 2012 regulations had been found inadequate and expressed surprise at the reaction to the new framework.
“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 said, adding that while the regulations themselves may still be inadequate, she hoped the Supreme Court would address the matter “in a rational manner”.
Political reactions have also been mixed. Rajya Sabha MP Priyanka Chaturvedi said the regulations should be “withdrawn or amended as necessary”.
“Why is this discrimination in the implementation of the law? What happens in case of false accusations? How will guilt be determined? How should discrimination be defined—through words, actions, or perceptions?” the Shiv Sena-UBT leader asked in a social media post.
What are the protestors saying?
TL;DR: Some protesting students detailed their apprehensions on Tuesday.
Some protesting students detailed their apprehensions on Tuesday. Alokit Tripathi, a PhD student at Delhi University, said the regulations could create chaos on campuses by shifting the burden of proof entirely onto the accused, without adequate safeguards.
“The new regulations are draconian in nature. The definition of victim is already predetermined,” he told PTI. “With the proposed Equity Squads, it will be akin to living under constant surveillance inside the campus.”
Matter reaches Bareilly
TL;DR: In UP's Bareilly, since-suspended City Magistrate Alankar Agnihotri escalated his protest against the Uttar Pradesh administration, urging the Centre to intervene in the matter.
In UP's Bareilly, since-suspended City Magistrate Alankar Agnihotri escalated his protest against the Uttar Pradesh administration, urging the Centre to intervene in the matter.
Alleging a failure of constitutional machinery in the state, he claimed that Brahmin organisations across multiple states had expressed concern over the UGC regulations.
“Many people, including elected representatives, believe the UGC regulations published on January 13, 2026, will be highly detrimental to the country,” Agnihotri told the media.
Curated by Shiv Shakti Mishra
