The University Grants Commission’s newly notified equity regulations have triggered a nationwide debate, spilling into courtrooms, Parliament, and university campuses. On Monday, a writ petition was filed in the Supreme Court questioning the legality and fairness of the UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, even as student groups and political leaders voiced strong objections to the rules.
The controversy centres on how the new framework defines caste-based discrimination and whether it unfairly excludes certain sections of students from protection.
Read Also:- Ganja Seizure Case: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail Over Violations in NDPS Procedure
Background of the Case
The petition has been filed by Mrityunjay Tiwari, a post-doctoral researcher at Banaras Hindu University. His counsel, advocate Neeraj Singh, confirmed that the matter would be mentioned before the Supreme Court for urgent listing.
The UGC notified the 2026 regulations on January 13, replacing its 2012 framework. The new rules aim to promote equity on campuses by introducing stricter grievance redress mechanisms, mandatory equity committees, and faster timelines for resolving complaints.
However, the regulations also redefine “caste-based discrimination” as discrimination faced by Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and Other Backward Classes (OBCs), a change that has become the centre of the dispute.
Court Challenge and Key Objections
In his petition, Tiwari has argued that the regulations operate on an “untenable presumption” that discrimination flows only in one direction.
He contended that the rules, by design, “accord legal recognition of victimhood to certain reserved categories” while excluding students from the general category from protection. According to the petition, this creates a presumption of guilt and denies equal protection under law.
“The definition assumes that caste-based discrimination can only be suffered by certain groups, which is constitutionally unsustainable,” the plea states.
The petition also questions the removal of provisions related to action against false complaints, which were present in the draft version circulated in 2025.
Political and Student Reactions
Political reactions have been swift and sharp.
Rajya Sabha MP Priyanka Chaturvedi questioned the intent of the regulations, asking on social media, “Shouldn’t the law be inclusive and ensure equal protection for everyone? How will guilt be determined, and what happens in cases of false accusations?”
BJP MLC from Uttar Pradesh, Devendra Pratap Singh, wrote to the UGC warning that the rules could “widen caste-based divisions” and make general category students feel unsafe. While supporting protection for marginalised groups, he said equity should not come at the cost of social balance.
Student bodies have echoed similar concerns. The students’ union of Kumaun University submitted a formal letter to the UGC through the Vice-Chancellor, stating that the regulations violate the “principle of natural justice.” The union warned that the rules could create an atmosphere of fear and distrust on campuses.
Read Also:- Arrest Illegal for Not Telling Reasons: Tripura High Court Grants Bail in NDPS Case
UGC’s Rationale and Data
The UGC has defended the regulations by citing a sharp rise in caste-based discrimination cases. According to official data, complaints increased by over 118% in five years - from 173 cases in 2019–20 to 378 in 2023–24.
Under the new rules:
- Every institution must set up an Equal Opportunity Centre and an Equity Committee.
- A 24/7 helpline and online complaint portal are mandatory.
- Committees must meet within 24 hours of a complaint.
- Investigations must be completed within 15 working days.
- Heads of institutions will be personally accountable for delays or inaction.
The UGC has also expanded the scope of protection to include OBC students explicitly.
Diverging Views Within Academia
Interestingly, not all criticism has come from opponents of affirmative action.
IRS officer Nethrapal, writing on social media, argued that the regulations still fall short in addressing the real forms of discrimination faced by SC, ST, and OBC students during admissions, interviews, and oral examinations. He said generic equity committees may not be equipped to deal with deep-rooted biases.
Meanwhile, BJP MP Nishikant Dubey sought to reassure critics, stating that misconceptions around the rules would soon be cleared. He pointed to the introduction of EWS reservation under the Modi government and said, “As long as Modi ji is there, no harm will come to the children of the upper castes.”
Read Also:- HP High Court Grants Bail in NDPS Case, Says Money Transfers Alone Don’t Prove Drug Trade
Adding to the growing controversy, Bareilly City Magistrate Alank Agnihotri resigned from service on Monday, citing dissatisfaction with the UGC regulations. Around the same time, several BJP workers in Lucknow also tendered their resignations in protest.
Court’s Next Step
The Supreme Court is expected to take up the writ petition shortly. The challenge places the spotlight on the balance between protecting historically marginalised communities and ensuring equal safeguards for all students.
For now, the fate of the UGC’s 2026 equity framework rests with the court’s scrutiny.
