UGC Introduces Strict Guidelines as Caste-Based Discrimination Complaints Rise by 118%

The court emphasized that educational spaces should unite, not segregate, and warned against policies that could institutionalize division instead of preventing discrimination.
 

The Supreme Court has listed the matter for further hearing on March 19.
 

Yes. Until further orders, the earlier UGC anti-discrimination framework (2012 regulations) continues to remain in force.
 

Yes. The Supreme Court has effectively asked the government and UGC to rethink and redraft the regulations so they promote equity without bias or exclusion
 

The court said the wording was unclear and open to misuse, and suggested the regulations may need to be re-examined by an expert committee.
 

Yes. While one section narrowly defined caste-based discrimination, another section defined discrimination broadly to include religion, caste, gender, region, place of birth, and disability. The court questioned why both definitions were needed.
 

The court observed that discrimination is not limited to one group and that denying remedies to others may violate Article 14 (Right to Equality) under the Constitution.
 

A key provision defined caste-based discrimination as discrimination only against SC, ST, and OBC students, excluding students from the general category from the same grievance mechanism.
 

The court found the rules vague, potentially misusable, and socially divisive. It warned that, in their current form, they could have serious consequences for equality and harmony in educational institutions.
 

The Supreme Court has stayed (put on hold) the UGC’s Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions Regulations, 2026. The rules will not be implemented until the court completes its review.