Strong opposition to new university equity regulations
New regulations by India’s higher education regulator, the University Grants Commission (UGC), aimed at preventing caste-based discrimination in higher education institutions, have sparked widespread opposition from students and politicians who argue they could lead to discrimination against general category students.
Aimed at combatting caste-based discrimination and ensuring fair treatment of students from marginalised communities, including Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and Other Backward Classes (OBC), the UGC’s Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions Regulations, 2026, mandate institutions to implement special committees, 24/7 helplines, and robust monitoring systems.
SC and ST are constitutionally recognised groups that have faced historical disadvantage in India. Federally funded higher education institutions reserve 15% of seats for members of the SC, including Dalits, and 7.5% for ST. Since 2008, an additional 22.5% of seats have been reserved for OBC to expand affirmative action.
Upon receiving a complaint, the equity committee must take action within 24 hours and submit a detailed report within 15 working days to prevent delays in resolving cases.
Insufficient safeguards
Several students belonging to the general category have expressed concerns that the regulations could be misused and allow for frivolous complaints without adequate safeguards.
“We are urging the UGC to review or amend the rules to ensure that safeguards are balanced and equitable for all students,” said Raunaq Singh, a student at Delhi University.
He told University World News: “Such regulations will politicise the higher education campuses and bring undue pressure on students from the general class.”
Within days of the regulations being issued on 13 January, protests erupted on campuses and spilt onto the streets. Student groups argue that while preventing caste-based discrimination is necessary, the design of the rules is unbalanced and violates the principles of natural justice.
Their main concern is that the regulations focus specifically on addressing the grievances of SC, ST, and OBC students, while not providing similar safeguards for general category students.
Exclusion of general category students
Student unions have raised objections, arguing that the definition of caste-based discrimination has been framed in such a way that only SC, ST, and OBC students can be recognised as complainants, effectively excluding general category students from seeking protection under the same system.
They also point to the removal of provisions relating to penalties for false or malicious complaints, arguing that this creates a presumption of guilt and places the entire burden of proof on the accused student.
They objected to the composition of the mandatory equity committees under the rules, which require representation from reserved categories and women but make no provision for members of the general category.
These concerns have escalated into organised protests. In Uttarakhand state, the Kumaun University Students’ Union submitted a formal memorandum to the UGC through the university’s vice-chancellor, warning that the rules could disrupt peace on campus and create an atmosphere of fear and mistrust.
The union termed the rules as being against the principles of natural justice and cautioned against their potential misuse.
In Delhi, about 100 students from several colleges protested outside the UGC headquarters on 27 January, despite heavy rain and police barricades. They demanded the complete withdrawal of the rules and argued that the new framework would lead to chaos on campuses by promoting surveillance through equity squads and criminalising normal academic or social interactions.
“The definition of the victim is predetermined, and the accused gets very little protection,” said one protesting research scholar, echoing a sentiment repeatedly expressed during the demonstrations.
Court action
Mritunjay Tiwari, a post-doctoral researcher at Banaras Hindu University in Uttar Pradesh, has filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court through his lawyer, Neeraj Singh, challenging the new regulations. The Supreme Court on 28 January agreed to list the petition.
Social media has fuelled students’ anger. Hashtags like #UGCRollback and #ShameonUGC trended nationally for several days, primarily driven by students and parents who fear that the rules will institutionalise bias rather than eliminate it.
Not all student organisations oppose the regulations. Left-leaning organisations like the All India Students' Association (AISA) have welcomed the inclusion of anti-discrimination safeguards in the regulations, calling it a long-overdue step.
However, AISA pointed out that the representation of SC, ST, OBC, and women in the grievance committee is limited and not clearly defined. A statement by AISA said: “The rules describe discrimination in broad and vague terms, without concrete actions or examples, which has given rise to some concerns.”
Amid growing protests, Federal Minister of Education Dharmendra Pradhan said the new regulations would not be allowed to become a weapon of harassment or discrimination against any group.
“I assure everyone that there will be no discrimination or harassment in the name of the new UGC regulations. No one can misuse the law,” he said, adding that both the government and the UGC would ensure fair implementation at the ground level.
Student groups remain apprehensive, arguing that the assurances must be backed by explicit safeguards written into the regulations themselves.