Supreme Court Keeps UGC Equity Regulations, 2026 in Abeyance; Raises Concerns Over Ambiguity and Possible Misuse

New Delhi | February 1, 2026

The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice in a batch of writ petitions challenging the University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, and ordered that the impugned regulations be kept in abeyance until further orders.

A Bench of the Supreme Court, after hearing the petitioners, the Union of India, and intervenors, observed prima facie ambiguities in certain provisions of the 2026 Regulations and noted that the possibility of their misuse cannot be ruled out.

Solicitor General Accepts Notice

On the Court’s query, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta accepted notice on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. The Court also heard Senior Advocate Ms. Indira Jaisingh, appearing in the matter.

The petitions primarily challenge the definition of “caste-based discrimination” under Clause 3(c) of the 2026 Regulations.

Challenge to Definition of Caste-Based Discrimination

The petitioners contended that Clause 3(c) is restrictive and exclusionary, rendering individuals belonging to non-reserved or general categories remediless, even if they are subjected to caste-based discrimination or institutional bias within higher education institutions.

It was argued that the Regulations proceed on an unfounded presumption that caste-based discrimination is necessarily unidirectional and cannot operate against persons from non-reserved categories.

Key Constitutional Questions Framed

The Supreme Court framed several substantial questions of law requiring detailed examination, including:

• Whether Clause 3(c) bears a reasonable nexus with the object of the Regulations, especially when no separate procedural mechanism has been prescribed for addressing caste-based discrimination, unlike the broader definition of “discrimination” under Clause 3(e).

• Whether the operationalisation of caste-based discrimination under the Regulations affects the constitutional and statutory sub-classification of Most Backward Castes within SC, ST, and OBC categories, and whether the framework provides adequate safeguards for Extremely Backward Castes facing structural disadvantage.

• Whether the inclusion of the term “segregation” under Clause 7(d)—relating to allocation of hostels, classrooms, mentorship groups or similar arrangements—could result in a “separate but equal” classification, infringing Articles 14, 15, and the constitutional value of fraternity.

• Whether the omission of “ragging” as a specific form of discrimination, despite its presence in the 2012 Regulations, amounts to a regressive legislative omission, leading to unequal access to justice and violation of Articles 14 and 21.

2019 Petition to Be Heard Together

The Court noted that the issues raised in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1149 of 2019  which was filed by the mother of Dr. Payal Tadavi and Rohit Vemula, also bear upon the constitutional validity of the 2026 Regulations. Accordingly, all matters were directed to be heard together and listed before a three-Judge Bench.

2012 Regulations to Continue

Invoking its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court directed that the UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2012 shall continue to operate and remain in force until further orders.

The matter has been listed again on 19 March 2026.