New Delhi: The Central government on Thursday informed the Supreme Court that it would reconsider the University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, framed to prevent caste-based discrimination in higher educational institutions.
Appearing for the Centre, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that the government was contemplating constituting a committee to review the regulations and ensure that the concerns of students belonging to all sections are adequately addressed.
A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the validity of the 2026 UGC Regulations, which had been kept in abeyance by the apex court in an interim order passed in January.
During the hearing, the CJI Kant-led Bench asked the Centre to revisit the regulations, saying “Why don’t you revisit the regulations?”
In response, SG Mehta submitted, “The government has taken a decision that every student should be taken care of. Nobody should have any apprehension. Nobody should feel dissatisfied. We are also considering the interests of the younger generation. The government is contemplating appointing a committee.”
Taking note of the Centre’s submission, the Supreme Court adjourned the batch of petitions for further consideration.
In an interim order passed on January 29 this year, the apex court had stayed the operation of the 2026 UGC Regulations, directing that the earlier 2012 UGC Regulations would continue to remain in force until further orders.
Issuing notice to the Centre and the UGC, a Bench of CJI Kant and Justice Bagchi had expressed prima facie concerns over certain ambiguities in the new framework and observed that the possibility of its misuse could not be ruled out.
The petitions had primarily challenged Clause 3(c) of the 2026 Regulations, which defines “caste-based discrimination”, contending that its restrictive scope excludes students belonging to general categories from the protection and grievance redressal mechanisms available under the framework.
The petitioners argued that the regulations recognise caste-based discrimination only when it is directed against members of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes, thereby leaving individuals from non-reserved categories without an effective remedy.
The Supreme Court had also flagged concerns over provisions relating to segregation in educational institutions and the omission of ragging as a specific form of discrimination under the new framework.
(IANS)
