- Supreme Court keeps UGC Equity Regulations 2026 in abeyance; revives 2012 rules.
- Bench questions vague provisions, absence of ragging safeguards, and potential divisiveness.
- Union and UGC issued notice; matter listed for March 19.
The UGC Equity Regulations 2026 stay came after the Supreme Court ordered the new rules to be kept in abeyance, citing concerns that several provisions are vague, unclear, and open to misuse. The Court also warned that aspects of the framework could prove divisive on campuses.
A Bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued notice to the Union government and the University Grants Commission (UGC), directing responses by March 19. Until then, the UGC Regulations, 2012 will continue to operate to ensure students retain a grievance redress mechanism.
Bench Questions Definitions and Scope
During the hearing of three writ petitions, the Court examined Regulation 3(1)(c), which defines “caste-based discrimination” in relation to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Classes. Petitioners argued this duplicates the broader definition of “discrimination” in Regulation 3(1)(e) and risks excluding other forms of harassment.
The Bench tested this by asking whether harassment based on region or language would fall under the general definition. Counsel argued it would, making a separate caste-specific definition unnecessary.
Ragging Omission Draws Sharp Criticism
The Court repeatedly flagged the absence of any provision on ragging in the 2026 framework. Counsel presented scenarios where harassment between juniors and seniors may not be adequately addressed under the new rules.
Judges questioned why the regulations appeared to assume that discrimination on campuses occurs only along caste lines, noting that much harassment is unrelated to caste.
Concerns Over Campus Unity and Social Impact
The CJI expressed concern that the rules could undermine progress toward a more integrated campus environment. He strongly objected to ideas such as separate hostels along caste lines, calling them unacceptable.
Justice Bagchi invoked the principle of non-regression, asking why a broader, more inclusive 2012 framework should be replaced with a narrower approach.
Court Suggests Expert Review
Addressing Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, the Bench said it was not inclined to pass a final verdict immediately. Instead, it suggested the regulations be reconsidered by a committee of eminent jurists who understand social realities and campus dynamics.
Senior Advocate Indira Jaising defended the intent behind the regulations, which were framed after earlier Supreme Court directions in a 2019 PIL seeking stronger safeguards against discrimination in universities.
2012 Rules Restored Under Article 142
In its interim order, the Court said: “The 2026 Regulations are ordered to be kept in abeyance. In exercise of Article 142, the 2012 Regulations shall continue to remain in force till further orders.”
The 2026 rules, notified in January, replaced the 2012 framework after consultations with stakeholders. However, they triggered opposition from multiple quarters, with petitions arguing that the provisions may unfairly target or exclude certain student groups.
The case will resume after the Union government and UGC file their responses, with the Court set to re-examine whether the regulations require substantial redrafting.
You May Like
Trending Searches Today |
- Sensex Nifty Fall After Budget 2026: STT Hike, Borrowing Plans Weigh on Sentiment
- Bhubaneswar Traffic Restrictions for President’s Six-Day Odisha Visit from Feb 2
- India Under-19 Beat Pakistan Under-19 to Seal World Cup Semi-Final Spot
- Pakistan Boycott India T20 World Cup Match on February 15
- India Venezuela Oil Deal Claim: Trump Says India Will Buy Venezuelan Oil Instead of Iran
