In a significant move, the Supreme Court has put a stay on the University Grants Commission (UGC) (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, providing immediate relief to protesting students and faculty while delivering a setback to the government's efforts to enforce stricter anti-discrimination measures in higher education. The ruling came on Thursday, January 28, 2026, during a hearing prompted by petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the regulations.
The core contention revolves around the UGC's new regulations, which aim to combat caste-based discrimination and promote equity in higher education institutions. These regulations, notified earlier in January 2026, broadened the scope of protection to include Other Backward Classes (OBCs) alongside Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST). They mandated the establishment of equity committees in all higher education institutions to address discrimination complaints and ensure inclusivity.
However, the regulations faced immediate backlash from certain sections of students, faculty, and political circles. Critics argued that the rules were vague, potentially misused, and could lead to "reverse discrimination" against general category students. Concerns were also raised about the lack of provisions for penalizing false complaints and the administrative burden on institutions to implement the new framework. Social media platforms saw widespread campaigns with hashtags like #UGCRollBack, alleging that the regulations were unfair and created caste-based divisions.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant expressed reservations about the regulations, deeming them "completely vague" and "capable of misuse". The court also issued a formal notice to the government and the UGC, keeping the regulations on hold until further notice. The court has ordered that the 2012 regulations will remain in force until further orders. Exercising its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the court directed the UGC to maintain the 2012 regulations until it further examines the matter. The case is scheduled to be heard along with other related petitions on March 19, 2026.
During the hearing, Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, representing the petitioners, argued that the regulations presume discrimination by only a certain section of society. He contended that the rules could create further divisions within society. The Chief Justice also remarked on the potential for cultural misunderstandings and the need to avoid segregating students based on cultural backgrounds. The court suggested the formation of a committee comprising eminent jurists and scholars to advise on the direction of social values and ethos in higher education.
This stay order marks a significant turn in the ongoing debate surrounding equity and inclusion in Indian higher education. While proponents argue that the 2026 regulations are necessary to address historical injustices and ensure equal opportunities for marginalized communities, opponents fear the potential for misuse and the disruption of established norms. The Supreme Court's intervention underscores the complexities and sensitivities surrounding affirmative action policies and the need for careful consideration of all stakeholders' concerns. The apex court's final decision will likely have far-reaching consequences for the future of higher education and social justice in India.
