In a significant legal salvo, the Supreme Court has been approached via PIL to strike down a contentious clause in UGC’s newly minted equity regulations for higher education. Rule 3(C) of the 2026 Promotions of Equity framework, gazetted on January 13, is decried as whimsical, biased, and a constitutional affront.
The suit alleges this rule, ostensibly for equality, fosters reverse discrimination targeting the general category, risking their ouster from universities. Violations cited include core constitutional pillars—Article 14’s equality guarantee, Article 19’s expressive freedoms, and Article 21’s personal liberty—plus deviations from UGC Act provisions.
Designed to purge campuses of discrimination rooted in caste, religion, gender, origin, or impairment, the rules enforce Equity Committees in all higher ed setups. These bodies will adjudicate complaints with teeth: halting certifications or derecognizing errant institutions.
UGC’s figures underscore urgency—a 118% spike in caste-related grievances in five years. Born from Supreme Court orders in a longstanding PIL, the regs prompted immediate directives for policy implementation.
Petitioners decry Rule 3(C)’s caste discrimination framing as prone to general category victimization, exacerbated by no repercussions for fabricated accusations. They seek urgent validation of its legality to uphold student rights.
This litigation revives fiery debates on merit versus mandated equity, poised to influence future higher education reforms profoundly.