Syllabus: Social empowerment.
Context and Supreme Court Intervention
- Supreme Court stayed UGC (Promotion of Equity in HEIs) Regulations, 2026.
- Court termed provisions ambiguous and prone to misuse.
- Notice issued to Centre; legal scrutiny initiated.
- UGC Regulations, 2012 restored temporarily.
Background of Equity Regulations
- UGC framed anti-discrimination regulations in 2012.
- Aim: Promote equity and prevent campus discrimination.
- Discrimination defined broadly across social identities.
- Included denial of access, segregation, undignified treatment.
- Covered caste, religion, language, gender, disability, ethnicity.
Institutional Mechanisms Introduced
- Mandated Equal Opportunity Cells in universities.
- Required appointment of anti-discrimination officers.
- Created structured grievance redressal frameworks.
Trigger for Regulatory Revision
- Suicides of Rohith Vemula (2016) and Payal Tadvi (2019) raised concerns.
- Families sought stricter enforcement before Supreme Court.
- UGC constituted committee to review framework.
- 2026 regulations emerged from this review.
Key Features of 2026 Regulations
- Expanded definition of discrimination.
- Covered unfair treatment against students, faculty, staff.
- Grounds included caste, religion, gender, disability, race.
Core Controversy: Caste-Based Definition
- Defined caste discrimination only against SC, ST, OBC members.
- Triggered opposition from unreserved categories.
- Critics argued it presumes perpetrators from general category.
- No penalties prescribed for false complaints.
Supreme Court’s Legal Concerns
- Case: Mritunjay Tiwari vs Union of India.
- Court framed substantive constitutional questions.
- Questioned need for separate caste-based definition.
- Examined nexus with regulation objectives.
- Raised concerns over impact on sub-classification debates.
Constitutional Principles Involved
- Article 14: Equality before law, equal protection.
- Article 15: Prohibits discrimination on listed grounds.
- Enables special provisions for SCs, STs, OBCs.
- Reflects balance between formal and substantive equality.
Legal and Policy Perspectives
- Government can recognise specific discrimination categories.
- Caste discrimination considered structurally asymmetric.
- Linked to historic deprivation and exclusion.
Way Forward Indicated
- Campuses should minimise caste identity conflicts.
- Regulations require stakeholder consultation and refinement.
- Strong enforcement essential to protect vulnerable groups.