UGC equity rules divide legal minds, set stage for Supreme Court fight

The UGC's new equity and anti-discrimination guidelines have triggered sharp legal debate. While some senior advocates call the rules progressive and constitutionally aligned, others argue they are exclusionary and flawed. With petitions now before the Supreme Court, expert opinion is shaping the next phase of the controversy.

The University Grants Commission’s newly notified equity and anti-discrimination guidelines have triggered a fresh controversy, now snowballing from political criticism to multiple legal challenges.

The row has its roots in a long-pending matter before the Supreme Court, where concerns were raised over the absence of an effective institutional framework to curb caste-based discrimination in higher education. In earlier proceedings, the top court had asked the UGC to frame robust guidelines to ensure protection of students, particularly from Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe communities.

However, the new guidelines have now been challenged, with petitioners arguing that certain provisions are exclusionary and constitutionally suspect.

Senior Advocate Indira Jaising, who has represented petitioners in the matter pending before the Supreme Court, dismissed the criticism surrounding the UGC guidelines, calling it misplaced.

“I am surprised at the criticism, since guidelines have been in existence since 2012. In 2019, two mothers approached the court saying the regulations were inadequate and unable to protect SC/ST students. The Supreme Court has been dealing with this issue, and these regulations are an improvement over the 2013 framework,” Jaising said.

She pointed out that the regulations have been closely monitored by the Supreme Court, and the court’s own views have found reflection in the new guidelines.