New Delhi, The Supreme Court on Thursday said that the petitions challenging the University Grants Commission Regulations, 2026 raised substantial questions of law and framed four such questions for consideration.
The SC framed 4 questions of law on the petition challenging the UGC regulationThe court stayed the recent UGC equity restrictions to prevent caste-based discrimination on campuses, saying the framework was “primarily vague”, could have “far-reaching consequences” and divide society with “dangerous effects”.
A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Jayamalya Bagchi observed that the regulations suffer from “some ambiguity” and “the possibility of their misuse cannot be ruled out”.
The Apex Court said that it prima facie raised the following four important questions of law for consideration and would require a detailed examination:
2026 to protect the object and purpose of the UGC Regulation, defining “caste-based discrimination”, does the inclusion of Section 3 bear a reasonable and rational relationship, especially in the light of the fact that no distinct or special procedural mechanism has been prescribed to determine the broad and inclusive definition of “discrimination” provided under Section 3 of the impugned Regulation?
More Read
Whether the introduction and enforcement of “caste-based discrimination” under the absent Regulations will have any effect on the existing constitutional and statutory sub-classifications among Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes, and whether such notified Regulations and Implementing Rules provide for such protection and safeguards. Against caste discrimination and structural disadvantage?
Whether the inclusion of the expression “segregation” in the context of allotment of hostels, classrooms, mentorship groups or similar academic or residential arrangements would constitute a “separate, yet equally constitutionally equal by guarantee of equal classification”, notwithstanding transparent and non-discriminatory criteria. Fraternity under Articles 14, 15 as well as the Preamble of the Constitution of India?
Whether the omission of the word “ragging” as a specific form of discrimination in the framework of the impugned Regulation, notwithstanding its existence in the University Grants Commission Regulations, 2012, constitutes a retroactive and exclusionary statutory exclusion? If so, does such exclusion constitute a violation of unequal treatment of the victims of discrimination and inequality in access to justice and thus fall foul of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India?
More Read
A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court will hear the matter on March 19.
The new regulations were notified on January 13, making it mandatory for all higher education institutions to form “Equity Committees” to look into complaints of discrimination and promote equity.
The University Grants Commission Regulations, 2026, mandate that these committees must include members of the OBC, SC and ST communities, persons with disabilities and women.
The new regulations replaced the UGC Regulations, 2012, which were mainly advisory in nature.
The petitions attacked the rules on the ground that caste-based discrimination is strictly defined as discrimination against members of SC, ST and OBC communities.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without text modification
