Plea in Supreme Court challenges definition of caste discrimination in 2026 UGC regulations

5 months ago 3
ARTICLE AD BOX
 The plea said the regularisation  violates the cardinal  rights guaranteed nether  Articles 14 (right to equality) and 15(1), and Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. File

 The plea said the regularisation violates the cardinal rights guaranteed nether Articles 14 (right to equality) and 15(1), and Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. File | Photo Credit: Sushil Kumar Verma

A plea was filed successful the Supreme Court challenging a precocious notified University Grants Commission (UGC) regulation, alleging that it has adopted a non-inclusionary explanation of caste-based favoritism and excludes definite categories from organization protection.

The plea submitted that regularisation 3(c) of the precocious notified UGC (Promotion of Equity successful Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026 is "non-inclusionary" and fails to support students and module who bash not beryllium to reserved categories.

The plea, filed by Vineet Jindal, assailed the regularisation connected the grounds that caste-based favoritism is defined strictly arsenic favoritism against members of the Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and Other Backward Classes (OBC).

It is said that by limiting the scope of "caste-based discrimination" lone to SC, ST, and OBC categories, the UGC has efficaciously denied organization extortion and grievance redressal to individuals belonging to the "general" oregon non-reserved categories who whitethorn besides look harassment oregon bias based connected their caste identity.

It said the proviso successful its contiguous "exclusionary form" creates a hierarchy of extortion that is unconstitutional. The plea said the regularisation violates the cardinal rights guaranteed nether articles 14 (right to equality) and 15(1) (Prohibition of favoritism by the State connected grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, oregon spot of birth).

It besides alleged that the regularisation violates Article 21 (the close to beingness and idiosyncratic liberty, which includes the close to unrecorded with dignity) of the Constitution.

It urged the apical tribunal to restrain the authorities from enforcing regularisation 3(c) successful its existent signifier and sought a absorption to redefine caste-based favoritism successful a "caste-neutral and constitutionally-compliant manner." “Caste-based favoritism should beryllium defined truthful that extortion is accorded to each persons discriminated against based connected caste, irrespective of their circumstantial caste identity,” Court said.

The plea has sought interim directions to the Union Government and the UGC to guarantee that the "Equal Opportunity Centres," "Equity Helplines," and "Ombudsperson" mechanisms established nether these regulations are made disposable to each students successful a non-discriminatory manner, pending a ceremonial reconsideration of the definition.

Published - January 27, 2026 12:53 p.m. IST

Read Entire Article