…..Recently, the University Grants Commission (UGC) issued a notification titled the Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions Regulations, 2026. These regulations were intended to eliminate discrimination based on religion, caste, sex, place of birth, race, or disability in educational institutions, but they sparked widespread controversy. General category students feared that these regulations pre-emptively criminalized them. The Supreme Court has currently put a stay on the regulations.

These rules lack any concrete provisions for verifying the veracity of complaints or weeding out false ones. While swift action is guaranteed by immediately forming a committee on every allegation, procedures such as examining evidence, hearing witnesses, confidentiality, and appeals are not clearly defined. How can a proper investigation be conducted in the rush to take action immediately after an allegation is made? This is a significant question. The question also arises: how will the UGC’s new guidelines reconcile the goals of the National Education Policy 2020 with constitutional impartiality? In reality, justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done, otherwise trust is shattered.

From a legal perspective, the new UGC regulations ignore the right to equality under Article 14, while Article 15(1) prohibits discrimination on the basis of caste. Courts have repeatedly recognized that dignity, fairness, and access to fair procedures are integral to the right to life and personal liberty. If a teacher or student faces caste-based discrimination and does not belong to a Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, or OBC, the lack of legal recourse constitutes procedural injustice. The most significant issue is that the UGC guidelines are inconsistent. While Rule 2 calls for eliminating discrimination against disadvantaged groups, Rule 3(c) limits the right to justice to only certain castes.

In February last year, the UGC released a draft version of the regulations for public comments. It excluded Other Backward Classes (OBCs) from the scope of caste-based discrimination. The draft regulations also proposed “discouraging” false complaints of discrimination and included penalties for them. However, the final notified regulations removed the provision related to false complaints. In fact, the removal of provisions dealing with false or malicious complaints presented a structural weakness to the guidelines.

According to the All India Survey of Higher Education 2021-22, 60 percent of students in higher education were from reserved categories. In such a situation, a big question arises: what will happen if someone among these 60 percent students discriminates against someone on the basis of caste? These rules are silent on this issue. Just as there have been many instances under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 498A (anti-dowry harassment) where false or incorrect cases have been filed and innocent people have been implicated, a similar danger was visible in the UGC’s equality rules. The Supreme Court itself, expressing concern over their misuse in 2018, had suggested preliminary investigations before arrests.

Renowned universities and educational systems around the world also embrace principles of diversity and equality. Every university in the United States has an independent body that investigates complaints of discrimination or harassment. The investigation process respects the rights of both the complainant and the accused. Investigative protocols clearly define standards of evidence, opportunities for appeal, and confidentiality, ensuring that justice is both done and seen to be done.

Often, an external or neutral investigator is appointed, the report is prepared in writing, and both parties are given a full opportunity to present their case. Similarly, higher education institutions in Britain, Australia, and other countries have uniform anti-discrimination policies. Any student experiencing harassment, whether from a minority or majority group, has the ability to file a complaint and seek justice.

Harvard, Oxford, etc. have started regular sensitization workshops, mentoring programs and diversity coursework, so that mutual respect and sensitivity develop among the students. The real meaning of equality is justice for all. Empowering one weak person and weakening another is not the solution. Taking everyone along is the only sustainable way. India is a democratic nation, where the law is equal for all. This is the basic spirit of our Constitution. If a student from the general category is being wronged somewhere, he should also get justice. Work should also be done to create such an environment where there is less scope for complaint.