SC Stays New UGC Rules Over Serious Constitutional, Societal Concerns

The Supreme Court of India on Thursday put on hold the University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, observing that the provisions raise serious constitutional and societal concerns that could have far-reaching and divisive consequences if left unaddressed.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued notice to the Centre and the UGC on a batch of petitions challenging the Regulations. Directing that the 2026 framework remain in abeyance, the court invoked its powers under Article 142 and ordered that the UGC’s 2012 Regulations will continue to operate until further orders.

“There are four to five substantial questions that arise for consideration. Otherwise, these Regulations will have very sweeping consequences. They will divide society and lead to very dangerous outcomes,” the CJI remarked.

Justice Bagchi cautioned against institutional segregation, drawing a parallel with racially segregated schooling in the United States. “We must not reach a stage where children are educated in segregated spaces. The unity of India must be reflected in our educational institutions,” he said.

Concerns Over Vague Provisions And Possible Misuse

The petitions primarily questioned Section 3(1)(c) of the 2026 Regulations. During the hearing, the CJI cited scenarios where students from one region might face harassment in another and sought clarity on whether such situations were adequately addressed under the new framework.

Petitioners argued that Clause 3(1)(e), which defines discrimination, already covers such instances. This led the bench to question the necessity of retaining Clause 3(1)(c) as a separate provision.

Justice Bagchi observed that while Clause 3(1)(e) had existed under the 2012 Regulations, there appeared to be no justification for carving out Clause 3(1)(c) separately. “If the substance of 3(1)(c) is already ingrained in 3(1)(e), why was it isolated as a standalone definition? Is it redundant, or is it open to interpretation?” he asked.

The CJI further flagged the possibility of intra-caste harassment, where dominant groups within the same caste could target others, and queried how the Regulations deal with such situations. Petitioners responded that this issue had not been addressed. The court observed that, prima facie, the language of the Regulations was vague and capable of misuse.

Justice Bagchi also raised a broader constitutional concern, noting that Article 15(4) empowers the State to enact special measures for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. He questioned why the 2026 Regulations appeared to narrow protections that were broader under the 2012 framework, which addressed multiple forms of discrimination, including ragging. Referring to the principle of non-regression, he said protective and social justice legislation should not move backwards.

Echoing the concern, the CJI warned that ambiguous provisions could be exploited by “mischievous elements” within society.

Court Seeks Expert Review

Seeking a detailed response from the Centre, the bench asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to ensure the formation of a committee of eminent jurists to examine the issues raised. The CJI said the court must be kept informed and approve the constitution of such a committee.

Universities and colleges, the court noted, cannot be viewed in isolation from society. “The environment we create inside campuses will influence how people behave outside. These are complex societal questions that require informed and careful consideration,” the CJI said. The Solicitor General assured the court that the government would comply.

Raising a fundamental concern, the CJI asked whether, after 75 years of Independence and progress towards a casteless society, the country was moving towards a regressive policy direction. He also expressed strong reservations about provisions suggesting separate hostels.

“For God’s sake, don’t do that. We have all lived in hostels with students from every community. Such spaces have fostered social integration, even inter-caste marriages. We must move forward towards building a casteless society, not backwards,” the Chief Justice said.

The matter will be heard further after the Centre and the UGC submit their responses.