Why opposition to stayed UGC rules is flaring up again

What do the UGC regulations say?

The UGC notified the University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026 on January 13. Meant to apply to all higher education institutions, they laid down a structure and method for discrimination-related complaints.

Their stated purpose was to “eradicate discrimination only on the basis of religion, race, gender, place of birth, caste, or disability, particularly against the members of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes, socially and educationally backward classes, economically weaker sections, persons with disabilities, or any of them, and to promote full equity and inclusion amongst the stakeholders in higher education institutions”. Thus, a broad set of criteria was mentioned.

They were based on a Supreme Court intervention after a petition filed by the mothers of Rohith Vemula and Payal Tadvi, who died by suicide over alleged caste-based discrimination in 2016 and 2019, respectively. Under the rules, bodies such as Equal Opportunity Cells and Equity Squads were to be constituted.

These regulations were meant to replace the similarly named UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Educational Institutions) Regulations from 2012. Notably, the old rules did not provide for action against an institution that did not comply with the regulations, while the new ones do. The older regulation further did not specify discrimination against backward classes, and was limited to SCs and STs.

Why did the UGC regulations come under criticism?

A section of students, as well as upper caste groups, called for the withdrawal of the regulations.

They alleged that the regulations can lead to the “harassment” of students in the general category, and can create divisions based on caste. Two key aspects highlighted were the absence of any provision for penalties for “false complaints of discrimination”, and that institutions can be subjected to action for not complying with the regulations.

Under the #UGCRollBack hashtag on X, accounts alleged that the regulations are “unfair” to students in the general category, and that they create caste-based divisions for political gain among the OBC community.

On the other hand, many backward caste groups supported the need for such regulations, citing instances of caste discrimination in campuses going unpunished and the high rates of deaths by suicide among SC/ST and OBC students.

Why did the Supreme Court stay the UGC rules?

The SC stayed the rules in late January, issuing notice on three petitions filed in the matter. It observed that the regulations raise important questions which, if left unexamined, could have “very sweeping consequences” and “divide society”.

In its order, the apex court said that “upon a prima facie consideration, it appears to us that some of the provisions of the Impugned Regulations suffer from certain ambiguities, and the possibility of their misuse cannot be ruled out”.

The order also highlighted ambiguity in how caste-based discrimination is defined and flagged concerns about how “segregation” might play out in campus arrangements.

The stay drew a range of responses from student organisations and political parties. Bahujan Samaj Party chief Mayawati called the stay appropriate given the unrest the new rules had generated, while Congress leaders Pramod Tiwari and Ranjit Ranjan reiterated that the regulations were poorly defined and should be examined by a parliamentary panel to prevent divisions among students.

So why are the rules under focus now?

Despite the stay, the regulations have come under the spotlight recently, in relation to other parallelly running political trends.

For example, while there is no immediate trigger for the Karni Sena protest, it comes as several social media accounts have sought to rally behind an anti-reservation political agenda. Many of these accounts hope to mimic the success of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) protests, which began on websites like Instagram, sustained momentum on the streets, and led to the resignation of former Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan.

Both the anti-UGC regulations and anti-reservation groups argue against policies targeted towards improving the social status of marginalised caste groups.

Criticism from upper caste groups, who have traditionally been allied with the BJP, over the rules could also have figured into the results of the recent bypolls in Bihar. A senior Congress leader told The Indian Express that the BJP’s loss of its Bankipur seat to Prashant Kishor, after holding it for over 30 years, could be attributed to resentment over the UGC regulations, among other factors.