Bangalore University row and the struggle to combat caste discrimination on campuses

Indian higher education has yet to develop an effective policy framework to prevent caste-based discrimination. This failure stems from a fundamental reluctance to acknowledge caste as an institutional problem

Five syndicate members have objected to the high court’s order directing the appointment of Dr H Krishnaram and urged the university to appeal against the single-bench decision. Krishnaram is a syndicate member of Bengaluru City University.

The higher education system in India has been a den of caste-based hierarchies and systemic exclusion.

4 min readJul 11, 2025 07:19 PM IST First published on: Jul 11, 2025 at 07:19 PM IST

Written by Bharat Rathod

Isabel Wilkerson’s framing, “Caste is the bones, race the skin,” captures precisely a fundamental social reality of Indian society. Recent allegations of caste discrimination at Bangalore University are not new to Indian universities. Studies and official reports have unequivocally established that caste-based discrimination and the exclusion of caste-oppressed people are institutionalised across the higher education system. It is more rampant in elite institutions such as the IITs and IIMs. Caste apologists argue that this is an isolated incident and cannot be portrayed as systemic in nature. The Indian higher education system (which is mandated to prevent caste discrimination), too, denies that it is an institutional problem.

But the higher education system in India has been a den of caste-based hierarchies and systemic exclusion. Historically, it has been dominated by dominant caste groups; and therefore, casteist values and practices are an integral part of the system. Dominant caste individuals often treat higher education as their bastion. Many also perceive the quota policy as an antithesis to their caste privilege and a challenge to their dominance over cultural capital. Oppressed caste individuals are perceived and treated as outsiders, undeserving, and non-meritocratic. The underrepresentation of oppressed caste faculty in IITs and IIMs clearly indicates how dominant caste individuals, both consciously and unconsciously, practise exclusionary tactics and undermine quota policies.

In my research on Dalit students, interlocutors narrated their experiences pertaining to dominant narratives surrounding the quota policy and stereotypes about its beneficiaries. Some of these dominant narratives, which are casteist remarks and slurs, include: “We are not responsible for caste discrimination, why should we (dominant castes) pay for historical injustice?” “Why is caste identity a criterion for reservation? Why not a reservation for economic status?” “It is reverse discrimination against the general category.” “Caste is a matter of the past, why is reservation being provided to caste oppressed people?” “Quota students are non-meritocratic, they are dull or weak students, they do not want to compete, they can access admission with low grades, reservation compromises quality by providing admission to undeserving candidates.” And so on.

Conveniently, individuals from dominant castes frequently champion meritocracy, effectively sidestepping constitutional safeguards like quota policies. This stance either deliberately or unknowingly downplays the reality that their caste-based advantages are inherited, not achieved, bundled with the significant cultural and financial resources inherent to their privileged social position.

Also Read | On Bihar SIR, EC must press pause

For the past two decades, Indian higher education has been witnessing a demographic shift. On the one hand, a significant number of oppressed caste students are entering higher education, which has significantly changed student demographics. However, the faculty and administration are still largely made up of historically dominant-caste individuals, creating a sociocultural divide. Moreover, oppressed caste students have been developing a counter-narrative to the status quo and to dominant caste culture within institutional spaces. Both these phenomena trigger exclusionary practices and reveal a feudal psyche often hidden behind a modern outlook and sophisticated language.

The most pressing question now is how to find effective solutions and interventions to address caste discrimination on campuses. Unfortunately, Indian higher education has yet to develop an effective policy framework to prevent caste-based discrimination. This failure stems from a fundamental reluctance to acknowledge caste as an institutional problem. Without this crucial recognition, it is impossible to develop a robust research framework, foster scholarly engagement, or provide adequate institutional support to caste-oppressed people.

Even though the current socio-political climate is not conducive to caste/anti-caste scholarship and activism, scholars and activists have been engaged in challenging the status quo and building a scholarly narrative to define, describe, and discuss caste/anti-caste issues in India and abroad. Recently, caste and anti-caste topics have emerged as academic phenomena outside India, specifically in Europe and North America. I see this as a positive development that offers a great opportunity for scholars and students to internationalise anti-caste research, build transnational solidarity with other oppressed groups, develop new theoretical frameworks and interdisciplinary research, and ensure that caste becomes part of academic discourse and research.

The writer is Assistant Director, Office of Inclusion & Engagement, University of Massachusetts Amherst