The Centre told the Supreme Court it is reconsidering the UGC’s new equity regulations aimed at addressing caste-based discrimination in higher education.
The Supreme Court granted the UGC four weeks to file a comprehensive response to petitions challenging the regulations.
Petitioners have challenged provisions including Regulation 3(C).
The Centre on Thursday told the Supreme Court that it is reconsidering the University Grants Commission’s (UGC) new regulations aimed at addressing caste-based discrimination in higher education institutions. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre and the UGC, said the government had not yet decided what course of action it would take on the regulations.
“I’m not saying which way it will go, but we are reconsidering it,” Mehta told a bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant.
The Supreme Court granted the UGC four weeks to respond to a batch of petitions challenging the regulations and directed it to file a comprehensive counter-affidavit addressing the issues raised by all petitioners.
UGC Given Four Weeks To Respond
The court directed the UGC to submit a common response to the challenges and provide copies of its affidavit to all petitioners.
The petitioners will then have two weeks to file their rejoinders, the court said. The matter will be taken up again after four weeks.
The directions came after petitioners raised concerns about not receiving copies of responses filed by the Centre and the UGC during the proceedings.
The Supreme Court had earlier directed that the regulations remain in abeyance while it considered the challenges against them.
What Are The UGC Equity Regulations?
The case concerns the UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, which were notified on January 13.
The regulations seek to address discrimination and promote equity in higher education institutions. However, several provisions have been challenged before the Supreme Court.
Among the issues raised by the petitioners is the definition and scope of “caste-based discrimination” under the regulations.
The petitions argue that the definition is restrictive and could leave students belonging to general and non-reserved categories without adequate protection against caste-based discrimination or institutional bias.
Petitioners have also questioned the overall scope of the regulations and raised concerns about the possibility of their provisions being misused.
Challenge To Regulation 3(C)
A key challenge relates to Regulation 3(C), which petitioners have described as arbitrary and discriminatory.
According to the petitions, the provision could exclude certain sections of students from the protections provided under the regulations.
The petitioners have argued that the provision violates constitutional guarantees relating to equality, freedom of expression and personal liberty.
They have also contended that the regulations are inconsistent with the University Grants Commission Act, 1956, and could undermine the objective of ensuring equal opportunity in higher education.
