Students from marginalised communities have repeatedly reported unequal treatment in classrooms, hostels, examinations, and access to academic support.
However, the guidelines have also triggered protests in several states, with some upper-caste students calling for their rollback.
Some students and faculty members have expressed apprehension that false allegations could create anxiety, strain academic relationships, and affect teaching and supervision
The University Grants Commission (UGC) has introduced new guidelines to address caste-based discrimination in universities and colleges in India. It is referred to as the “UGC anti-discrimination bill,” but it is in fact a set of guidelines issued by the UGC to ensure that higher education institutions should have transparency and a clear system to deal with discrimination on the campus.
According to the UGC, the objective of the new rules is 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”.
The new guidelines have their genesis in the long-standing history of discrimination on campuses and a petition filed in 2019 by Abeda Salim Tadvi and Radhika Vemula, the mothers of Payal Tadvi and Rohith Vemula, respectively, who questioned the implementation of the UGC rules to tackle discrimination on campuses. The suicide of Rohith Vemula in 2016 had triggered a debate on caste-based discrimination in Indian institutions.
The UGC mandates the establishment of Anti-Discrimination Committees in universities and colleges across India. These committees will handle complaints related to discrimination based on caste, tribe, gender, religion, disability, region, and sexual orientation. The guidelines explained in detail how complaints should be filed, how inquiries should be conducted, and how institutions should report cases. The aim is to report for grievances more transparent and consistent across campuses.
How will the new UGC guidelines be implemented?
As per the new guidelines, every institution must establish an Equal Opportunity Centre to oversee policies for disadvantaged groups.
The Equal Opportunity Centre will have 10 members and will be headed by a senior faculty member as chairperson.
The committee must include faculty representatives, administrative staff, and representatives from Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), Other Backward Classes (OBC), minority communities, and persons with disabilities. At least one woman member must be included. Institutions may include student representatives but it will depend on the nature of the complaint.
The committee will be responsible for receiving complaints related to discrimination on grounds such as caste, tribe, gender, religion, disability, region, place of birth, or sexual orientation.
The committee must meet within 24 hours of receiving a complaint and submit its report within 15 days.
The head of the institution is required to initiate action within seven days of receiving the report. Institutions must follow prescribed procedures and maintain written records of complaints received and actions taken.
All the Universities and colleges are required to publicly display committee details and complaint procedures, including on institutional websites.
The compliance reports must be submitted to the UGC.
How do the 2026 UGC regulations differ from the 2012 rules?
The 2012 guidelines were largely advisory and stated that punishment should be proportionate to the discrimination or harassment, without clearly defined enforcement mechanisms. The 2026 regulations make compliance mandatory, with defined responsibilities for institutions.
Under the 2012 rules, the committee structure was loosely defined and representation was uneven. The new regulations standardise committee size and representation, including the mandatory inclusion of members from marginalised groups.
While the earlier framework focused largely on caste-based discrimination, particularly affecting SC/ST students but the 2026 regulations expanded the scope to include gender, religion, disability, region, sexual orientation, and place of birth.
The complaint mechanisms under the 2012 rules were often informal and lacked clear timelines but the new rules lays out defined procedures, inquiry timelines, and documentation requirements.
Unlike the 2012 rules, the 2026 regulations introduce regular reporting and oversight by the UGC, and it also aim for uniformity across campuses.
Why did the new guidelines spark protests?
The new UGC guidelines are rooted in long-standing concerns about discrimination in higher education. Many students have argued that the existing UGC laws have failed at the institutional level and campuses lacked uniform procedures, documentation, and accountability. Students from marginalised communities have repeatedly reported unequal treatment in classrooms, hostels, examinations, and access to academic support. Government committees, academic research, and student groups have highlighted caste-based bias in grading, supervision, and everyday campus interactions.
However, the guidelines have also triggered protests in several states, with some upper-caste students calling for their rollback. Protesters argue that discrimination is already prohibited by law and that additional guidelines are unnecessary. They also express concern that the framework could interfere with academic decisions such as assessment and supervision. The criticism is also rooted in arguments about “equal treatment,” and upper caste students claiming that recognising caste or social background within institutional processes undermines this principle. Many also argue that discrimination in universities is rarely direct and therefore difficult to prove. Another major concern is the fear of misuse. Some students and faculty members have expressed apprehension that false allegations could create anxiety, strain academic relationships, and affect teaching and supervision. The protests against UGC guidelines are not just restricted to students but it also triggered amongst political leaders. The 11 BJP leaders in Uttar Pradesh have resigned from the party in protest against the new UGC guidelines. A petition also has been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the UGC’s new anti-discrimination rules.
The UGC’s anti-discrimination guidelines have stirred a broader debate within Indian higher education around inequality, merit, and institutional responsibility. How the framework is finalised and implemented will shape how universities respond to discrimination complaints in the future.
