In recent years, the University Grants Commission (UGC) had claimed to promote “equity” amongst the individuals studying in higher academic institutions of India. With the drafted regulations, it appears on the surface that it is creating inclusive campuses, and the reforms appear to be progressive and forward-looking. But, upon a much closer examination, it reveals the flaws and contradictions. While UGC proposes new equity regulations, it is no surprise that the data shows a sharp rise in caste discrimination complaints across UGC-recognized universities and institutions. Along with that, these draft regulations have drawn strong criticisms from the individuals who have witnessed the consequences of caste violence.
This article probes deeper into the unseen caste discrimination across universities and institutions while mentioning the UGC’s draft equity regulations and its flaws. With the mentions of students like Rohith Vemula and Payal Tadvi, whose families were the live examples of sufferings caused by caste discrimination, we will talk about the regulations which can aid in saving many precious lives.
UGC’s Draft Equity Regulations: What Has Changed?
The UGC’s draft equity regulations, objections raised by the families of Rohith Vemula and Payal Tadvi, and the data reveal a 118% increase in the caste discrimination complaints, exposing the growing gap between the promised equity and the reality of campus life for the students.
The equity regulations laid out by UGC earlier decided to group all forms of discrimination, including those based on gender, disabilities, religion, and caste, under one single umbrella. On the surface, this appears inclusive. But, when analyzed through a critical lens, one can observe that caste discrimination, which is a historically agonizing issue, is merged with other forms of discrimination. This, in turn, waters down the notion of caste oppression.
One of the major concerns of these regulations is their lack of precise definitions, which creates ambiguity, allowing the universities and institutions to interpret complaints narrowly or dismiss them altogether. The UGC Regulations 2026 are an update on Anti-Discrimination Regulations in place since 2012. A draft version of the same was put out in public, which was heavily criticized due to the way other backward classes (OBCs) were kept outside the scope of caste discrimination. In addition to that, the draft also proposed a provision to “discourage” false complaints of discrimination, suggesting fines for such complaints.
The final notified version of the equity regulations, however, has gone through some changes and has included OBCs under the category of caste discrimination and dropped the provision on false complaints. Mentioned below are the few additional regulations that the institution needs to follow.
1. Equity Committees
• According to the new regulations, UGC mandates the setting up of equal opportunity centers (EOCs) in every university or institution to promote “equity and equal opportunity to the community at large in the higher education institutions (HEIs) and to bring about social inclusion.”
• Under this, an equity committee must be formed, which would be chaired by the head of the institution and must have the representation of OBCs, persons with disabilities, SCs, STs, and women, as per the regulations.
• The EOCs are expected to submit a biannual report of their functioning; the equity committees are to meet twice a year. This also requires the institution to submit an annual report on the functioning of EOCs to the UGC for annual review.
2. Monitoring Panel
• UGC has also decided to place a monitoring mechanism to review the progress of the implementation of these regulations in universities and institutions. It will set up a national-level monitoring committee with representatives of professional councils and commissions. The panel is expected to meet twice a year and will investigate the numbers, whether there is an increase or decrease in the cases, reasons for discrimination, and suggest ways to prevent it.
• These equity regulations emphasize the duty of each institution to “eradicate discrimination,” “promote equality,” and take appropriate required measures for this. These new regulations consider the risk of not partaking in eliminating caste discrimination.
• In the event of non-compliance, higher educational universities and institutions would be taken through a course of strict actions by UGC as mentioned below.
1. Debarred from participating in UGC schemes.
2. Debarred from offering degree programs, distance learning programs, and online programs.
3. The institution could also be removed from the UGC’s list of higher education institutions.
Data vs Narrative: What UGC’s Numbers Reveal?
Despite policy assertions of inclusivity, UGC‑submitted data indicates a significant rise in reported cases of caste discrimination in educational institutions and universities. As revealed through the data submitted by UGC to a parliamentary panel and the Supreme Court, complaints of caste discrimination have risen by 118% in the past five years. In addition to that, the data showed that the number of reported incidents increased from 173 in 2019-20 to 378 in 2023-24. The numbers could be a lot more, as most of the students learn to remain silent and suffer secretly.
Between 2019-20 and 2023-24, UGC received 1,160 complaints reported by Equal Opportunity Cells (EOCs) and Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (SC/ST) Cells across 704 universities and 1,553 colleges. Out of these complaints, 1,052 complaints were marked as resolved, reflecting a 90.68% disposal rate. However, the date also shows that the number of pending cases rose from 18 in 2019-20 to 108 in 2023-24. The data suggests persistent and inadequately addressed caste discrimination within Indian universities.
Why are Equity Regulations Mandatory?
The Equity Regulations introduced by the University Grants Commission (UGC) were made mandatory to address long-standing and deep-rooted systematic inequalities existing within the educational institutions. Universities, which do not stand apart from the social strata, often include caste discrimination, unknowingly. Despite constitutional guarantees of equality, the system has failed to enforce the mechanisms across institutions, which has led to discrimination on a large scale, often costing the lives of individuals who dream of becoming something.
Forming and reforming equity regulations are mandatory to standardize institutional responsibility. With all the universities and institutions required to establish formal structures like grievance redressal bodies and equal opportunity mechanisms, UGC ensures that discriminatory complaints under the new regulations would not be ignored by the administration. It promises to hold institutional accountability.
The effectiveness of such mandates depends on how clearly the intuitions define discrimination, how independent enforcement mechanisms are, and whether this promises to hold the institutions accountable beyond the procedural compliance.
Concluding Remarks
Despite the UGC’s draft equity regulations set against the caste discrimination, the question is not whether equity is a desirable and achievable goal, but whether it can be achieved without naming, confronting, and addressing caste directly. From the voices of grieving families, rolling discrimination, and the draft regulations, one can slowly expect changes within the institutions and universities.
If the higher educational institutions become inclusive spaces, equity will be set to move beyond the paper commitments. It should involve within itself enforceable safeguards, independent grievance mechanisms, and a willingness to trust the realities as faced by the discriminatory bodies. For the institutions to become a safe space, it is crucial to invite the students from all spaces with a promise of equity and acknowledgment of their dilemma.
