‘Majestic Equality of the Laws’ prevails?: How protests against UGC Regulations threaten decades of jurisprudential progress on equality and justice
The Chief Justice of India’s recent remarks, and a spate of agitations led by the Hindu right against the new UGC Regulations to tackle caste-discrimination in campuses seek to undo our progress towards substantive equality.
Justice K. Chandru (Retd.)
8 February 2026
“The majestic equality of the laws prohibits the rich and the poor alike from sleeping under bridges, begging in the streets and stealing bread.
– Anatole France
WHEN THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA (‘CJI’) Surya Kant headed bench of the Supreme Court of India granted an interim stay on the University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026 (‘Equity Regulations’), perhaps they were guided by this quote attributed to the French poet Anatole France. Little did they realize that the Indian Constitution not only has an equal protection clause under Article 14 but also forbids the State from discriminating against any citizen only on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth under Article 15. It only means that if there is any discrimination based only on grounds of caste, such a discrimination will be hit by the said Article.
While granting the stay of the Equity Regulations on January 29, 2026, CJI Surya Kant’s bench observed: “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”. Among the questions of law framed by the bench is this: “(i) Whether the the Impugned Regulations, defining “Caste-based Discrimination”, bears a reasonable and rational nexus to subserve the object and the fact that no distinct or special procedural mechanism has been prescribed to address caste-based discrimination, as opposed to the exhaustive and inclusive definition of “Discrimination” provided”.
In essence, even before the Equity Regulations could be put to practice, the bench, on a theoretical basis, had developed a theory of so-called “reverse discrimination” of the high caste students studying in the same campus.
The long movement for a law against caste discrimination in universities
In essence, even before the Equity Regulations could be put to practice, the bench, on a theoretical basis, had developed a theory of so-called “reverse discrimination” of the high caste students studying in the same campus. This approach is not only regressive, but also derailing a process initiated after the suicidal deaths of Rohith Vemula, a Dalit research scholar of the Central University, Hyderabad and Dr. Payal Tadvi, a tribal woman. For years now, the mothers of both students have highlighted, organised around and litigated on the numerous caste-based discriminations prevalent across India’s higher education institutions that students from deprived sections of society have had to face.
In fact, the Karnataka government had already finalized a draft of the Rohith Vemula Act, a comprehensive law to address caste discrimination in higher education, to be introduced in legislative assembly. The Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi has also voiced the demand for a nationwide legislation to curb caste based discrimination against the socially deprived groups of students in campuses.
When the two mothers moved the Supreme Court, they pointed out that the pre-existing UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Educational Institutions) Regulations, 2012 did not address certain issues. What was needed, they argued, was for a regulation that mandates universities to take strong disciplinary action against the victimization of students and for the constitution of anti-discrimination, internal complaint mechanisms in universities.
The case filed by Radhika Vemula and Abeda Tadvi was heard by several benches. On April 24, 2025, when the UGC produced a draft regulation, the Justice Surya Kant, as a puisne judge at that time, directed the Commission to “proceed with finalisation of the Draft Regulations, 2025 and [to] notify the same.”