The Union Government has informed the Supreme Court that it is contemplating appointing a committee to reconsider the University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026.

Previously, Mehta informed the Court that the equity regulations are under reconsideration.

On January 29, the Court had stayed the newly notified University Grants Commission Regulations, 2026, and, while exercising the powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, ordered that the earlier 2012 Regulations would continue in force.

A Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India was filed before the Supreme Court assailing the constitutional validity of Regulation 3(c) of the University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, notified on January 13, 2026.

The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi orally suggested the Union to revisit the Regulations. 


Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain appeared for the Petitioner, while Solicitor General Tushar appeared for the Union of India

CJI Surya Kant said, "Why don't you revisit the UGC Regulations? Take a decision in such a way that every student is taken care of. Next generation, young generation, are taken care of."

Mehta replied, "The government has taken a decision...The government is contemplating appointing a committee."

Plea, filed by AOR Satyam Pandey, stated, "By defining "caste-based discrimination" exclusively against members of these notified backward classes, the impugned Regulation 3(c) mischaracterises them as castes alone, ignoring the constitutional distinction and restricting protection to a predetermined set of classes while excluding others who may suffer caste-based hostility irrespective of their class status. This approach is arbitrary, as it elevates certain classes to exclusive victimhood while denying recognition to caste-based discrimination suffered by non-reserved groups, violating the egalitarian intent behind the use of "classes" in the Constitution."

In response to a 2019 Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Radhika Vemula and Abeda Salim Tadvi, the University Grants Commission (UGC) established these regulations to address and eliminate caste-based discrimination on campuses. The legal action followed the tragic deaths by suicide of their children, Rohith Vemula and Payal Tadvi, who reportedly faced systemic caste-related harassment within their respective universities.

The Petition primarily challenges the definition of "caste-based discrimination" and says that by design and operation, this definition accords legal recognition of victimhood exclusively to certain reserved categories and categorically excludes persons belonging to general or upper castes from its protective ambit, regardless of the nature, gravity, or context of discrimination suffered by them. It also says that such a definition institutionalises exclusion at the threshold, creates a hierarchy of victimhood, and introduces a constitutionally impermissible bias into a regulatory framework that purports to be neutral and inclusive.

By way of illustration, the plea also said that in December 2022, walls at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), Delhi, in particular, the School of International Studies-II building, were defaced with anti-Brahmin and anti-Baniya slogans such as “Brahmins Leave The Campus,” “There Will Be Blood,” “Brahmin Bharat Chhodo,” and “Brahmino-Baniyas, we are coming for you!” These provocative graffiti, reported widely and condemned by student bodies including JNUSU and faculty associations, fostered an atmosphere of fear and intimidation, with the university administration ordering an inquiry but institutional responses remaining perceived as inadequate in several accounts.

Cause Title: Mritunjay Tiwari v. Union of India & Ors. [Diary No. 4985/2026], Abeda Salim Tadvi v. Union of India & Ors.[W.P.(C) No. 1149/2019] and connected matters.

Tags: