Supreme Court Seeks UGC Data On Anti-Caste Discrimination Mechanisms In Universities
In a case addressing caste discrimination in higher educational institutions (HEIs), the Supreme Court on Friday directed the University Grants Commission (UGC) to gather and provide data from universities across the country regarding the establishment of Equal Opportunity Cells and complaints received under the UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Educational Institutions) Regulations, 2012, along with action taken reports.
The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan passed the order while hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Radhika Vemula and Abeda Salim Tadvi, mothers of Rohit Vemula and Payal Tadvi, respectively.
The petition challenges caste discrimination on campuses and the alleged failure of UGC to implement the 2012 regulations effectively.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Indira Jaising, representing the petitioners, argued that UGC’s inaction had led to widespread caste-based discrimination and cited alarming statistics of student suicides, including 115 cases reported from IITs between 2004 and 2024. She urged the Court to direct UGC to present data on the composition of Equal Opportunity Cells and monitor the enforcement of anti-discrimination measures.
Jaising raised the following issues:
i) Out of total 820 universities (central/state/deemed) across the country, how many have setup Equal Opportunity Cells?
ii) If set up, what is the composition of these cells?
iii) What is the nature of monitoring being done by UGC towards implementation of the 2012 Regulations?
In response, UGC informed the Court that it had drafted new regulations to address the issue.
The Bench directed UGC to notify the revised regulations and submit them to the Court.
Justice Kant emphasized the Court’s commitment to addressing the sensitive matter systematically, stating, “We will proceed step-by-step to ensure the effective implementation of the 2012 Regulations.”
The Bench also directed the Union of India and the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) to file counter-affidavits within four weeks, providing details on their roles in enforcing anti-discrimination norms in HEIs.
The petition was filed in 2019 following the tragic suicides of Rohit Vemula, a PhD scholar at Hyderabad Central University in 2016, and Payal Tadvi, an Adivasi medical student in Mumbai in 2019, both reportedly due to caste-based discrimination. The petitioners allege systemic failure to prevent discrimination and seek the establishment of Equal Opportunity Cells in all HEIs, with independent members to ensure impartiality in redressal mechanisms.
Earlier, in July 2023, the Apex Court had granted the University Grants Commission (UGC) to file a reply and take necessary action in a Public Interest Litigation seeking statutory guidelines to prevent caste-based discrimination on educational premises.
The Court had found the matter to be of a serious nature and said, "Tell them, it is a sensitive matter, and you will have to take some action and since it is not adversarial. You can even discuss it with Counsel for the Petitioner for any suggestion. Because, ultimately, it is in the interest of students and parents, and some care should be taken that this doesn't happen."
The Court had also orally observed that "As pointed out by the Senior Counsel for the Petitioner, this matter is non-adversarial. Rather than replying in the nature of objections, UGC will have to look into whatever concern is raised in the petition." The Court had also directed the UGC to tell how they will address and rectify the situation. "What steps have been taken, and what do you propose to do?" asked the Bench.
Senior Advocate Indira Jaising had submitted, "This is a Public Interest Petition filed to create an enabling environment for students belonging to schedule caste and schedule communities in institutions of higher learning. Notices have been issued in this matter as far back as September 2019. The respondents in the petition are primarily the University Grant Commission, the Ministry of Education, and the Accreditation Council."
Jaising had also submitted that "Under the statute, UGC bears the primary responsibility to frame binding regulations to create enabling and non-discriminatory environment in institutions of higher learning. What they have done is in the year 2012 they framed what they call 'the Promotion of Equity Regulations, 2012' and it is unfortunate that these regulations don't have a binding nature because they don't have any sanction for the violation of the regulation."
Cause Title: Abeda Salim Tadvi & Anr. v. Union Of India & Ors. [W.P.(C) No. 001149/ 2019]
