Supreme Court Puts UGC Equity Regulations on Hold, Flags Possible Social Impact

Supreme Court stays UGC Regulations 2026, citing vagueness and far-reaching consequences

PTI, New Delhi, January 29, 2026: In a significant development, the Supreme Court on Thursday stayed the recent UGC equity regulations on preventing caste-based discrimination on campuses, saying the framework is “prima facie vague”, can have “very sweeping consequences” and may end up dividing society with a “dangerous impact”.

The apex court also sought responses by March 19, 2026, from the Centre and the UGC on three pleas against the University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, on the grounds that caste-based discrimination is defined strictly as discrimination against members of the SCs, STs and OBCs.

“If we do not intervene it will lead to dangerous impact, will divide the society and will have grave impact… Prima facie we say that the language of the regulation is vague and experts need to look into for the language to be modulated so that it is not exploited,” a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said.

While keeping in abeyance the “non-inclusionary” definition of caste-based discrimination that excluded general categories from institutional protection under Rule 3(1)(c), the bench revived the UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Educational Institutions) Regulations, 2012.

“In exercise of our powers under Article 142, we direct that the 2012 Regulations shall continue in force till further orders,” the bench ordered, noting that the repeal of the earlier framework would otherwise leave students without any remedy.

“Issue notice returnable on March 19. The Solicitor General accepts notice. Since issues raised in 2019 plea shall also have bearing while examining constitutionality, let these petitions be tagged with the same. Meanwhile, let the UGC Regulations, 2026, remain in abeyance,” it said.

The 2026 regulations triggered protests at various places, with student groups and organisations demanding its immediate rollback.

The Chief Justice of India suggested that the matter be revisited by a committee comprising eminent jurists and experts familiar with social realities. “Some committee should be there with two or three eminent persons who understand social values and the ailments society is facing. How society should grow, and how people are going to behave outside the campus if we create such a framework, they must apply their mind,” the CJI said.

At the outset, the bench flagged concerns with the 2026 regulations and questioned the need for a separate definition of “caste-based discrimination” under Regulation 3(1)(c), when Regulation 3(1)(e) already provides a broad definition of “discrimination”. It also questioned why ragging had been left out of the scope of the regulations, despite being a common form of harassment within educational institutions.