Click the Play button to listen to article

The Solicitor General on Thursday told the Supreme Court that the Union Government was reconsidering the University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, which were formulated to address caste discrimination in colleges and universities.

Noting this, the Court adjourned the batch of petitions challenging the 2026 regulations till four weeks. In January, the Court had stayed the operation of the 2026 regulations, after prima facie observing that they were vague and capable of being misused.

Today, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta informed the bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana that the UGC regulations were under reconsideration, and requested that the bench may defer the formulation of questions to be determined until the process is over.

Senior Advocate Indira Jaising(assisted by Adv Disha Wadekar), appearing for the mothers of Rohit Vemula and Payal Tadvi who died by suicide after facing caste discrimination, submitted that a timeline may be fixed for the Union's decision. 

One counsel at this point questioned the maintainability of Jaising's petition, saying, "these are stated to be PILs...but petitioners have personal interest."

"These are mothers of two children who died. If they can't raise this issue, who can?," Jaising retorted. "This is affecting trial...they say murder," the other counsel submitted. Jaising stated that the petitioners never used the word "murder". Jaising also pointed out that the petition was filed way back in 2019, and it was in their petition that the Supreme Court earlier directed the UGC to come up with regulations to deal with caste-based hostilities.

The bench stated that it was not considering any arguments today, and adjourned the hearing by four weeks.

The UGC framed the latest Regulations following a PIL filed before the Supreme Court in 2019 by Radhika Vemula and Abeda Salim Tadvi, mothers of Rohit Vemula and Payal Tadvi respectively, seeking a mechanism to end caste-based discrimination in campuses.  

In early 2025, the top Court told the Union that it was looking to create a "very strong and robust mechanism" for "really" tackling the unfortunate issues. It further gave liberty to the petitioners and other stakeholders to give suggestions for incorporation in UGC's draft regulations. After considering stakeholder suggestions, UGC finally notified the Regulations in January this year, which had the effect of superseding its earlier 2012 Regulations.

The Regulations, formulated with the objective of promoting "equity" in higher education institutions, are being opposed by some sections. While members of non-reserved categories are seeking a roll back of the Regulations, the reserved categories are opposing any roll back. Petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court contending that the Regulations promote discrimination against "general classes".Some petitioners specifically challenge Regulation 3(1)(c), which defines "caste-based discrimination", contending that the provision should be "caste-neutral".

Case Title: ABEDA SALIM TADVI AND ANR. V Union of India | W.P.(C) No. 1149/2019 & connected case



Tags: