.webp)
In the UGC case, this is the stance of Parliamentary Committee Chairman Digvijay Singh
Note on UGC Equity Regulations
● The mothers of Payal Tadvi and Rohith Vemula - and the prompting of the Supreme Court - Modi Government and the UGC came with draft UGC Equity Regulations in February 2025.
● In December 2025, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education issued a report that, among other things, reviewed the UGC’s draft Equity Regulations. The report, was unanimously adopted by the committee and made some recommendations to strengthen the UGC’s draft Equity Regulations -
a) The draft Regulations must explicitly include the harassment of students and other stakeholders from the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in its definition of castebased harassment, in keeping with the Constitutional recognition of OBCs as Socially and Educational Backward Classes (SEBCs) under Articles 15(4) and 15(5) of the Indian Constitution;
b) The draft regulations must explicitly include disability as an axis of discrimination;
c) The Equity Committee envisioned by the draft Regulations has provisions for only one mandatory woman member and one mandatory member each from the SC and ST communities out of a strength of 10. This should be raised to correspond with the provision of 50% reservations for SCs, STs, and OBCs in faculty and student positions. Accordingly, the Equity Committee must also draw more than half of its composition from the SC, ST, and OBC communities to ensure fair representation and effective decision-making;
d) The draft Regulations, like the 2012 Regulations, must positively identify instances of discrimination. Without such detail, it will be left to the discretion of the institute to decide whether a complaint is genuine or false. Accordingly, the Regulations must explicitly include a comprehensive list of discriminatory practices
e) The draft Regulations must require an annual public disclosure of caste-based discrimination cases, mandatory sensitization programs for faculty and administrative staff, and adequate mental health support and legal aid in all HEIs
● In January 2026, the UGC released its final Equity Regulations, which accepted the Committee’s recommendations on A, B, and E. It, however, did not accept the Parliamentary Committee’s recommendation on C and D.
● The UGC’s final Regulations also got rid of a separate provision (which existed in the draft Regulations) that penalised students for lodging false cases of discrimination. This was done by the UGC of its own accord - entirely independent of the Parliamentary Committee’s recommendations.
● The protests against the Regulations are by General category students and largely concentrated on two issues -
a) The removal of provisions that existed in the draft Regulations which penalised students for lodging false cases of discrimination. General category students believe that this may result in the filing of fake cases of caste bias against General category students and faculty. However, the decision to remove this provision was made by the UGC and had nothing to do with the Parliamentary Committee’s report.
b) The Regulations list only SC, ST, and OBC as categories that can face caste discrimination. General category students claim that by excluding the General category, the UGC Regulations implicitly argue that it is the General category students who commit caste discrimination. The decision to not include General category students was also made by the UGC. The Committee’s report made no comment on the inclusion of General category in the list of communities that can face caste discrimination.
● In fact, clarifying what acts and instances count as discrimination would not just strengthen protections for students, but also dilute the possibility of the regulations being misused as an instrument to lodge fake cases. This is what the Committee had asked the UGC to do (Recommendation D) but the UGC coose to ignore.
● It is now entirely up to the UGC and the Ministry of Education to bring resolution to this issue.
UGC विवाद में दिग्विजय सिंह के बयान की मुख्य बातें
• संसदीय स्थायी समिति ने सुझाव दिया था कि इन नियमों में OBC और विकलांग छात्रों को भी शामिल किया जाए, 'इक्विटी कमेटी' में 50% से अधिक सदस्य SC/ST/OBC समुदाय के हों, और भेदभावपूर्ण कृत्यों की एक विस्तृत सूची तैयार की जाए।
• जनवरी 2026 में जारी अंतिम विनियमों में यूजीसी ने OBC और विकलांगता संबंधी सुझाव तो मान लिए, लेकिन कमेटी के गठन और भेदभावपूर्ण कृत्यों की सूची से जुड़ी सिफारिशों (सिफारिश C और D) को खारिज कर दिया।
• यूजीसी ने अपने स्तर पर मसौदे से उस प्रावधान को हटा दिया जो झूठे मामले दर्ज करने वाले छात्रों को दंडित करने की बात करता था।
• वर्तमान में इस विवाद का समाधान पूरी तरह से यूजीसी और शिक्षा मंत्रालय के निर्णयों पर निर्भर है।
• कहना क्या चाहते हैं: यदि यूजीसी ने संसदीय समिति की सिफारिश 'D' (भेदभावपूर्ण कृत्यों की स्पष्ट सूची) को मान लिया होता, तो नियमों के दुरुपयोग और फर्जी मामलों की गुंजाइश कम हो जाती।