A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court challenging Regulation 3(c) of the recently notified University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026. The petitioner argues that the definition of “caste-based discrimination” under this provision is narrow and exclusionary.

Regulation 3(c) defines caste-based discrimination as discrimination “only based on caste or tribe” against members of the Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and Other Backward Classes (OBC). Advocate Vineet Jindal, who has filed the petition, contends that this definition limits institutional protection and grievance redressal mechanisms exclusively to these categories, leaving out individuals from other caste groups who may also face discrimination on the basis of caste.

According to the plea, the regulation, in its current form, denies non-SC/ST/OBC individuals access to grievance redressal mechanisms and institutional safeguards, making it constitutionally flawed. The petitioner has urged the Court to restrain authorities from enforcing or acting upon Regulation 3(c) and to direct the adoption of a caste-neutral and constitutionally compliant definition of caste-based discrimination that protects all individuals who face discrimination on caste grounds, regardless of their caste identity.

The petition also seeks directions to the Union government and the UGC to ensure that Equal Opportunity Centres, Equity Helplines, inquiry mechanisms, and Ombudsperson proceedings under the Regulations function in a non-discriminatory and caste-neutral manner while Regulation 3(c) is reconsidered.

In addition, the petitioner has sought a declaration that denying grievance redressal mechanisms based on caste identity amounts to impermissible State discrimination and violates fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 15(1), and 21 of the Constitution.

The 2026 Regulations were framed by the UGC following a public interest litigation filed in 2019 by Radhika Vemula and Abeda Salim Tadvi, the mothers of Rohith Vemula and Payal Tadvi. Both students had reportedly died by suicide after facing alleged caste-based discrimination at their respective universities. The PIL had sought the creation of a robust mechanism to address caste-based discrimination in higher education institutions.

In March 2025, the Union government informed the Supreme Court that the UGC had prepared draft regulations to address the concerns raised in the PIL. The Court had then observed that it intended to ensure a “very strong and robust mechanism” to effectively tackle caste-based discrimination on campuses.

In April 2025, the Supreme Court clarified that the UGC could proceed with finalising and notifying the draft regulations, while allowing petitioners and other stakeholders to submit their suggestions. Later, in September 2025, the Court granted the UGC eight weeks to consider these inputs and take a final decision.

The UGC ultimately notified the Regulations in January this year.