A plea has been filed earlier than the Supreme Courtroom difficult Regulation 3(c) of the newly enacted College Grants Fee (Promotion of Fairness in Greater Schooling Establishments) Rules, 2026 on the bottom that the safety accorded by it in opposition to caste-discrimination is non-inclusionary.
As per Regulation 3(c) of the UGC Rules, “caste-based discrimination” means “discrimination solely on the idea of caste or tribe in opposition to the members of the scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, and different backward lessons”.
The petitioner, Advocate Vineet Jindal, avers that the supply, in its current “exclusionary kind”, denies grievance redressal and institutional safety to individuals belonging to non-SC/ST/OBC classes.
He prays that the authorities be restrained from implementing or performing upon the supply. Moderately, caste-based discrimination be outlined in a caste-neutral and constitutionally-compliant method in order that safety is accorded to all individuals discriminated on the idea of caste, regardless of caste id.
He additional seeks a path to the respondent-authorities (Union authorities and UGC) for making certain that Equal Alternative Centres, Fairness Helplines, inquiry mechanisms and Ombudsperson proceedings beneath the Rules are made out there in a non-discriminatory and caste-neutral method, pending acceptable re-consideration of Regulation 3(c).
The petitioner additionally seeks a declaration that denial of grievance redressal mechanisms on the idea of caste id quantities to “impermissible State discrimination” and is “violative of basic rights assured beneath Articles 14, 15(1), and 21 of the Structure”.
The UGC framed the Rules following a PIL filed in 2019 by Radhika Vemula and Abeda Salim Tadvi, moms of Rohit Vemula and Payal Tadvi respectively, looking for a mechanism to finish caste-based discrimination in campuses. Rohit Vemula and Payal Tadvi each reportedly died by suicide over caste-discrimination confronted of their universities.
In March, 2025, the Union informed the Courtroom that UGC had ready draft laws to inter-alia tackle the problems raised. The Courtroom, on its half, expressed that it was trying to create a “very robust and strong mechanism” for “actually” tackling the unlucky points.
In April, the Courtroom clarified that the UGC might proceed with finalization of the draft laws and notify the identical. On the similar time, liberty was given to the petitioners and different stakeholders to provide options for incorporation within the draft laws.
In September, the Courtroom gave 8 weeks’ time to UGC to contemplate the options obtained from totally different stakeholders and take a ultimate choice concerning notification of the Rules. In January this 12 months, the Rules have been notified.
Case Title: Vineet Jindal v. Union of India and Anr.| Diary No. 5196 of 2026
 of the newly enacted University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026 on...){kind=link}