Anand Teltumbde: Stay on UGC rules was disproportionate – six counterpoints to the objections
· Scroll
When the Supreme Court of India stayed the University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, on Thursday, it did more than pause a regulatory framework. It inadvertently put on trial the very idea that campuses in India require a modern, enforceable equity architecture responsive to the lived realities of caste, gender, religion, disability and region.
By restoring the older 2012 framework pending review, the court signalled caution about definitional clarity, procedural safeguards and possible misuse. Yet, the stay also risks sidelining a crucial constitutional commitment: that higher education spaces must actively dismantle discrimination rather than merely advise against it.
While the objections raised by petitioners deserve careful judicial scrutiny, the decision to suspend the 2026 Regulations in their entirety may have been disproportionate. A more balanced course – allowing the rules to operate with clarifications – would have preserved protections for vulnerable students while the court examined contested clauses.
Selective judicial urgency?
The irony at the heart of the controversy is easy to miss. The UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, did not arise in a vacuum. They were framed in response to concerns repeatedly flagged before the Supreme Court in a 2019 public interest litigation which drew attention to...