A bold challenge has reached India’s top court against the UGC’s latest push for campus equity. The Promotions of Equity in Higher Education Institutions Regulations, 2026, notified just weeks ago on January 13, is under fire through a PIL that brands Rule 3(C) as capricious and violative of constitutional norms.

Petitioners contend that under the guise of promoting equality, this provision discriminates against non-reserved categories, potentially excluding them from educational opportunities. It allegedly undermines Articles 14, 19, and 21, and contradicts the spirit of the 1956 UGC Act, which prioritizes fair access to higher learning.

The regulations’ broader goal is unambiguous: Stamp out all forms of prejudice in higher education on grounds like caste, creed, sex, or disability. Institutions are now compelled to establish Equity Committees empowered to investigate grievances and deliver stringent punishments, from degree suspensions to license cancellations.

Backed by alarming stats—118% rise in caste discrimination reports over five years—these rules fulfill a Supreme Court mandate from an earlier petition demanding ironclad safeguards. Notifications have since spurred colleges and universities to comply swiftly.

Critics zero in on Rule 3(C), arguing its vague caste-bias definitions could prejudice against general category members. The absence of deterrents for bogus claims amplifies misuse risks. The petition calls for a thorough judicial review to protect fundamental freedoms.

As the case unfolds, it spotlights deeper tensions in academia: How to balance affirmative equity with unyielding meritocracy? The verdict could set precedents echoing across India’s educational landscape.