In an IANS interview, Tikait recounted the swift public uproar that caught judicial attention. ‘Courts demanded full disclosure of documents to scrutinize shortcomings and decide on amendments or suspension,’ he explained.

Urging stakeholder consultations, especially with castes perceiving harm, Tikait cautioned against national fragmentation. ‘Repeated caste-based conflicts could splinter India, making collective action in tough times unfeasible,’ he observed.

Tikait portrayed the rules as a government ploy yielding no real losses for those in power. ‘Angry voters threatening NOTA or abstention only aid incumbents, who continue unchallenged,’ he pointed out, critiquing electoral dynamics.

He alleged deliberate caste polarization to proliferate lawsuits. ‘While SC groups may lack resources, others—better educated—can manipulate the system. Legal actions must align with constitutional equity,’ Tikait stressed.

Thursday’s apex court ruling paused the impugned UGC norms following multiple challenges. Directing a return to 2012 guidelines, justices scheduled further proceedings for March 19. This interim order highlights tensions between regulatory overhaul and reservation protections in academia.