Government informs Supreme Court of plan to review 2026 UGC equity regulations following judicial stay
The Indian government told the Supreme Court it is considering forming a committee to review the 2026 UGC regulations on caste discrimination in higher education, after the court stayed the rules in January due to concerns over vague provisions.
AI-generated summary
The Supreme Court stayed the UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, on January 29, citing vague provisions.
The Centre has told the Supreme Court that it is considering appointing a committee to revisit the UGC's 2026 regulations on caste discrimination in higher education institutions. The submission comes after the top court put the rules on hold in January, citing concerns over vague provisions and their potential consequences.
The Centre is considering appointing a committee to revisit the University Grants Commission's (UGC) 2026 regulations aimed at preventing caste discrimination in higher education institutions, TOI reported, quoting a Bar and Bench report. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the Supreme Court on Thursday that the proposed committee would examine students' concerns and ensure that no section feels apprehensive or dissatisfied with the rules.
Mehta made the submission before a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, which was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the UGC regulations. He told the court that the government was considering the formation of a committee while keeping the interests of students and the younger generation in mind, Bar and Bench reported.
The development comes after the Supreme Court put the implementation of the UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, on hold on January 29, citing concerns over the wording and possible consequences of certain provisions.
During Thursday's hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the Supreme Court that the government was contemplating appointing a committee to examine the regulations and address concerns surrounding them.
"The government has taken a decision that every student should be taken care of. Nobody should have any apprehension. Nobody should feel dissatisfied. We are also considering the interests of the younger generation. The government is contemplating appointing a committee," Mehta told the bench.
The proposed committee is expected to provide a forum to examine the concerns raised over the new regulatory framework. However, the Centre's submission was that it was considering constituting such a panel, not that a committee had already been formally appointed.
On January 29, the Supreme Court kept the UGC's 2026 regulations in abeyance while hearing petitions challenging the framework. The bench had described certain provisions as "prima facie vague" and expressed concern that they could have sweeping consequences, potentially dividing society.
The court had also sought responses from the Centre and the UGC on three petitions challenging the regulations.
Until further orders, the Supreme Court directed that the University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2012, would remain in force. The direction was issued under Article 142 of the Constitution.
The 2026 regulations were introduced to address caste-based discrimination in higher education institutions. However, their provisions triggered opposition in several places, with student groups and other organisations demanding that the framework be withdrawn.
The petitions before the Supreme Court challenged the new rules, prompting judicial scrutiny of their wording and potential impact. The Centre's latest submission indicates that it is considering a committee to revisit the regulations amid the continuing legal challenge.
AI outlook — possibilities, not facts
The Supreme Court will continue to oversee the review process of the UGC regulations.
Very likely · Within months
India's Supreme Court has decided to review its 2003 verdict disqualifying individuals with more than two children from contesting panchayati raj elections, stating that population-control laws have become counter-productive as the total fertility rate has fallen below replacement level.
The Supreme Court refused to entertain a petition challenging the reservation of Kadipur assembly constituency in Uttar Pradesh for Scheduled Castes, stating that delimitation and reservation criteria are exclusively legislative functions and courts cannot usurp Parliament's powers.
The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit revived a civil rights lawsuit filed by Ralph Isham on behalf of his son Elijah's estate after police fatally shot Elijah in Moraine, Ohio. The court ruled that an initial complaint filed without authorised legal representation is not automatically void when the filer subsequently hires an attorney within the district court's timeline.
The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit revived a civil rights lawsuit filed by Ralph Isham on behalf of his son Elijah's estate after police fatally shot Elijah in Moraine, Ohio. The court ruled that an initial complaint filed without an attorney is not automatically invalid when the filer subsequently hires counsel within the district court's timeline.
Madras High Court ordered the Thanjavur District Collector to relocate an unauthorized E V Ramasamy Periyar statue from temple land within four weeks, following a petition by Rama Ravikumar.
The Supreme Court has sought the Allahabad High Court's response to a rape complainant's plea seeking the suspension of a Uttar Pradesh additional district judge who has been chargesheeted for rape by Delhi Police and heads a POCSO court. The bench issued notice returnable on December 11.