Caste Discrimination In Colleges | 'Draft Regulations Prepared By UGC', Tells Union; Supreme Court Mulls 'Strong & Robust' Mechanism

In the PIL assailing caste discrimination in higher educational institutions (HEIs), the Union recently told the Supreme Court that the University Grants Commission (UGC) has prepared draft regulations to inter-alia address the issues raised. On its part, the Court expressed that it is looking to create a "very strong and robust mechanism" for "really" tackling the unfortunate issues.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh adjourned the matter to May, 2025, upon being informed about the draft regulations by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta (for Union).

"We have, in a non-adversarial manner, taken up this petition and based upon some of the issues flagged, we have prepared draft regulations further strengthening the regime. They are published for inviting suggestions...after that, we will be publishing this...", SG told the Court.

During the hearing, it further came forth that the draft regulations have been displayed on the UGC website, inviting suggestions from all stakeholders. As such, the Court recorded in its order that "the petitioners, intervenor(s), or any other person(s) may submit their suggestions to the UGC, which shall be duly considered".

Insofar as the Supreme Court had earlier called on UGC to collate and furnish data from universities (central/state/private/deemed) with regard to setting up of Equal Opportunity Cells and total number of complaints received under the UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Educational Institutions) Regulations, 2012 alongwith action taken reports, Senior Advocate Indira Jaising (for petitioners) highlighted that 40% universities and 80% colleges had not responded.

Based on the affidavit filed by UGC, she stressed that many IITs and even some national law universities had not responded to UGC. On this, Justice Kant said, "if they don't submit any proposal, we will take it they have no objection".

"The violations are there...the non-compliance is there and probably, it is mostly because of the reason that for want of sufficient power and teeth with UGC...so once probably UGC's hands are strengthened with the power to cancel the affiliation...we think that will be a power that can be used in the right direction", the judge added.

Speaking on the issue of suicides in HEIs, Justice Kant also said, "what's happening is extremely unfortunate...each one of us feels like that...and therefore we are only looking for creating a very strong and robust mechanism through which we can really tackle this issue".

Although Jaising requested for an opportunity of physical hearing, apart from submission of written suggestions to the competent authority, the Court did not pass any order in that regard. As in an earlier hearing, the senior counsel also urged the Court to call for data on suicides pointing out that there had been 18 deaths by suicides - especially in the IITs and IIMs - in the last 14 months. However, Justice Kant only assured at this point, "once this action-taking body emerges as a statutory authority, we are contemplating to assign them some responsibility".

Background

Rohit Vemula, a PhD scholar at Hyderabad Central University, died by suicide on January 17, 2016, reportedly due to caste-discrimination. Three years later, Payal Tadvi, an Adivasi student at TN Topiwala National Medical College in Mumbai also died by suicide (on May 22, 2019). As per claims, she was subjected to caste-based discrimination by her upper-caste peers.

In 2019, Radhika Vemula and Abeda Salim Tadvi, mothers of the two Rohit Vemula and Payal Tadvi respectively filed the present PIL, seeking a mechanism to end caste-based discrimination in campuses. In July 2023, the top Court issued notice on the plea and sought response of the UGC. “Ultimately it is in the interest of the students and the parents whose children have lost their lives. In the future, atleast some care should be taken that this doesn't happen”, the Court told UGC then.

The petitioners submit that there is a rampant prevalence of caste discrimination against members of the SC/ST community alongside institutional apathy to caste-based discrimination and flagrant non-compliance with the existing norms and regulations in place. Furthermore, the norms are inadequate insofar as they do not properly address the occurrence of caste-based discrimination on campus against both teachers and students, fail to provide an independent, unbiased complaint redressal mechanism and do not provide for any punitive sanction on HEIs for failure to take positive steps to prevent discrimination on the basis of caste on campus.

Among other reliefs, the petitioners seek a direction to all Universities and HEIs to establish Equal Opportunity Cells on the lines of such other existing anti-discrimination internal complaints mechanisms and to include members from the SC/ST communities and independent representatives from NGO's or social activists to ensure objectivity and impartiality in the process.

Case Title: Abeda Salim Tadvi and Anr. v. Union of India, W.P.(C) No. 1149/2019