UGC Rules Row: Separate Hostels By Caste? CJI Loses Patience, Says ‘For God’s Sake......'

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was hearing a petition challenging the UGC rules.

The CJI asked why ragging had not been included in the UGC rules and questioned the assumption that discrimination in colleges was limited only to caste.

Source : ANI

Show Quick Read

Key points generated by AI, verified by newsroom

The Supreme Court on Thursday (January 29, 2026) raised serious concerns over provisions in the University Grants Commission’s (UGC) new Equality Regulations, particularly a proposal that could lead to separate hostels for students of different castes.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was hearing a petition challenging the UGC rules.

Reacting sharply to the suggestion of caste-segregated hostels, the Chief Justice said, “What kind of talk is this? We used to live in hostels together, and now inter-caste marriages are even taking place.”

‘For God’s Sake, Don’t Do This’: CJI

Questioning the intent behind the proposal, the court observed that such measures could undo decades of social progress.

“For God's sake, don't do this. Inter-caste marriages are now taking place across the country, and we, too, used to have students of all castes living together in hostels,” the CJI said.

He added, “Given the achievements we've made in 75 years toward a classless society, are we now moving toward a casteless society or are we regressing?”

Challenge To Section 3(c) Of Regulations

Appearing for the petitioner, advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain said he was specifically challenging Section 3(c) of the UGC regulations, which deals with Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes.

He argued that discrimination is not confined to these categories and that Section 3(e) already provides a broad definition of discrimination. According to him, Section 3(c) was unnecessary and created divisions.

The CJI responded that the court was examining whether the regulations were consistent with Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality.

Court Raises Issue Of Regional Discrimination

The bench also discussed discrimination based on region and culture. The CJI remarked that one of the worst aspects of college harassment was students mocking peers from the South or the North-East for cultural differences.

He asked whether Section 3(e) covered such situations, including cases where South Indian students study in North India or vice versa and face inappropriate remarks. The petitioner’s counsel replied in the affirmative.

Why Is Ragging Missing From The Rules?

Another counsel raised concerns that the rules do not address ragging. He argued that a general category student ragged by seniors from a Scheduled Caste background would have no remedy under the regulations, while counter-allegations of discrimination could be misused.

The CJI asked why ragging had not been included in the UGC rules and questioned the assumption that discrimination in colleges was limited only to caste.

The court noted that harassment often stems from senior-junior hierarchies and exists across institutions.

Centre Asked To Explain Controversial Provisions

Addressing Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, the court said it was staying the rules for the time being. It sought an explanation on why caste-based discrimination was defined separately when a general definition of discrimination already existed, and why ragging was excluded.

The CJI said the court wanted to examine whether the disputed provisions could be redrafted to be inclusive and fair.

About The UGC Equality Regulations 2026

The UGC notified the Equality Regulations 2026 on January 13, aimed at eliminating caste-based discrimination in higher educational institutions. The rules apply to all universities and are accompanied by a detailed implementation roadmap.

However, the regulations have triggered protests and legal challenges across the country.