Caste Rights Activists Slam UGC's 2026 Regulations as Inadequate for SC/ST/OBC Protections. Read Why

New Delhi- Anil Wagde, a prominent Dalit rights activist and leading member of the Ambedkar International Center, has labeled the University Grants Commission's (UGC) 2026 Promotions of Equity Regulations "woefully inadequate," arguing they fail to safeguard Scheduled Caste (SC), Scheduled Tribe (ST), and Other Backward Classes (OBC) students against entrenched caste discrimination in higher education.

AIC is a civil rights advocacy group that was formed in 2012 to fight against caste discrimination in the United States. The organization's mission is to strengthen unity among SC, ST and OBCs living in the United States of America.

Drawing from the 2012 framework's stronger provisions, Wagde and fellow activists contend the new rules regressively dilute protections, exposing marginalized students to bias and exclusion. Here are their key concerns:

1. Exclusion of Top Institutions: The regulations bypass IITs, IIMs, and other premier bodies despite well-documented caste-based harassment there. Activists demand immediate inclusion to cover these high-profile "hotspots."

2. Dilution of Defined Discrimination: Explicit 2012 definitions covering harassment, victimization, unfavorable treatment, and caste-based labeling have been scrapped, risking arbitrary interpretations and unchecked bias against SC/ST/OBC students.

3. Admissions, Evaluation, and Fellowship Protections Removed: Safeguards ensuring fair processing in admissions, unbiased evaluations, and equitable fellowships for reserved categories are gone, threatening to entrench historical inequities and erode merit opportunities.

4. Hostel, Campus, and Resource Access Protections Diluted: Bans on segregation, facility denials, and exclusions from cultural/sports activities, core to the 2012 rules are absent, leaving everyday campus discrimination unaddressed.

5. Absence of Dedicated Liaison Officers: No mandate for senior officers (e.g., Joint Secretary rank) to proactively monitor and resolve SC/ST/OBC grievances, hampering effective redressal.

6. Unified Equity Cell Risks Marginalization: A single cell for all disadvantaged groups could sideline SC/ST/OBC-specific disabilities, diluting representation and access to justice. Activists call for separate or proportionally representative structures.

Wagde warns these gaps "betray the Constitution's equity promise," urging swift amendments to restore robust, targeted defenses. Nethrapal, a serving IRS officer too had previously shared similar views on the regulations. He states, " As a well wisher of the SC ST community i see too many problems in this guidelines… It is more anti SC ST than anti General merit."

He adds, "The only reason why the protests have erupted all over India is that the present 2026 regulations are applicable for OBCs, while 2012 was applicable to SC and ST alone." Comparing with the 2012 regulations, Nethrapal states, the earlier regulations of 2012 were not applicable to IIT/IIMs, many universities not covered under UGC, or the private sector. The implementation mechanism was weak, with many universities not even having an SC/ST cell. 2026 regulations are inadequate, and that is what should be discussed now."