IRRF Global Policy Article
Published by IRRF Global — International Reservation Reform Forum
India’s colleges and universities are not merely institutions for degrees. They are places where young people from different states, languages, religions, castes, communities and economic backgrounds study together, build friendships, exchange ideas and prepare for the future.
That is why an educational campus should promote not only academic excellence but also social harmony, equal dignity and constitutional fraternity.
There should be no place in any educational institution for discrimination, caste-based humiliation, harassment or exclusion.
If an SC, ST, OBC, General Category or any other student is discriminated against because of caste, religion, language, region, gender, disability or social background, that student should have an effective right to complain and seek justice.
But IRRF Global raises an equally important question:
In trying to eliminate discrimination, are we institutionalising caste identity even more deeply among students?
This question lies at the heart of the debate around the UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026.
A technical clarification is also important. These are not a new “UGC Act.” The principal legislation remains the University Grants Commission Act, 1956. The controversial 2026 framework is a set of UGC Regulations relating to equity in higher education.
The Objective May Be Right — But the Framework Must Also Be Fair
Caste discrimination has been a real part of India’s historical and social experience. It should not be denied.
If a student is humiliated, excluded or harassed because of caste, there must be a strong grievance-redressal mechanism.
But public policy must be judged not only by its intention, but also by its design, implementation and long-term consequences.
IRRF Global is not opposed to anti-discrimination protection.
Our question is simpler:
Why should protection against caste discrimination not be available equally to every student?
If caste-based humiliation of an SC student is wrong, it is wrong.
If it happens to an ST student, it is wrong.
If it happens to an OBC student, it is wrong.
And if a General Category student — including a Brahmin, Kshatriya or any other community — is targeted, abused, boycotted or humiliated because of caste identity, that student’s dignity should also matter.
Discrimination cannot become acceptable merely because the identity of the victim changes.
Existing Mechanisms Already Existed
Higher Education Institutions were not operating in a regulatory vacuum before 2026.
The UGC Promotion of Equity in Higher Educational Institutions Regulations, 2012 already existed. Student grievance-redressal systems, anti-ragging rules, anti-sexual-harassment mechanisms and other institutional safeguards also existed.
That raises legitimate policy questions:
Were the 2012 Regulations inadequate?
Was the problem in the law itself or in implementation?
How many complaints remained unresolved?
Which forms of discrimination were not being addressed?
Could the existing framework have been strengthened instead?
Before creating a new regulatory structure, the Government should answer these questions with evidence.
More regulation does not automatically mean more justice.
Supreme Court Intervention Makes the Debate Even More Important
The controversy around the 2026 Regulations is not limited to political or social debate.
On 29 January 2026, the Supreme Court kept the 2026 Regulations in abeyance and allowed the earlier 2012 framework to continue in the interim.
In August 2026, the Centre also informed the Supreme Court that the Regulations were under reconsideration.
That makes this an appropriate moment for a broader national review.
IRRF Global therefore believes that the Government should not treat criticism of the Regulations as resistance to equality.
Instead, the pause should be used to create a framework that is more balanced, inclusive and constitutionally sustainable.
Do Not Institutionalise Caste Consciousness on Campus
Why does an 18- or 20-year-old enter university?
To study engineering.
To learn medicine.
To understand law.
To work on Artificial Intelligence and Data Science.
To conduct research.
To build businesses.
To create technology.
To prepare for a career.
The central question of university life should not become:
“Which caste do you belong to?”
Educational institutions should gradually reduce inherited social barriers and strengthen a common student identity.
If institutional structures repeatedly divide students into caste categories, there is a risk that students who once saw one another simply as classmates begin to see one another primarily through social identities.
That may create mistrust rather than fraternity.
Discrimination Is Not Only an Indian Problem
Identity-based discrimination is not unique to India.
Across the world, societies have experienced different forms of division based on:
Race
Ethnicity
Religion
Tribe
Language
Nationality
Immigration status
Community identity
Caste
In some societies, there has been a long history of Black–White racial discrimination.
In others, ethnic or religious communities have faced conflict.
In parts of Africa, ethnic and tribal divisions have contributed to social and political tensions.
In Europe and elsewhere, immigrants and minority communities have faced discrimination and exclusion.
India has its own historical experience of caste discrimination.
The broader lesson is important:
Discrimination is not the permanent characteristic of one caste, one community or one country. It is a human social problem that can appear in many forms.
Therefore, future generations should not be permanently divided into inherited categories of “oppressor” and “victim.”
History must be understood.
Historical injustice must be addressed.
But present-day justice must also judge actual conduct.
**A child does not choose caste.
A child does not choose race.
A child does not choose the family into which he or she is born.**
A young person should not automatically inherit personal guilt for what ancestors may have done.
Likewise, discrimination against a young person should not become less serious merely because that person belongs to a historically advantaged group.
What Should India Learn From the World?
If a society has a history of racial conflict, the purpose of education should not be to transfer that hostility permanently to the next generation.
If two ethnic communities have fought in the past, schools and universities should promote reconciliation, equality and cooperation.
India should follow the same principle.
Historical caste discrimination must not be denied.
Corrective support may
01
Reservation Based on Economic & Genuine Disadvantage
Public support should follow genuine disadvantage, not remain permanently dependent only on birth-based identity.
Reservation Should Be Based on Economic and Genuine Disadvantage
Greater importance should be given to economic condition, access to education, family circumstances, social disadvantage and geographic deprivation, so genuinely poor and disadvantaged citizens from any caste or religion can receive support.
IRRF Principle: “Support should follow genuine need — not merely birth.”
Follow • Join • Share IRRF Global
Latest public posts from our official Instagram, X and Facebook channels.
Instagram
@irrfglobal
FollowX
@IRRFGlobal
FollowFacebook
IRRFGlobal
Follow