NewKerala.com

UP Minister Rajbhar Says All Parties Will Accept SC Verdict on UGC Guidelines

Uttar Pradesh Minister Om Prakash Rajbhar stated that all parties involved will accept the Supreme Court's upcoming verdict on the controversial UGC equity guidelines. The Supreme Court had stayed the new regulations in January, citing "complete vagueness" in the rules and potential for misuse. The regulations were introduced to address caste-based discrimination in higher education institutions by establishing special committees and helplines. The statement follows incidents of protest and chaos, including Delhi University's subsequent ban on meetings and processions.

Key Points: SC UGC Guidelines Verdict Will Be Accepted: UP Minister

  • Supreme Court hearing on UGC equity guidelines
  • UP Minister says all parties will accept verdict
  • SC stayed new rules citing "vagueness"
  • Regulations aim to curb caste-based discrimination in universities
  • Delhi University banned protests after chaos
2 min read

"Both sides would accept verdict": UP Minister OP Rajbhar on Supreme Court hearing on UGC guidelines

UP Minister OP Rajbhar states all sides will accept the Supreme Court's decision on the controversial UGC equity guidelines, currently stayed by the court.

"It's up to the court. Whatever the court decides will be accepted by all. - Om Prakash Rajbhar"

Lucknow, March 19

Uttar Pradesh Minister Om Prakash Rajbhar, on Thursday, said that the Supreme Court's judgment will be accepted by all the parties on the issue of University Grants Commission guidelines.

He stated that both sides involved in the matter would respect and abide by the judicial decision concerning the new regulations.

"It's up to the court. Whatever the court decides will be accepted by all. Both sides would accept the court's decision. The government will present its case before the court, and both sides will present theirs," said Rajbhar.

Meanwhile, on February 17, Delhi University prohibited meetings, processions, and protests for a period of one month.

This development came days after chaos erupted at a protest demanding implementation of the new University Grants Commission (UGC) equity guidelines, which the Supreme Court put on hold, citing "complete vagueness" in the rules and potential misuse.

On January 29, the SC stayed the University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, following nationwide uproar over alleged "discrimination" against the General Category in the regulations.

The Top Court said that, for now, the 2012 UGC regulations will continue to apply. The Court opined that there is complete vagueness in Regulation 3 (C) (which defines caste-based discrimination), and it can be misused. "The language needs to be re-modified," the Court said.

After 75 years of trying to make a caste-less society, whether the direction of policy-making is progressive or tending towards a regressive approach, it asked.

The new regulations, introduced to curb caste-based discrimination in colleges and universities, require institutions to establish special committees and helplines to address complaints from students in the Scheduled Caste (SC), Scheduled Tribe (ST), and Other Backwards Classes (OBC) categories.

- ANI

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priya S
Good that the SC stepped in. The language of the regulations was too vague and open to misuse. We need clear, precise laws that actually help students facing discrimination, not create new avenues for false complaints and campus politics. Hope the revised guidelines are more balanced.
R
Rohit P
The court's question is crucial: after 75 years, are we moving forward or backward? Endless categorization might be perpetuating the very divisions we want to erase. The focus should be on economic criteria and merit, not just caste. Let's hope for a progressive rethink. 🤞
S
Sarah B
While the intent to curb discrimination is absolutely necessary, the execution has to be foolproof. Vague rules help no one. The special committees and helplines are a good idea in principle, but they need a very clear framework to function without bias on either side.
V
Vikram M
Respectfully, I disagree with the Minister's blanket acceptance. The government should vigorously defend policies made for social justice. The "complete vagueness" can be fixed with amendments, not a complete stay. This feels like a setback for students from marginalized communities who face real issues on campus.
K
Karthik V
DU banning protests is worrying. Students have a right to peaceful assembly. The chaos mentioned is unfortunate, but can't use that to clamp down on all dialogue. The solution is better-defined laws and campus mechanisms, not shutting down dissent.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50