LawLoveLegal

Introduction The Supreme Court’s decision to list for hearing a plea challenging the University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026 has reopened a critical debate on how caste-based discrimination is defined, addressed, and remedied in Indian higher education institutions (HEIs). The challenge, filed in Rahul Dewan and Ors. v. Union of India , raises fundamental constitutional questions: Can anti-discrimination regulations selectively protect certain caste groups while excluding others? And can regulatory dilution be justified in the name of administrative flexibility? Background of the Supreme Court Proceedings While agreeing to list the matter, the Chief Justice of India observed that defects in the petition must be cured before formal listing. The petitioner’s core grievance is that the 2026 Regulations create a narrow and exclusionary framework for caste-based discrimination by limiting its scope primarily to Scheduled Cast...

The Supreme Court of India has published a landmark institutional report titled “Judicial Conceptions of Caste” , marking the first systematic attempt by the judiciary to critically analyse how courts have spoken about caste over seven decades. Prepared by the Supreme Court’s Centre for Research and Planning (CRP), the report evaluates constitutional bench judgments on reservations, personal laws, and atrocities laws, highlighting the normative role of judicial language in shaping equality and social justice. Continuing Concern: Caste as a Constitutional Issue The report asserts that caste is not a historical artefact but a continuing constitutional concern , central to India’s equality jurisprudence. It argues that judicial vocabulary must reflect constitutional values, rejecting outdated or paternalistic terminology. Relevant Constitutional Provisions: Article 14 – Equality before law Article 15(4) & 15(5) – Special provisions for socially and educationally backward ...