General Category Students Are the New Marginalized Group Under UGC's 2026 Equity Regulations

Where educational campuses are meant to be crucibles of merit, intellect, and social mobility, a quiet but profound shift is underway in Indian Higher Education system. The University Grants Commission’s Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions Regulations, 2026, notified on January 13, 2026, promise to eradicate discrimination and foster inclusion. 

However, beneath the noble rhetoric of equity and the NEP 2020-inspired emphasis on protecting historically disadvantaged groups lies a structural reality that many are only beginning to confront.

The General Category students, those outside the reserved quotas of SC, ST, OBC, EWS, and PwBD are increasingly emerging as an invisible, voiceless marginalized group within their own institutions.

Despite the positive intent behind the 2026 UGC equity regulations, they carry serious flaws that tilt the scales unfairly and risk undermining true equality. Most glaringly, Equity Committees must include members from SC, ST, OBC, PwBD, and women categories, but there's no mandate for General Category representation, raising real fears that these bodies could lean one-sided, presuming only certain groups suffer discrimination while others are inherently at fault, which erodes trust and impartiality in investigations. 

Even more troubling is the complete silence on deterring false or malicious complaints, while complainants get strong shields like confidentiality, anti-retaliation rules, and quick probes, there's nothing explicit no penalties, no mandatory costs, no clear evidentiary bars for proven bad-faith allegations, leaving the accused (frequently from the General Category) exposed to heavy fallout like ruined reputations, suspensions, mental stress, or even police cases under laws like the SC/ST Act, where misuse for personal grudges or rivalries has long been documented. 

Caste discrimination is still very much a painful reality on Indian campuses, and it's not getting better, it's getting worse. Recent UGC data shows a staggering 118.4% jump in reported cases of caste-based discrimination between 2019 and 2024, with complaints rising from around 173 in 2019–20 to 378 in 2023–24, totaling over 1,160 in that period alone. 

These aren't just numbers; they're stories of real students, often from SC, ST, OBC, or other marginalized backgrounds facing harassment, derogatory comments, being left out of group projects or study circles, unfair marking, denied opportunities, or even outright bullying and threats. 

Campuses, which should be places where young minds grow freely through ideas, debate, and hard work, too often end up mirroring the worst divisions of our society.

That's why the new Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions Regulations, 2026 deserve real credit for finally moving beyond old, toothless advisory notes to something much stronger: a mandatory, legally enforceable system. 

Every university, college, and deemed institution now has to set up Equal Opportunity Centres to actively support disadvantaged students, run awareness drives, and handle complaints properly. Equity Committees will look into allegations with structured processes, and there are built-in preventive steps like regular monitoring, reporting, and programs to build understanding across differences, things that were often missing or half-hearted before.

Discrimination doesn't stick to office hours; it can happen late at night in a hostel corridor or over a group chat. So having 24/7 helplines and easy online ways to report issues makes it far less intimidating for someone to speak up. 

The rules push for quick, time-bound resolutions, with appeals possible to an Ombudsman, so victims don't have to suffer in silence for months or years.These measures apply across the board, to students, teachers, non-teaching staff, and even administrators acknowledging that unfair treatment can happen in any direction in the hierarchy. 

And by holding the head of the institution personally accountable, the UGC is basically saying: no more lip service; get this right, or face consequences. At its heart, this lines up with the NEP 2020's push for true inclusion and echoes our Constitution's promises of equality, dignity, and non-discrimination under Articles 14, 15, 16, and 21.

If colleges and universities implement these rules with genuine commitment rather than just ticking boxes, they could genuinely make campuses safer and more welcoming, especially for first-generation students from marginalized communities who already carry so many extra burdens just to be there. That's the hopeful side, and it's worth recognizing.

However, in a system already strained by intense competition, where General Category students routinely face higher cut-offs, full-fee burdens, and cut-throat entrance-exam pressures, this one-sided architecture fosters a chilling asymmetry. The cost of filing a complaint is near-zero, while the fallout for the accused, often from the unreserved category can be career-derailing.

This is not mere theoretical concern. Critics point to patterns under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, where acquittal rates in many cases highlight misuse for personal vendettas, property disputes, or score-settling, issues even acknowledged by the judiciary, including former CJI observations in 2025.

Transplanting a similar framework to campuses without safeguards risks turning Equity Committees into de facto kangaroo courts, where ideological clashes, academic rivalries, or petty grudges can be escalated under the shield of “protected” status.

General Category students and faculty, lacking reserved seats or dedicated representation in these bodies, find themselves in a precarious position. Most often, presumed perpetrators by structural default, with limited recourse when targeted.

The invisibility of this group is compounded by broader societal narratives. In public discourse, “marginalization” is almost synonymously tied to caste-based historical disadvantage; acknowledging that General Category individuals, many from modest middle-class or lower-middle-class families face unique pressures is often dismissed as “upper-caste whining.” 

In contrast, the data tells another story. accelerating emigration of high-achieving General Category talent to universities abroad, skyrocketing coaching-class expenditures borne disproportionately by unreserved families, psychological stress from perpetual “merit vs quota” debates, and now, the added fear that a single unsubstantiated complaint could derail years of hard work. 

These students are not a monolith of privilege; many come from economically strained backgrounds, regional disadvantage, or non-creamy-layer realities, yet they lack the institutional safety nets extended to others.

The UGC regulations, while addressing a real rise in reported caste-discrimination cases, have inadvertently institutionalized a new form of exclusion. 

By design or oversight, they treat equity as a zero-sum game, protecting one set of groups requires presuming vulnerability in only one direction and immunity in the other. 

True inclusion cannot thrive in such imbalance. It demands representation that reflects the entire campus community, safeguards against abuse on all sides, and recognition that discrimination—caste-based or otherwise—can victimize anyone, anywhere.
 
Without balanced representation and symmetric safeguards against misuse, the regulations may inadvertently empower aggressive mobilization under the "equity" banner, potentially forcing university administrations to surrender on rules or concessions to avoid prolonged conflict, further entrenching group-based leverage over merit-driven governance.

As campuses become more diverse and contested, India stands at a crossroads. Will we build systems that heal historical wounds without inflicting new ones, or will we allow well-intentioned policies to deepen resentment and division? 

The answer lies in revising these rules to restore balance—ensuring General Category voices are heard in equity bodies, introducing symmetric protections against misuse, and reaffirming that justice under the Constitution is blind to caste, not selective by it. 

Even though the 2026 regulations offer a chance to make campuses safer and fairer—but only if amended to include everyone in the promise of dignity, due process, and belonging. Ignoring the growing unease among General Category students will not make it disappear; it will only drive deeper alienation, accelerate brain drain, and fracture the social fabric that higher education should strengthen.

The UGC Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions Regulations, 2026 is drawing fierce criticism and widespread demands for a complete rollback, with many arguing they undermine fairness, due process, and true inclusion on Indian campuses—particularly for general category students and faculty.

Far from promoting real equity, these rules deepen division, institutionalize suspicion, and echo misuse-prone frameworks—sparking protests. 

Moreover, General Category students risk remaining the new invisible marginalized: hardworking, high-achieving, yet structurally sidelined in the very institutions meant to uplift the nation through education.

India’s future depends on getting this balance right—before the invisible become the unheard, and the unheard become the departed. In the end, equity is not a slogan to be weaponized; it is a principle that must apply equally or it ceases to be equity at all.