UGC Redefines Caste Discrimination Rules

Context

The University Grants Commission (UGC) has recently issued new draft regulations aimed at addressing discrimination in higher education institutions. These regulations redefine ‘discrimination’ and specifically focus on ‘caste-based discrimination’ against members of the Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST). This move follows a Supreme Court directive and petitions highlighting rampant caste discrimination in universities.

Background and Context

Caste-based discrimination is a situation that has always existed, and has, therefore, led to exclusion, harassment, and suicides within Indian higher education among students of marginalized communities. Famous among such cases would be those of Rohith Vemula and Payal Tadvi, who allegedly faced caste discrimination on their campuses leading to their deaths by suicide. The UGC in its newly drafted regulations has set out broad undertaking efforts to address such and other issues in higher education policy and equality.

Key Provisions of the Draft Regulations

• Definition of Discrimination: In redefinition within the new draft regulations, ‘discrimination’ now refers to any unfairness, differential, or biased treatment against any stakeholder on grounds such as religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. These definitions apply to other stakeholders besides students, marking a significant extension of the ambit of the protection against discrimination.
• Caste-Based Discrimination: ‘Caste-based discrimination’ is defined now by the regulations to mean discrimination against Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. This distinction is in place to better focus means for protecting these communities that have a long history of systemic exclusion and bias.
• Institutional Mechanisms: The draft regulations envision the establishment of Equal Opportunity Centers in all higher educational institutions. These centers will offer advice and assistance targeted toward disadvantaged groups and develop a culture of diversity and equity on campus. Furthermore, institutions need to set up equity committees that include women and SC/ST faculty members to address incidents of discrimination immediately.
• Non-Compliance Penalties: Severe punishment awaits institutions that fail to comply with these regulations, including de-recognition and restriction from accessing funding. This aims to ensure that any institution takes active, preventive steps to obstruct discrimination and provide a platform where all students feel they are treated fairly. 
• Reporting and Mechanism for Redressal: The draft regulations provide a fast track through which incidents of discrimination may be dealt with. The aggrieved may report any incident on an online portal or via equity helpline. An equity committee must be convened within 24 hours to take necessary action, and a detailed report is to be submitted in 15 working days.

Challenges and Criticisms

• Clarity Hurdles: Critics have pointed out that the draft regulations are neither clear nor decipherable about forms of discrimination. They make an explicit mention of disability, which was part of the previous regulations. These critics are critical about new rules since they raise many questions regarding their effectiveness in dealing with all kinds of bias.
• Fake Complaints: The draft rules include punishments for making false complaints, and this has been taken by many as a move to discourage any reporting of incidents of discrimination. The provisions have since generated debate as to how the two were to be balanced against each other.
• Higher Education Effects: Progressing Towards Equity: The UGC’s new draft regulation is toward progression towards a more equalizing environment in higher education. The UGC has focused rules on caste-based discrimination and instituted mechanisms within the institution toward redressal, thereby ensuring that all students would enjoy equal opportunities to succeed.
• Dealing with Systemic Problems: Caste-based discrimination occurs within deep, systemic structures within Indian society, which requires systemic changes. The regulations are part of a bigger agenda concerning the demolitions of caste barriers to education and the process of bringing social justice and equality.
• Moving Forward: There are positive developments, but many hurdles remain. Little representation of SC/ST faculty members exacerbates the feeling of alienation among marginalized students. Yet the most significant challenge still lies in the compliance with these regulations, as many institutions are not putting the required info related to the anti-discriminatory measures in public domain.

Conclusion

The UGC’s new draft regulations mark a significant step towards addressing caste-based discrimination in higher education. While these regulations face challenges and criticisms, they represent a crucial effort to promote equity and ensure that all students, particularly those from marginalized communities, have a fair and inclusive educational environment. As India strives to build a more just society, these regulations will play a vital role in dismantling systemic barriers and fostering a culture of equality in its educational institutions.

Source: The Hindu

UPSC Mains Practice Question 

Q. Despite legal provisions prohibiting caste discrimination, its prevalence in various spheres of Indian society continues to pose a challenge to social justice. Critically examine the effectiveness of legal and policy measures in addressing caste-based discrimination.

Download as PDF