UGC must ensure equity does not become exclusion

As the debate on the now-stayed UGC rules regarding caste discrimination in educational institutions rages on, one must consider the root of the problem. It’s demand for ‘equity’ in place of ‘equality’. The two are widely differentm since equity means to provide equal reward for unequal work based on consideration for past ‘injustices’. One is easily reminded of the school-time tale of a wolf drooling over prospect of eating a lamb which had just come by to drink water from a river. The wolf takes exception to the water being muddied by him, but the latter points out that he was stationed downstream and so the muddied water could not go back to the wolf. At this, the wolf said that it must have been his parent who did so the previous year, and so he had to pay for it. The lamb replied that he wasn’t born then. But the wolf had already made up his mind to eat the lamb and so did not accept the logic. Something similar is being dished out as the raison de’tre of the affirmative laws and a just compensation for what the ancestors of general category students did. 

Whatever the merits of the ground for equity, we have been witness to a lot of affirmative action, reservations, etc. which have not achieved the target of bringing into existence a society free from the blot of caste discrimination. The approach towards the issue has been severely flawed. Even though many people belonging to these classes have come up educationally and economically, to believe that they have also been accepted as social equals is debatable. On the other hand, the culture of freebies has become a part of our politics and so, the benefits offered to the socially disadvantaged groups have been lapped up as compensation for political support to the benefactors and have not translated into meaningful endeavour to come up educationally. That is the story of reservations. 

Had the stress been on providing means whereby the aspirants for entrance to educational institutions or clearing competitive exams for jobs had prepared themselves well and come up to compete with the general category students and job aspirants, that would have been real benefit for the people concerned and the society on the whole. Also, it would not have led to heart-burning on the part of the general category candidates, who, even though pass the muster, yet lose in the end due to the caste label. This play of ‘equity’ leads most often to accentuated caste divide in society which goes against the cherished goal of our nation. 

These are general considerations, but confining ourselves to the points raised by the recent Supreme Court hold on the revised UGC rules, coming in the wake of widespread protests in the country, it can be said that it is a welcome step. For one, the advisory provisions of the earlier 2012 framework had been transformed in the 2026 proposal into ‘Equity’ regulations requiring setting up of Equity Committees and Equal Opportunity Centres in every college and university, 24×7 helplines for grievance redressal, etc. Unfortunately, such measures are based on a view that is lop-sided, since it considers the general category as the perpetrators and the depressed categories as victims. We know how the general class people are held to ransom whenever a dispute crops up with the other categories and mere mention of an invective can land a general category person in jail for a long time.  It is very much in line with the provisions of the sexual harassment laws which are often misused for devious selfish purposes so much so that even the Supreme Court expressed concern in December 2024 while deliberating on a case of consensual relationship going haywire in Gujarat. How can such thinking lead to an egalitarian society? 

It seems the BJP government at the Centre which oversees UGC has been taken for a ride by its officials, otherwise it is unthinkable that it would go solely by a concept which has been projected by its bête noire leftist politicians in the West and imported into India lately by groups supported by the billionaire George Soros? It’s an ironical situation just as the present framework on caste discrimination meant to smoothen caste divisions is. It is clearly a case of equity leading to exclusion – that is against the ‘Inclusion’ part of the DEI shibboleth. 

The SC bar will give the government time to re-think and come up with caste-neutral provisions, which are not vague and provide clearly for corrective rather than punitive measures in case of breach of rules and laws, since the students are young learners and not hardened criminals. These should not impinge on the equality provisions guaranteed under Articles 14 and 15 of the constitution and should guard against mischievous and malicious complaints. Poorly designed policies weaken the moral force of the fight against caste injustice, because when regulations appear one-sided, constitutionally untenable, or ideologically paradoxical, they provoke resistance that would ultimately harm marginalised students themselves. We must remember that social reform imposed without consensus or clarity often collapses under its own weight.

END OF ARTICLE