Will a New National Organization to Combat Caste Prejudice in Higher Education Be Successful?

Thousands of students across India experience caste-based discrimination in schools and universities every year. According to Supreme Court documents, at least 115 student suicides between 2004 and 2024 were linked to caste-based harassment, though countless incidents remain unreported.

Students often face discrimination in admissions, classroom interactions, scholarships, and hostel allocations, leaving many to suffer in silence. To address these issues, the UGC implemented new regulations aimed at fostering equity in higher education.

UGC data indicates that complaints of caste-based discrimination in colleges and universities have increased by 118.4% over the past five years, rising from 173 complaints in 2019–20 to 378 in 2023–24.

Under the new regulations, each institution and university is required to maintain a national monitoring committee, an equity committee, and a 24/7 helpline to ensure compliance. While these measures are positive, experts question whether a central committee can effectively change deep-rooted discrimination at local campus levels.

“The creation of the national committee is commendable,” said Mr. Tarun Anand, founder and chancellor of Universal AI University. “The regulations demonstrate how seriously the UGC takes discrimination. The real question is whether prestigious universities will comply or treat these rules as mere formalities.”

He emphasized that for the committee to make a tangible difference, it must operate with openness, independence, and regular follow-ups.

The Panel’s Function

On January 14, 2026, the UGC released the Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions Regulations, stating that the monitoring board will convene twice a year and set guidelines for campus equity centers.

While the rules allow the commission to request reports and recommend remedial actions, they do not provide immediate punitive authority, such as withdrawing recognition in severe cases. This limitation raises questions regarding due process and enforcement.

Legal constraints could delay stronger enforcement. “Meetings twice a year will not replace continuous monitoring,” cautioned Mr. Anand. The committee must have statutory authority to conduct routine audits and inspections to be truly effective.

Transparency, Data, and Self-Sufficiency

Transparent and accurate data is essential for effective oversight. UGC statistics show that universities’ Equal Opportunity Cells (EOCs) received more than 1,500 complaints in recent years. Yet audits reveal that many complaints remain unresolved or inadequately documented.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly requested caste-specific complaint data from the UGC, highlighting the need for reliable reporting. “Public dashboards, independent audits, and clear timelines for resolving complaints are crucial,” said Mr. Anand. “Without these, students cannot trust the system.”

Learning from Earlier Models

The new national panel can draw lessons from similar organizations. University sexual harassment committees have shown that independent, transparent oversight can be effective. However, when committees operate inwardly, complaints often go unanswered, leaving students vulnerable.

Similarly, national organizations such as the National Commission for Women cannot ensure structural change in every institution. “The national monitoring committee should avoid the same trap,” Mr. Anand advised. “Real change requires independence, transparency, and clear consequences.”

What Must Happen

Experts recommend that the committee include independent members and student representatives empowered to order investigations. Universities should publicly report the number of complaints, resolution timelines, and outcomes.

Funding, accreditation, or other incentives should be tied to compliance. “This is how we move from words on paper to real change,” Mr. Anand said. “The committee can only succeed if it combines authority with visibility. Otherwise, it risks becoming a paper exercise.”

The UGC’s new regulations and the national monitoring committee represent a significant step toward safer, more equitable campuses. However, their effectiveness will ultimately depend on enforcement, transparency, and continuous oversight. The true measure of success will be seen in how students experience their campuses rather than announcements or reports.