UGC's Section 3(c) Sparks Legal Clash: SC Stays New Rules

• UGC's proposed Section 3(c) of the 2026 Regulations broadens the definition of caste-based discrimination, including any insult or mental harassment if the complainant feels so.
• This section directly conflicts with two High Court decisions stating that abuse must be proven caste-based, not just a personal dispute, to fall under the SC-ST Act.
• The Supreme Court, led by CJI Suryakant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, expressed concern over the vagueness of Section 3(c) and its potential for misuse and 'reverse discrimination'.
• The Court acknowledged the reality of caste discrimination on campuses (e.g., Rohit Vemula, Payal Tadvi cases) but emphasized that solutions must be clear and legally sound, not based on emotion.
• The Supreme Court used Article 142 to impose an interim stay on the 2026 rules on January 29, 2026, ordering the continuation of the old 2012 rules, with the next hearing on March 19.

Why It Matters: Supreme Court stayed UGC's new rules due to vague Section 3(c), fearing misuse and clash with High Court rulings.