Why UGC Equality Regulations Are Essential: Question of Social Justice in Universities
Higher education in India is often described as a pathway to social mobility, intellectual freedom, and democratic empowerment. Universities are expected to embody the constitutional values of equality, dignity, and justice. Yet, for many research scholars from marginalized communities, the lived reality can be deeply distressing. The need for strong and effectively implemented University Grants Commission (UGC) equality regulations becomes evident when we examine experiences of caste-based discrimination, academic harassment, and institutional apathy within university systems.
In September 2013, after qualifying for the Junior Research Fellowship (JRF), I secured admission to the Ph.D. program in the Hindi Department at Banaras Hindu University (BHU), Varanasi. Having completed my postgraduate degree in the same department in 2012, I was familiar with many of the faculty members. However, what soon became apparent was the overwhelming dominance of upper-caste professors in the department. Nearly 90 per cent of the faculty belonged to socially privileged communities, with negligible representation from Other Backward Classes (OBCs) or other marginalized groups. This structural imbalance shaped the academic environment in subtle and overt ways.
For students from marginalized backgrounds, representation matters. When there are hardly any faculty members from similar social locations, research scholars often feel hesitant to share academic or personal concerns. The absence of diversity creates not only a psychological distance but also an institutional power imbalance. In such an environment, the freedom to express research interests or grievances without fear becomes severely constrained.
One of the most troubling aspects of the research process was the issue of supervision. Some professors reportedly viewed guiding students from backward or Dalit communities as beneath their status. Even when they agreed to supervise, there were instances where students were pressured to undertake research topics aligned with the supervisor’s personal networks or preferences, rather than their own academic interests. In my case, although I was interested in working on novels or short stories independently, I was assigned a research topic that combined two genres—novels and short stories—under a demanding and expansive title: “Rural and Urban Realities in the Fiction of Shivprasad Singh: Content and Form.” This topic involved studying nine novels, five of which were out of print and difficult to access.
Despite repeated requests, I received no meaningful support from my supervisor in locating these texts. The burden of arranging materials, structuring the research, and managing expectations rested entirely on me. The workload appeared disproportionate, especially when compared with topics assigned to some upper-caste scholars, whose research themes were narrower and more manageable.
Equally concerning was the alleged misuse of institutional power in matters of fellowship and academic progression.
Despite completing the required academic work—including writing two chapters as per norms—my three months of JRF fellowship were withheld. The transition from JRF to Senior Research Fellowship (SRF), which should have followed established UGC regulations, was also delayed without transparent justification. Research Progress Committee (RPC) evaluations, typically conducted every six months and were reportedly stalled for over two years. Since fellowships are often the only financial support for full-time research scholars, withholding them can cause severe economic and psychological stress.
The situation was compounded by expectations unrelated to academic work. There were pressures to perform personal and domestic tasks for the supervisor—ranging from household errands and festival preparations to proofreading personal publications and assisting in evaluation work. Such demands blur professional boundaries and violate ethical norms. Research scholars are not domestic aides; they are emerging academics engaged in intellectual labor. When academic authority is used to extract personal service, it undermines dignity and institutional integrity.
Moreover, differential treatment among students was visible. Upper-caste scholars reportedly enjoyed greater flexibility, including relaxed attendance expectations and academic support without the burden of non- academic obligations. In contrast, marginalized scholars faced stricter monitoring and greater scrutiny. Such disparities, whether systemic or individual, create an environment of alienation and reinforce social hierarchies within academic spaces.
It is important to acknowledge that not all faculty members engaged in discriminatory behaviour. A few professors demonstrated empathy and professionalism. However, isolated goodwill cannot substitute for institutional safeguards. When complaints were raised informally and later formally— including a written request for a change of supervisor—there was no transparent acknowledgement or receipt of the complaint. The absence of procedural accountability discouraged trust in the system.
These experiences highlight why UGC’s equality and anti-discrimination regulations are indispensable. The UGC has issued guidelines promoting equity in higher educational institutions, mandating the establishment of Equal Opportunity Cells, SC/ST Cells, grievance redressal mechanisms, and transparent fellowship disbursement systems. On paper, these provisions aim to ensure that no student faces discrimination on grounds of caste, community or social background.
However, the mere existence of regulations is insufficient without strict enforcement. Equality regulations are necessary for several reasons: Safeguarding Constitutional Values Indian universities function within a constitutional framework that guarantees equality before law and prohibits discrimination.
UGC regulations operationalize these principles in academic settings. Without enforcement, constitutional promises remain symbolic. Protecting Academic Freedom Research scholars must have the autonomy to pursue topics aligned with their intellectual interests. When supervisors impose topics for personal reasons or as a form of coercion, academic freedom is compromised. Clear guidelines and grievance mechanisms protect this freedom. Ensuring Financial Security Fellowships such as JRF and SRF are lifelines for scholars. Delays or arbitrary stoppages can derail academic careers. Transparent digital tracking systems and time-bound reviews can prevent misuse of power. Preventing Exploitation Explicit codes of conduct governing supervisor–scholar relationships are essential. They should prohibit personal service demands, establish professional boundaries, and define consequences for violations. Promoting Diversity and Representation. Balanced representation among faculty helps foster inclusivity.
While appointments must follow merit and reservation policies, universities should actively ensure that marginalized communities are represented in teaching and decision-making roles. Supporting Mental Health. Hostile academic environments can lead to anxiety, depression, and even extreme distress among scholars. Accessible counselling services and supportive institutional cultures are crucial for well- being.
The broader implication of such systemic issues extends beyond individual suffering.
When talented scholars feel marginalized or compelled to abandon research, the academic community loses valuable perspectives. A homogeneous faculty structure risks intellectual stagnation. Diversity enriches scholarship by bringing varied lived experiences into academic discourse.
Indian universities aspire to global recognition and improved rankings. However, global standards of excellence are inseparable from inclusivity, fairness, and ethical governance. Academic quality cannot flourish where discrimination persists. Transparency, accountability, and equity are not peripheral concerns, they are central to institutional credibility.
Conclusion
UGC equality regulations are not bureaucratic formalities but essential safeguards for justice in higher education. They protect vulnerable scholars, uphold constitutional ideals, and strengthen academic integrity. My experience during doctoral research at BHU reflects the urgent need for effective implementation of these norms. Universities must move beyond token compliance and create genuinely inclusive environments where every research scholar—regardless of caste or background— can pursue knowledge with dignity and freedom. Only when equality becomes a lived reality within campuses can Indian higher education truly fulfil its transformative promise.
