Supreme Court allows UGC to notify draft regulations addressing ragging, sexual harassment, and discrimination in higher education
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed the University Grants Commission (UGC) to notify the draft regulations 2025 which deal with ragging, sexual harassment and discrimination on the basis of caste, gender, disability, among other biases in institutions of higher learning. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh took note of a March 24 verdict, which considered the cases of suicides among students in such institutions and constituted a national task force (NTF) to address the mental health concerns of students to prevent such incidents.
"In light of this, we deem it appropriate to clarify that UGC may proceed with the finalisation of the draft regulations 2025 and may notify the same," the bench said. The regulations, the court said, as held by this court in the case of Amit Kumar (March 24 verdict) operate in addition to the NTF's recommendations.
The bench was hearing a PIL which said pending the NTF's recommendations and consideration by the top court, the petitioners or any other public spirited person should be at liberty to move an appropriate plea in the pending proceedings to suggest the suitable addition or deletion in the regulations to be notified by the UGC.
The top court said it goes without saying such suggestions will be considered.
Senior advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for the mothers of students Rohith Vemula and Payal Tadvi, who allegedly died by suicide after facing caste-based discrimination, said the UGC had merged the guidelines for sexual harassments, ragging and discrimination.
While Vemula, a PhD scholar at Hyderabad Central University died on January 17, 2016, Tadvi, a student at TN Topiwala National Medical College, died on May 22, 2019, after she was subjected to purported discrimination by three doctors in her college.
Jaising had a heated debate with solicitor general Tushar Mehta, who was appearing for the Centre and the UGC, on the "interruptions during her arguments". She said the old regulations gave a very detailed description of what was discrimination.
"All those have been done away with in the proposed new regulations," she said.
Mehta, however, said since there was a verdict of the top court by a coordinate bench on March 24, the ongoing process of the NTF which was headed by former apex court judge Justice S Ravindra Bhat, should not be disturbed.
The court said if the proposed regulations were enacted, the NTF would have an opportunity to examine them and make its own recommendations on in case of shortcomings.
The top court passed the order on an intervention application filed in a PIL filed in 2019.
The UGC was previously ordered to notify draft regulations to ensure no caste-based discrimination happened with students in the central, state, private and deemed universities and asked for data on equal opportunity cells in compliance with the UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Educational Institutions Regulations) 2012.
For real-time updates, follow our
AP SSC 10th Result 2025
Live Blog.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
2 hours ago
- Business Standard
With Trump as ally, El Salvador's President ramps up crackdown on dissent
Days before his arrest outside his daughter's house in the outskirts of San Salvador, constitutional lawyer Enrique Anaya called Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele a dictator and a despot on live TV. This week, lawyer Jaime Quintanilla stood outside a detention facility in El Salvador's capital with a box of food and clothes for his client, unsure if Anaya would ever be released. The Saturday arrest of Anaya, a fierce critic of Bukele, marks the latest move in what watchdogs describe as a wave of crackdown on dissent by the Central American leader. They say Bukele is emboldened by his alliance with US President Donald Trump, who has not only praised him but avoided criticising actions human rights defenders, international authorities and legal experts deem authoritarian. Authorities in El Salvador have targeted outspoken lawyers like Anaya, journalists investigating Bukele's alleged deals with gangs and human rights defenders calling for the end of a three-year state of emergency, which has suspended fundamental civil rights. Some say they have been forced to flee the country. They're trying to silence anyone who voices an opinion professionals, ideologues, anyone who is critical now they're jailed. Quintanilla said. It's a vendetta. Bukele's office did not respond to a request for comment. 'I don't care if you call me a dictator' Observers see a worrisome escalation by the popular president, who enjoys extremely high approval ratings due to his crackdown on the country's gangs. By suspending fundamental rights, Bukele has severely weakened gangs but also locked up 87,000 people for alleged gang ties, often with little evidence or due process. A number of those detained were also critics. Bukele and his New Ideas party have taken control of all three branches of government, stacking the country's Supreme Court with loyalists. Last year, in a move considered unconstitutional, he ran for reelection, securing a resounding victory. I don't care if you call me a dictator," Bukele said earlier this month in a speech. "Better that than seeing Salvadorans killed on the streets. In recent weeks, those who have long acted as a thorn in Bukele's side say looming threats have reached an inflection point. The crackdown comes as Bukele has garnered global attention for keeping some 200 Venezuelan deportees detained in a mega-prison built for gangs as part of an agreement with the Trump administration. 'Of course I'm scared' Anaya was detained by authorities on unproven accusations of money laundering. Prosecutors said he would be sent to relevant courts" in the coming days. Quintanilla, his lawyer, rejects the allegations, saying his arrest stems from years of vocally questioning Bukele. Quintanilla, a longtime colleague of Anaya, said he decided to represent his friend in part because many other lawyers in the country were now too afraid to show their faces. On Tuesday, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights expressed deep concern over Anaya's arrest. Anaya, 61, is a respected lawyer and commentator in El Salvador with a doctorate in constitutional law. He has criticized Bukele's crackdown on the gangs and Bukele stacking of El Salvador's high court. Last year, he was among those who unsuccessfully petitioned the country's top electoral authority to reject Bukele's re-election bid, saying it violated the constitution. Days before his arrest, Anaya railed on television against the detention of human rights lawyer Ruth Lopez, who last week shouted, They're not going to silence me, I want a public trial, as police escorted her shackled to court. Of course I'm scared, Anaya told the broadcast anchor. I think that anyone here who dares to speak out, speaks in fear. While some of Bukele's most vocal critics, like Anaya and Lopez, have been publicly detained, other human rights defenders have quietly slipped out of the country, hoping to seek asylum elsewhere in the region. They declined to comment or be identified out of fear that they would be targeted even outside El Salvador. Fear and an ally in Trump Last month, a protest outside of Bukele's house was violently quashed by police and some of the protesters arrested. He also ordered the arrest of the heads of local bus companies for defying his order to offer free transport while a major highway was blocked. In late May, El Salvador's Congress passed a foreign agents law, championed by the populist president. It resembles legislation implemented by governments in Nicaragua, Venezuela, Russia, Belarus and China to silence and criminalise dissent by exerting pressure on organisations that rely on overseas funding. Veronica Reyna, a human rights coordinator for the Salvadoran nonprofit Servicio Social Pasionista, said police cars now regularly wait outside her group's offices as a lingering threat. It's been little-by-little, Reyna said. Since Trump came to power, we've seen (Bukele) feel like there's no government that's going to strongly criticise him or try to stop him. Trump's influence extends beyond his vocal backing of Bukele, with his administration pushing legal boundaries to push his agenda, Reyna, other human rights defenders and journalists said. The US Embassy in El Salvador, which once regularly denounced the government's actions, has remained silent throughout the arrests and lingering threats. It did not respond to a request for comment. In its final year, the Biden administration, too, dialled back its criticism of the Bukele government as El Salvador's government helped slow migration north in the lead up to the 2024 election. On Tuesday, Quintanilla visited Anaya in detention for the first time since his arrest while being watched by police officers. Despite the detention, neither Anaya nor Quintanilla have been officially informed of the charges. Quintanilla worries that authorities will use wide ranging powers granted to Bukele by the state of emergency to keep him imprisoned indefinitely. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Hans India
2 hours ago
- Hans India
SC judge recuses from hearing transfer petition of Congress MLA Rajendra Bharti
New Delhi: A Supreme Court judge on Thursday recused himself from hearing a plea filed by Madhya Pradesh Congress MLA Rajendra Bharti seeking transfer of a criminal case outside the state. After Justice Manmohan withdrew himself from hearing, the bench headed by Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra referred the transfer petition to the Chief Justice of India (CJI), who is the master of roster, for listing the matter before a different bench. In the meantime, the bench ordered extension of the interim order passed in the petition seeking transfer of the alleged cheating case outside Madhya Pradesh. In February this year, the apex court stayed the proceedings pending before the Additional Sessions Judge in Gwalior, observing that there was enough material placed on record before the trial court containing an allegation that the defence witnesses were sought to be intimidated. "The trial court should have also taken appropriate action on the basis of the material. (W)hen we made repeated queries to the learned AAG (Additional Advocate General) and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State (of Madhya Pradesh), they have no answer to the question of what inquiry or investigation the state has made on the basis of the allegations made by the petitioner (Rajendra Bharti)," it said. In its order, the Supreme Court had stressed the duty of the state machinery to ensure that a fair trial is conducted. "We must record that it is the duty of the State to ensure that a fair trial is conducted. Fair trial means that full opportunity is granted in accordance with law to the accused to defend himself," it had said. After the top court's observations, a committee of three police officials was constituted to inquire into the allegations of intimidation of defence witnesses. However, the Supreme Court, in an order passed in April this year, said that "proper investigation has not been made" into the allegations of putting pressure on the defence witnesses. "We expected the officers appointed by the State to look into each and every allegation made by the petitioner as well as by the witnesses and record findings. It is the duty of the State to ensure that there is a fair trial, which is an essential part of the rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India." Listing the matter for further hearing on May 16, the apex court told the state officials to carry out a "better investigation" and called for a report within one month. In the 2023 Madhya Pradesh Assembly polls, Rajendra Bharti won the Datia seat of Gwalior-Chambal region, defeating senior BJP leader Narottam Mishra, who held the portfolio of Home Minister in the Shivraj Singh Chouhan government.
Hans India
4 hours ago
- Hans India
SC bail to man booked for inter-faith marriage
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has granted bail to a man who was booked by the Uttarakhand Police under the anti-conversion law for marrying a woman of another faith. In February this year, the Uttarakhand High Court had refused to enlarge the accused Aman Siddiqui alias Aman Chaudhary on bail, prompting him to file an appeal before the top court. An FIR was lodged with Rudrapur Police Station of Udham Singh Nagar district against the appellant under the Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2018 and Sections 318(4) and 319 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sahita, 2023. The appellant's counsel contended that a frivolous complaint was lodged since the accused married a woman who follows a different faith. Further, it was submitted that the marriage between the parties was an arranged marriage, and the families of both sides voluntarily decided to arrange the marriage of the appellant with the woman. The FIR was registered soon after certain persons and organisations objected to the inter-faith marriage. Although the police filed a charge sheet against the appellant, he remained in jail for nearly six months. In its judgement, the apex court observed that the respondent state government cannot have any objection to the appellant and his wife residing together inasmuch as they have been married as per the wishes of their respective parents and families. It clarified that the pendency of the criminal proceeding against the appellant would not come in the way of him and his wife residing together on their own volition. 'In the circumstances, we find that this is an appropriate case where the relief of bail ought to be granted to the appellant herein,' a bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Satish Chand Sharma ordered. Allowing the appeal, the Justice Nagarathna-led Bench ordered the appellant to be produced before the trial court concerned as early as possible, which will release him on bail, subject to such conditions as the trial court may deem appropriate to impose to ensure his presence in the criminal case. It also directed the appellant to extend 'complete cooperation' in the ensuing trial and not to misuse his liberty. 'Any infraction of the conditions shall entail cancellation of bail granted to the appellant,' the top court cautioned.
