Resignation of Bareilly City Magistrate Brings Equity Cell Regulations Back Into Focus
January 27, 2026
Table of Contents
The recent resignation of Bareilly City Magistrate Alankar Agnihotri has reignited a heated debate over the University Grants Commission’s (UGC) newly introduced regulations aimed at curbing discrimination in higher education institutions.
Following his resignation, the Uttar Pradesh government ordered disciplinary action against the officer. However, it was Agnihotri’s stated reasons for stepping down that drew wider public attention. Speaking to reporters, he alleged that a “campaign against Brahmins” was underway in the state. He also strongly criticized the UGC’s new rules, claiming they unfairly target students from the general category.
According to Agnihotri, the regulations effectively portray general category students as potential offenders, calling the move “anti-general category.” His remarks quickly went viral on social media, sparking intense reactions and protests from several groups.
What Are the New UGC Rules?
On January 13, 2026, the UGC notified the University Grants Commission Regulations, 2026, with the stated objective of eliminating discrimination in higher education institutions and promoting equality on campuses.
Under the new rules, all higher education institutions—both public and private—are required to establish an Equity Cell. This body will function as a grievance redressal mechanism. Any student who believes they have faced discrimination can file a complaint with the cell, which will investigate the matter and recommend action to the institution.
The regulations aim to prevent discrimination based on religion, caste, gender, place of birth, disability, and other factors. Special emphasis has been placed on protecting students from Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), Other Backward Classes (OBC), Economically Weaker Sections (EWS), persons with disabilities, and women.
Why Is There Opposition?
The core of the controversy lies in the expanded definition of caste-based discrimination. Earlier drafts of the regulation covered only SC and ST communities. The final notification, however, includes OBCs within its scope as well.
Critics argue that this expansion could lead to misuse of the law, allowing false complaints against students and faculty from the general category. They fear that even unproven allegations could damage academic careers and reputations.
Another point of contention is the composition of the Equity Committee. The rules mandate representation from SC, ST, OBC, persons with disabilities, and women—but make no explicit mention of representation from the general category. Opponents claim this omission raises concerns about fairness and impartiality in investigations.
Government and Political Responses
The government has defended the move, stating that OBC students also face discrimination in educational institutions and therefore require similar legal protection. The inclusion of OBCs was reportedly based on recommendations made by a parliamentary committee on education headed by Congress leader Digvijaya Singh.
Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Priyanka Chaturvedi questioned the implementation framework of the regulation. While acknowledging that caste discrimination on campuses is unacceptable, she raised concerns about due process, clarity in defining discrimination, and safeguards against false complaints. She urged the UGC to either withdraw the notification or introduce necessary amendments.
On the other hand, BJP MP Nishikant Dubey came out in support of the regulations. He said the rules are being misunderstood and emphasized that Article 14 of the Constitution guarantees equality before the law for all citizens. According to him, the UGC regulations apply equally to all categories, including the general category, and are not politically motivated.
What Lies Ahead?
While the UGC maintains that the regulations are meant to ensure a safer and more inclusive academic environment, the backlash suggests a growing trust deficit over how the rules will be enforced. With protests announced by organizations such as the Karni Sena and continued debate on social media, the controversy shows no signs of dying down soon.
Whether the UGC chooses to clarify, amend, or stand firm on its new rules will likely shape the future of campus governance and social harmony in India’s higher education system.
