At a time when the University Grants Commission equity regulations have created palpable unease among the so-called upper castes and a sense of disquiet in the BJP in poll-bound Uttar Pradesh, the Union government told the Supreme Court Thursday it was planning to constitute a committee to reconsider the regulations. The top court had stayed the regulations earlier this year after petitions questioned their neutrality.“The government is contemplating appointing a committee,” Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta told a three-judge Bench presided over by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant.AdvertisementThe Solicitor General said this after the Bench, also comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V S Mohana, told the government to consider having a relook at the provisions. “Why don’t you revisit these regulations so that the next generation is taken care of? They should protect the interest of every student,” the CJI said.The critics of the UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, are opposed to Regulation 3(1)(c) that defines caste-based discrimination as discrimination based on caste or tribe against members of the Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), and Other Backward Classes (OBCs). The petitioners have argued that this excludes general category students and faculty from specific protection against caste-based discrimination. At the same time, the regulations’ broader definition of “discrimination” covers unfair or differential treatment on the ground of caste against any stakeholder.Read | UGC rules on caste discrimination: Why BJP government is ‘reconsidering’ its standThe regulations sparked protests earlier this year, with groups representing “upper caste” interests alleging they could be used to “harass” general category students and create “caste divisions”. Several BJP office-bearers in UP subsequently resigned in protest. On January 29, the Supreme Court stayed the regulations, saying the framework was “prima facie vague”, could have “very sweeping consequences”, and may end up dividing society with a “dangerous impact”.AdvertisementOver the months, the Modi government has sought to buy time to wriggle out of a situation that has led to signs of anger among the “upper castes”, the party’s core constituency since 1989, over potential “misuse” of the regulations. The BJP also faces a tight balancing act as the combined demographic weight of the OBCs, SCs, and STs far exceeds these so-called upper castes. In the 2024 Lok Sabha polls, the BJP’s Lok Sabha tally dipped from 303 to 240, and one of the reasons cited was the Opposition’s campaign that the ruling party would amend the Constitution and end reservation if it returned to power with a stronger mandate. The party took an especially major hit in Uttar Pradesh.Along with UP, Punjab is also going to polls early next year. Punjab has the highest share of SC population in the country, a large number of OBCs, and politically influential groups of the general category like in UP.Also Read | From definitions to action, how 2012 UGC equity guidelines vary from 2026 regulationsRipples within BJPThe disquiet in the ranks of UP BJP played out on November 1 when a BJP corporator in Prayagraj allegedly slapped a man from the Brahmin community over a question the latter posed to Deputy CM Keshav Prasad Maurya on the UGC regulations. The corporator is also a Brahmin. Later, local BJP MLA Harsh Vardhan Bajpai posted on X that “raising questions over the UGC (reservation) is a right of every Brahmin”.At an organisational meeting in Varanasi last month, a functionary from the BJP’s national team called the UGC issue a “do dhaari talwar” (double-edged sword) and advised party workers to avoid commenting on it.Though BJP leaders admit they are walking a tightrope, publicly they say that the differences will be amicably resolved before the elections. They insist that the “upper castes” will not vote for the Opposition Samajwadi Party (SP), which has widened its PDA (Picchda, Dalit, Alpsankhyak) pitch to insist that the P also stands for Pandits and A for Agarwals. The SP has been insinuating that the Uttar Pradesh government under Thakur rule — CM Yogi Adityanath is from the community — has been “unfair” to Brahmins.“Everything will be fine by the time of elections,” said the BJP’s Sultanpur Sadar MLA Raj Prasad Upadhyay. “People discuss the issue, but they also assure us that they will stay with the BJP. There is no problem because the BJP’s double-engine government has not done any such thing where one can make allegations of caste or religion-based discrimination.”Shahabad MLA and UP Minister of State for Higher Education Rajni Tiwari said, “There was discontent earlier, but there is no negativity on the ground at present. People calmed down after the court’s decision (the Supreme Court stayed the equity regulations in January).”The minister said people had earlier expressed their displeasure over the UGC regulations, adding, “There are no complaints now. I don’t see any impact on the ground.”Dhaurahra MLA Vinod Shankar Awasthi said Brahmins would not vote for the SP. “Adverse impact will be only in these seats where MLAs are inactive on the ground. Otherwise, UGC is not an issue,” he said.you may likeAnother Brahmin MLA of the party, requesting anonymity, said, “The intellectual class understands that UGC is a subject related to the Central government and the Yogi Adityanath government has no role in it. So, the impact is unlikely in the 2027 Assembly elections. The Central government will certainly find some solution before the 2029 Lok Sabha elections.”“The Supreme Court has stayed the new UGC equity regulations. We will wait for and respect the SC’s decision,” said the BJP’s Bithoor MLA Abhijit Singh Sanga.Ahead of the RSS’s three-day Akhil Bharatiya Karyakari Mandal meeting in Indore this week, the Sangh’s national publicity in-charge Sunil Ambekar addressed the issue, saying, “The RSS has made its position clear that the circular related to UGC was unbalanced. The attention was drawn towards it, and the government and UGC both took note of that. The court has put the regulations on hold, and the matter is sub judice. We believe that whatever decision is taken going forward must be balanced. The government must ensure this and the matter should also be pursued in the same direction before the court.”