Mandatory Establishment and Scope
Regulation no. 5(1) provides for the mandatory establishment of equal opportunity centre (EOC) in every HEI.
5. Equal Opportunity Centre:
(1) Every HEI shall establish an Equal Opportunity Centre to oversee the effective implementation of policies and programmes for disadvantaged groups; to provide guidance and counselling regarding academic, financial, social, and other matters; and to enhance the diversity within the campus.
Provided that if a college does not have at least five faculty members to establish the Equal Opportunity Centre, the functions of the Equal Opportunity Centre of the college shall be performed by the Equal Opportunity Centre of the university to which the college is affiliated.
This Sub-Regulation (1) of Regulation 5 mandates that every higher education institution (HEI) must set up an Equal Opportunity Centre (EOC). The centre’s purpose is threefold: managing policies for disadvantaged groups, providing counseling on academic or financial issues, and increasing campus diversity. According to the proviso of the regulation, if a college has fewer than five faculty members, it does not need its own centre; instead, the university it is affiliated with will perform these functions for them. This provision does not provide for any kind of facility to general category students, thereby violating principle of equality before law. Also promoting bias of the EOC against the general category students. There is no equality for all students apart from their identities dealt under the UGC Equity Regulations of 2026.
External Networking
Sub-Regulation no. (2) of Regulation no. 5 of the UGC Equity Regulations of 2026 provides for external networking by EOC. The provision reads as follows:
(2) The Centre shall establish coordination with civil society, local media, police, district administration, non-government organizations working in the field, faculty members, staff, and parents to realise the objective of these regulations.
This sub-regultion requires the centre to look outside the university and coordinate with various social and administrative bodies. This includes civil society, local news media, the police, and district officials, as well as parents and non-government organizations. This ensures that the implementation of these rules is not just internal but involves the local community and law enforcement. But there is no provision for assessment of this external networking either by universities or by UGC itself.
There should be a framework of involving all parents for working of these regulations, but no such clear framework is present in this. This is enough to create confusion in EOC members regarding involvement of parents, teachers, staff, police officers and administrative officers of general category or societies, NGOs, media working for general category, and in turn EOC’s will not involve these entities of society for implementation of these regulations. This is indirectly dividing the campus in general and reserved categories, and ultimately this divide will spread in society. This is harmful for social fabric of the nation.
Legal Coordination
Legal coordination is provided under Sub-Regulation (3) of Regulation 5 as follows:
(3) The Equal Opportunity Centre shall coordinate with the District Legal Services Authority and the State Legal Services Authority concerned to achieve the objectives of these regulations in general and to provide legal aid in deserving cases.
The centre must specifically link up with District and State Legal Services Authorities. The goal here is to ensure that the objectives of the regulations are met through legal channels and, most importantly, to provide free legal aid to students from disadvantaged groups in cases where it is deemed necessary. But there is no provision that District and State Legal Services Authorities shall also provide legal assistance to general category student, against whom any complaint has been placed on account of mere doubt of implicit discrimination. No right is specified to represent the case of the general category student, specifically male student. This may lead to drop out of general category student, who get their education on basis of their hard-work and merit and not on basis of certain quota assigned on the basis of caste or religion.
Appointment of the Coordinator
Appointment of the Coordinator is provided under Sub-Regulation (4) of Regulation 5 as follows:
(4) The Executive Council or the Governing Body or the Management Committee of the Higher Education Institution, as the case may be, shall nominate a regular professor or a senior faculty member who has an innate interest in the welfare of disadvantaged social groups as Coordinator of the centre.
The highest governing body of the institution, like the Executive Council, must choose a regular professor or senior faculty member to be the Coordinator of the centre. The regulation specifies that this person should have a natural or “innate” interest in the welfare of disadvantaged groups, ensuring the leadership is personally committed to the cause. There is no criterion specified to check the innate interest of the faculty member in the said cause. This may be simply interpreted as the appointment of a professor for SC, ST or OBC category, thereby reducing representation of general category faculty members in resolving the actual matters of students. This may increase caste-based nexus in the campus and there by cause the divide of the faculty members. Ultimately divided teachers, who are having influence on society, will divide the society. If you are not understanding the dangers of divided society, then you must read history of freedom struggle since 1857 and know the British Colonial Policy of Divide and Rule.
Creation of the Equity Committee
Creation of the Equity Committee is provided under Sub-Regulation (5) of Regulation 5 as follows:
(5) The Equal Opportunity Centre shall have an Equity Committee constituted by the Head of the Institution to manage the functioning of the Centre and to enquire into discrimination complaints.
Under this Sub-regulation, the head of the HEI must form a specific “Equity Committee.” This body is tasked with two primary roles: managing how the Equal Opportunity Centre functions day-to-day and conducting formal enquiries whenever a complaint of discrimination is filed. No rule is again provided for representation of general category staff or faculty member. Even it is not clear on representation of highly disadvantaged classes in this committee.
Composition of the Equity Committee
Composition of the Equity Committee is provided under Sub-Regulation (5) of Regulation 5 as follows:
(6) The composition of the Equity Committee shall be the following:
i. The Head of the Institution shall be the ex-officio Chairperson
ii. Three Professors/Senior Faculty Members of the HEI, as Members
iii. One Staff Member, other than a teacher, of the HEI, as a Member
iv. Two representatives from civil society having relevant experience, as Members
v. Two student representatives, to be nominated based on academic merit/excellence in sports/performance in co-curricular activities, as Special Invitees.
vi. The Coordinator of the Equal Opportunity Centre shall act as the ex-officio Member Secretary
This Regulation breaks down the exact membership of the committee:
(i) The Head of the Institution (Vice-Chancellor or Principal) serves as the Chairperson.
(ii) Three senior faculty members are appointed as Members.
(iii) One non-teaching staff member is included as a Member.
(iv) Two people from civil society with relevant experience are brought in as Members.
(v) Two students are added as “Special Invitees” based on their academic or extra-curricular excellence.
(vi) The EOC Coordinator serves as the Member Secretary to handle the paperwork and meetings.
As there is specific remark regarding the representation for general category in this equity committee, there will be high chances of biasness in working of the committee in resolving the complaints of discrimination. The campus politics will increase the fake cases provoked by staff or faculty members against the students who are not at all protected by these regulations. There are lot of cases filed against general category person mere on provocation by influential person. Our Hon’ble Prime Minister is saying repeatedly that this nation belongs to Buddha, but the policies are not at all showing equity as defined by Buddha. In history of past 3 millennial, Buddha was the one who actually believed in hard work over privileges assigned to a person due to his birth and identity. Such type of regulations are against the teachings of Buddha. To attain his liberation, even Buddha left his princely adobe and wondered like a common man in hunt of knowledge.
Mandatory Representation
Mandatory Representation is provided under Sub-Regulation (5) of Regulation 5 as follows:
(7) The Committee must have representation of Other Backward Classes, Persons with Disabilities, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and women.
This clause ensures that the committee is not homogeneous. It must include representatives from Other Backward Classes (OBC), Persons with Disabilities (PwD), Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and women. Although the regulations provide for prohibition of discrimination of EWS, but there is no mandatory clause for representation of EWS from general category. This is nothing but creating bias against the upper caste students, for the acts which they have not done. All the stories of 5000 years of discrimination are yet in doubt of false propaganda. The deprived class is not even having any sufficient proof to claim this age old discrimination.
Terms of Office
Terms of Office is provided under Sub-Regulation (5) of Regulation 5 as follows:
(8) The term of the members shall be for two years, and the term of the special invitees shall be one year.
The regular members of the committee are appointed for a period of two years. However, the student representatives who are special invitees, shall serve for only one year. It is not specified anywhere that student from general category may become member of the committee.
Meeting Requirements and Quorum
Meeting Requirements and Quorum are provided under Sub-Regulation (5) of Regulation 5 as follows:
(9) The Committee shall meet at least twice in a year, and the quorum for the meeting, including the Chairperson, but excluding the special invitee, shall be four. The committee, in its bi-annual meetings, shall review the action taken on the matters received in the previous 6 months, including the matters referred by it to other committees, constituted under any other regulations of the UGC or under any other law for the time being in force.
The committee is required to meet at least twice every year. For a meeting to be valid, at least four members i.e. including the Chairperson but excluding the students, must be present. In these meetings, they must review all complaints and actions taken over the previous six months, including cases sent to other legal or UGC committees. As the committee is for student well fare, the frequency of meetings can be increased, to resolve the matters within campus as fast as possible. But as only meetings are mandatory, the persons appointed will not call for any other meeting of the committee for discussion of the pending matters of discrimination. This delay will cause delay in redressal of the complaints. The delay in false cases, which will be increased due to these highly biased regulations, will destroy the dignity of the student against whom the complaint is raised and the eventually will destroy his/her life. This may cause suicides of falsely accused general category students, drop out of intelligent students and even frauds and extortions in the name of settlements.
You can send a representation to repeal these regulations by clicking the button below
Share this article and send the email.