Protests have erupted across the country over the new guidelines because they are being seen as discriminatory towards general-category students and pointing fingers at upper-caste students as potential perpetrators of harassment.
Disha Wadekar attributes this backlash to misinformation. “These are civil regulations,” she said. “No equity committee has the power to incarcerate anyone.”
She said that penalties under the framework can include undertakings, apologies, transfers, suspension, termination or rustication in extreme cases.
Criminal law, she said, remains separate and requires FIRs where penal provisions are attracted.
She also rejected claims that the regulations are meant only for SC, ST or OBC communities. “Both the 2012 and 2026 regulations cover all axes of discrimination under Article 15,” she said, including gender, religion, disability and place of birth.
She further said that many of the protests were happening because people are scared about the misuse of the new guidelines. She pointed out that every law is prone to misuse, but “we are a society that believes in justice, and every law has its safeguards.”
“That doesn’t mean you do away with it,” she added.
The matter is now back before the apex court, but Wadekar said that the central issue remains unchanged.
“The regulations were never about punishment; they were about prevention,” she said.
For her, the litigation continues to raise a constitutional question: whether the right to equality in higher education can exist without enforceable institutional safeguards — or whether, without them, it remains only a promise on paper.