New Delhi: The Supreme Court has stayed the University Grants Commission (UGC) (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, calling the rules that were brought to tackle caste discrimination in higher education institutions as “capable of misuse”.The stay came just days after the rules, which were notified on January 13, were challenged in the apex court, as the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) faced widespread opposition from upper caste groups who alleged that the regulations were discriminatory against them.From resignations within the BJP including office bearers in Uttar Pradesh, to protests by students across campuses and outside the UGC’s office in Delhi, the saffron party faced fire from the ‘general’ category or upper castes from which the party has drawn continued support.Sociologist Satish Deshpande, who has worked extensively on the issue of caste and education, said that the Supreme Court’s stay is “disappointing” and sends out the “wrong message”.In an interview with The Wire, Deshpande said the 2026 regulations were bound to face problems in their implementation as with any measure that goes against the power gradient of society, but that their potential for misuse, which exists with any law, cannot mean that there should be no law.“This concern of the upper caste that they might be discriminated against is the classic ‘man bites dog’ story. Yes it can happen, and occasionally does happen, but what is the frequency and what is the preponderance of events in society? What are the power equations in society – that’s what we have to consider,” he said.The widespread protests by upper caste groups have also put into question the sustainability of the BJP’s brand of Hindutva politics that is essentially Brahminical.Read edited excerpts of the interview below:How do you see the 2026 regulations that have now been stayed by the Supreme Court?I am deeply disappointed that this regulation has been stayed. I think the stay sends out the wrong message. But I was surprised that the regulation was announced in the first place. I can only hope that there will be such positive surprises in future also.The 2026 regulations publicly acknowledged that discrimination is now here to stay as a public issue. This was not the case before – until the 2010s, discrimination in higher education was never really acknowledged officially. The 2012 regulations brought it up but those regulations were largely ignored by HEIs [higher education institutions]. So there was a process of the regulations being killed by neglect. Due to pressure from the public and PILs and the courts, the current regime has thought it fit to issue regulations to acknowledge discrimination.There are certainly going to be enormous problems with implementation. With any measure that goes against the power gradient of society, there is always trouble and problems with implementation. But the step forward was the acknowledgement of the reality and presence of discrimination.Is the outpouring of upper caste anger that we saw particularly against misuse of the 2026 UGC Rules to be expected?The potential for misuse exists with any legislation.When there is a law against robbery, we don’t immediately start worrying about protecting the interests of robbers, though there is a possibility that there might be some misuse of the law. False cases of theft are sometimes put, particularly against domestic workers. But this doesn’t mean there should be no law.If you transplant this concern into other contexts, the absurdity of it being the first and primary concern becomes apparent.The language of balance is a very familiar argument and it is the recourse of the powerful. Appeals for balance between completely unequal forces is a very old argument. And in fact, the constitutional liberal idea of formal equality is also a major weapon in the hands of the powerful.The first amendment of the Indian Constitution was precisely to counter charges of reverse discrimination. This notion of equality was used to attack any kind of affirmative action or compensatory justice schemes. So this is a very old tactic. But it is true that implementation will be a challenge.This is really the new phase of social justice we’re entering now where we will be forced to deal with complex intersectionalities. There will be few cases of the ideal victim or even the perfect perpetrator, all neatly black and white, good and evil. Especially with the entry of the OBCs, the social justice struggle has entered a very challenging phase where groups that have been clubbed together under this very large and unwieldy label can be both oppressor and oppressed.This concern of the upper caste that they might be discriminated against is the classic ‘man bites dog’ story. Yes it can happen, and occasionally does happen, but what is the frequency and what is the preponderance of events in society? What are the power equations in society – that’s what we have to consider.Theoretically, the Constitution should be a sufficient condition to ensure that we live in paradise. But that does not happen, and the need for special laws is forced upon us by social conditions, which make it impossible for the vulnerable to get justice. Then special laws have also to be introduced for newly recognised crimes. Special laws are meant to strengthen existing laws. So while there is a potential for misuse, that should not be the first thing that strikes us. There also checks and balances built into the due process part of regulations.Given that the BJP has drawn its largest support from upper caste groups, how do you foresee the political implications for the party in such a scenario?This has always been the central question since the rise of Hindutva politics and its success in the past 20 years. The central question has been: Can the standard edition of Hindutva, which is essentially Brahminical, sustain an electoral balancing act which will require it to appeal to the large majority of lower castes while retaining its upper caste core?This has been handled successfully so far in electoral terms by the Modi regime, but that game plan cannot work forever. Any plan is subject to the contingencies of historical events and changes in the levels of consciousness.They have been riding two horses all this while and suddenly it’s testing time. Can this regime continue to appeal to the large masses while at the same time signalling that its heart is in the right place as far as the upper castes are concerned?The overwhelming victory of Hindutva politics in recent times makes us forget that any politics, however dominant, is still vulnerable to events and social changes which are beyond their control. For instance, the challenge of climate change or the direction that the world economy is taking are global events which change the local playing field. That’s what is happening and, in that sense, this is the implicit pressure of riding two horses at once being made explicit.