The University Grants Commission is a regulatory body under India’s Education Ministry that is responsible for coordinating and maintaining standards in higher education. The University Grants Commission Equity Regulations, 2026, aim to address discrimination and promote the inclusion of lower castes, tribes, people with disabilities, those who are economically disadvantaged, and other marginalized groups in higher education.

The regulations quickly triggered controversy.

Students, faculty and civil society groups criticized them, largely around concerns about potential discrimination against students and the absence of certain procedural safeguards. Yet, even as the debate intensified, there was little public discussion about the lack of explicit mention of transgender students in the framework. The omission, though not central to the overall controversy, raised questions among some advocates about the scope of the regulations and who they ultimately protect.

According to the All India Survey on Higher Education, trans student enrollment in universities and colleges rose from 302 in the 2020-2021 academic year to 1,448 in the 2022-2023 academic year, reflecting a sharp increase but still representing a very small share of India’s overall higher education population.

The Supreme Court in its 2024 National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India affirmed trans people are entitled to full constitutional protection, including equality, dignity and access to education, and directed governments to treat them as a socially and educationally disadvantaged group eligible for quota-based protections in education and public employment. The ruling recognized gender identity as integral to personal autonomy and held that discrimination on this ground violates fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, 16, and 21. 

Against this legal backdrop, the regulations do not explicitly reference trans students, an omission that has drawn attention in discussions on how constitutional protections are implemented within higher education institutions.

In the Indian constitutional framework, Articles 14, 15, 16, and 21 collectively form the foundation of equality and personal liberty. 

Article 14 guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of laws; Article 15 prohibits discrimination on grounds such as religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth; Article 16 ensures equality of opportunity in public employment; and Article 21 protects the right to life and personal liberty, which courts have interpreted to include dignity, autonomy, and access to education. These provisions underpin judicial recognition of protections for marginalized communities, including trans people, within public institutions.

Judicial and policy frameworks in India have increasingly recognized the need for institutional support for trans students, underscoring the contrast with the absence of explicit mention in the University Grants Commission Equity Regulations, 2026, regulations. 

The Madras High Court has directed educational institutions to implement measures such as gender-neutral restrooms, mechanisms to update name and gender in official records, inclusion of trans identities in application forms and the appointment of LGBTQ-inclusive counselors for grievance redressal alongside enforcement of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act and its Rules. 

Policy instruments have echoed similar priorities. 

The National Youth Policy 2014 acknowledged trans youth as a group facing social stigma and called for targeted interventions, while the National Education Policy 2020 emphasized reducing dropout rates and ensuring equitable access to education. The University Grants Commission itself has previously indicated that universities should adopt affirmative steps and institution-specific plans to support trans people, making their absence from the current regulatory text more pronounced.

Research and policy analyses have consistently documented structural barriers faced by trans students in India’s education system. The Center for Development Policy and Practices and other academic studies note that discrimination, bullying, and the absence of gender-sensitive infrastructure contribute to high dropout risks among trans students in both school and higher education. Census data underscore this disparity. 

The 2011 Census recorded a literacy rate of about 56.1 percent among trans people, significantly lower than the national average of roughly 74 percent, reflecting long-standing barriers to access and retention in formal education.

The controversy intensified after the Supreme Court on Jan. 29 stayed the implementation of the University Grants Commission Equity Regulations, 2026, and agreed to examine their constitutional validity. 

A bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant observed the regulations raised serious legal questions, including concerns that some provisions appeared vague and potentially open to misuse, and sought responses from the federal government and the University Grants Commission. The court directed that the earlier 2012 anti-discrimination framework would remain in force in the interim and listed the matter for further hearing, signalling the need for detailed judicial scrutiny.

Public and political reactions followed, with student groups, academics, and political actors divided over the stay and the broader policy direction. The federal government, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, maintained the regulations were intended to address caste-based discrimination and strengthen accountability within higher education institutions even as debate intensified nationally.

The regulations go beyond paperwork. They require universities to create on-campus equity monitoring teams and designated officers responsible for identifying incidents of discrimination, receiving complaints and reporting them to institutional committees for action. However, while the framework spells out protections for certain caste and social categories, it does not explicitly include trans students within this structure. In practice, that absence could leave uncertainty about whether routine monitoring, reporting and grievance mechanisms would extend to them with the same clarity, particularly in campuses where implementation already varies widely.

The regulations also prescribe penalties for faculty and staff found responsible for discrimination, including suspension, withholding of promotions, or termination of service following institutional inquiry. For students, disciplinary action may range from warnings to suspension depending on the severity of the misconduct. Where an incident amounts to a violation of existing statutory or criminal law, institutions are required to refer the matter to law enforcement authorities, placing responsibility on universities to escalate cases beyond internal mechanisms when warranted.

The regulations do not create new criminal offences but require institutions to escalate cases to law enforcement when conduct violates existing statutes. These may include the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, relevant provisions of the country’s penal code, such as criminal intimidation, assault or sexual harassment, disability rights protections, workplace harassment laws, and statutes addressing campus hazing. The framework is therefore stringent: campus inquiries can lead to disciplinary action, and, where legal thresholds are met, mandatory reporting to police. In the absence of explicit mention of trans students within the framework, questions remain about how individuals from the community would navigate complaint systems, interact with authorities, and access consistent institutional protections under these processes.

The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is among India’s strictest anti-discrimination criminal laws and applies to students, staff and any individual accused of caste-based offences. It criminalizes acts such as intentional insults or humiliation, social exclusion, threats, physical assault and other forms of harassment directed at members of specific castes or tribes. Offenses under the law can lead to arrest, non-bailable charges in several categories, and imprisonment that may extend from months to years depending on the severity of the conduct, along with fines. The law also restricts anticipatory bail in many cases and mandates prompt registration of complaints, which is why it is often viewed as a powerful legal safeguard for marginalized communities while also being regarded by some as carrying serious legal consequences once invoked.

Nishikant Dubey, a member of India’s ruling Bharatiya Jana Party, welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision to stay the regulations, stating the judges had acted appropriately and that the matter required careful legal scrutiny. Indrani Chakraborty, an LGBTQ rights activist and mother of a trans woman, told the Washington Blade the University Grants Commission Equity Regulations, 2026, is a welcome step toward supporting vulnerable students.

“The saddest part is that the transgender community is excluded which is very unfair,” said Chakraborty. “Presently, the transgender community is the most vulnerable and not mentioning the community in the act. I regard it as the biggest discrimination and will never help in changing the scenario of the transgender students.”

Chakraborty told the Blade the trans community, as a minority facing persistent social stigma and taboo, is often overlooked and must repeatedly advocate even for basic rights.

“I believe that grouping of individuals under caste, religion, gender, etc., is the base of discrimination. Personally, I disagree with naming and tagging any individual. Equity over equality is the need now for the most vulnerable. And the transgender community faces discrimination the most. Discrimination against any individual in educational institutions needs immediate attention and preventive measures should be necessarily implemented.”

Chakraborty said the absence of explicit inclusion of trans students amounts to discrimination, undermining equality in education and violating human dignity.

Ankit Bhupatani, a global diversity, equity and inclusion leader and LGBTQ activist, told the Blade that debate around the University Grants Commission Equity Regulations, 2026, has largely centered on concerns raised by relatively privileged students, particularly those in the unreserved category, while communities with limited visibility in higher education have received far less attention. Bhupatani also referenced the All India Survey on Higher Education statistics.

“According to Queerbeat, more than half of these 1,448 students are clustered in a few states and several large states still report almost no transgender students at all. Any serious equity regime has to guard every individual, including upper-caste students who are unfairly targeted or stereotyped , but the public conversation cannot pretend this tiny, highly vulnerable group does not exist,” said Bhupatani. “When outrage dominates headlines and the most marginalized are barely mentioned, the word ‘equity’ starts to lose meaning.”

Bhupatani told the Blade that the University Grants Commission Equity Regulations, 2026, define gender to include the “third gender” and prohibit discrimination on that basis, but then repeatedly identify lower castes, tribes, economically disadvantaged groups, people with disabilities, and women as specific groups, while trans students and teachers are not explicitly listed. Bhupatani said that for a young trans person reading the regulations, the message can feel indirect — that others are clearly recognized while their protections depend on interpretation. He added that explicitly naming trans people as a protected group would not dilute safeguards for others, but would instead ensure those already facing stigma are not left to seek recognition case by case.

“Transgender people sit at the intersection of legal vulnerability and social prejudice, so if they are not named and centered in large regulatory exercises, they quickly disappear from view,” said Bhupatani. “Campus rules need to start with a simple moral intuition. No one, whether Dalit or Brahmin, trans or cis, rich or poor, should be harassed, excluded or denied opportunity because of who they are. The University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026 already move in this direction by defining discrimination broadly for all students and staff and by listing grounds such as caste, gender, religion, disability, and place of birth. That universal shift is essential.”

Bhupatani said a fair equity framework should operate on two levels. First, it must guarantee that any individual, regardless of background, can seek redress if treated unfairly. Second, it should explicitly identify groups that face entrenched barriers — including lower castes and tribes, people with disabilities, and trans people — and build specific safeguards for them. He added that concerns about misuse could be addressed through clearer definitions, transparent procedures, trained inquiry committees, representation from diverse groups, and meaningful penalties for false or malicious complaints.

Kalki Subramaniam, a trans activist and artist, told the Blade that trans students face layered vulnerabilities — including social stigma, harassment, and systemic neglect — that often go unaddressed on campuses. When policies do not explicitly name them, she said, it signals that their struggles are not seen as warranting recognition, reinforcing isolation, and undermining their ability to access safe and dignified education.

“I have faced this and I really do not want this generation of transgender students to go through the same kind of exclusion and treatment,” said Subramaniam. “If the government truly believes in inclusive education, transgender students must be explicitly recognised in every policy conversation. Otherwise, we remain erased from the very spaces that claim to be suitable. We will certainly urge the government to ease and prioritise education for transgender community students.”

Subramaniam said limiting protections primarily to caste categories reflects a narrow approach to justice, noting that discrimination on campuses can also be shaped by gender, class, disability, and sexuality. She said a more expansive framework would protect any student facing discrimination, regardless of identity, and emphasized that equity must operate universally for campuses to function as spaces of learning rather than exclusion.

The Indian government on Dec. 15 informed parliament that only one transgender person in Jammu and Kashmir has been recorded as a beneficiary under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana since the housing program was launched a decade ago. 

PMAY is a federal government program aimed at expanding access to affordable housing for low- and middle-income households, including through credit-linked subsidies. The parliamentary disclosure indicates that trans beneficiaries have been virtually absent from the program’s records in the union territory, despite official guidelines listing trans people as a priority category.

In a written reply to a question in the upper house of parliament, known as the Rajya Sabha, the Housing and Urban Affairs Ministry said Jammu and Kashmir recorded zero trans beneficiaries under the program in each financial year from 2020–2021 through 2025–2026, with the cumulative total since inception remaining at one.

The Indian government launched the program on June 25, 2015, and the Housing and Urban Affairs Ministry implemented it.

The parliamentary reply came in response to a question on whether trans people are being included under the housing scheme and what steps have been taken to address barriers to access. The ministry said both PMAY and its successor, PMAY 2.0, are demand-driven programs, with responsibility for identifying and selecting beneficiaries resting with state and regional governments.

The ministry said the program lists trans people as a priority group, alongside widows, single women, people with disabilities, senior citizens, and other socially disadvantaged categories. It added that actual implementation depends on housing proposals and beneficiary lists submitted by state and regional governments.

According to figures the Indian government cited, a total of 809 trans beneficiaries have been recorded under PMAY and its successor, PMAY 2.0, since the programs were launched, with the vast majority concentrated in a small number of states. The southern state of Tamil Nadu accounts for 222 beneficiaries, followed by Andhra Pradesh with 186, and Odisha with 101. By contrast, several other states and federally administered regions, including Jammu and Kashmir, have reported either negligible or no coverage. India is administratively divided into 28 states and eight federally governed territories.

According to India’s 2011 national Census, Jammu and Kashmir recorded 4,137 trans residents. The same census counted 487,803 trans people nationwide, providing the most recent official population baseline for the community in India.

The ministry also said it has not conducted a specific survey to assess barriers faced by trans communities in accessing the scheme’s benefits. Instead, it said lessons from earlier implementation phases informed the design of the second phase of the program, launched on Sept. 1, 2024, which aims to support an additional 10 million urban beneficiaries over the next five years.

The parliamentary reply reveals an even more severe gap in Ladakh, India’s northernmost federally governed territory bordering China and Pakistan-administered areas and considered strategically critical to national security. 

Official records show that Ladakh has not reported a single trans beneficiary under the housing scheme, either in recent years or cumulatively since the program began, with zero coverage recorded across all financial years listed in the Annexure. By comparison, Ladakh’s trans population stands at six, according to a written submission made to the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir in 2024.

Despite trans people being listed as a priority group in the scheme’s guidelines, the federal government said that as of November 2025 it had sanctioned more than 12.2 million homes nationwide under both versions of the program, with over 9.6 million homes completed and delivered. At the same time, data from Jammu and Kashmir, Ladakh, and several other regions show little to no recorded housing uptake by trans beneficiaries.

Speaking with the Washington Blade, Meera Parida, a trans activist, former member of the National Council for Transgender Persons in India’s eastern zone, and a former state advisor under the housing and urban development department, said the 2011 Census does not reflect the full size of India’s trans population, noting that public recognition and self-identification were far more limited at the time. She pointed to later government data collection efforts, including the National Portal for Transgender Persons that the Social Justice and Empowerment Ministry launched in 2020, as evidence that official counts have expanded beyond what was captured in the last Census.

“I am surprised that around the country only over 800 people benefited from the scheme, because most of the transgender population is from socially backward classes,” said Parida. “So they do not have a house and no family. Five years have passed since the NALSA judgment and the Transgender Protection Act; even after all these, if only over 800 transgender persons got home, that is a sad situation.”

Parida said that Prime Minister Narendra Modi has publicly positioned trans people’s welfare as a priority, but argued that the issue requires greater attention at the administrative level. She said the prime minister’s office should issue clear directions to all relevant departments to ensure trans people receive housing support and that implementation moves more quickly.

“There is still widespread discrimination and stigma against the community. Many transgender people are afraid to speak openly, which is why this issue continues to persist,” Parida said. “If stigma and discrimination are not addressed seriously, the marginalized community will remain invisible and reluctant to come forward. In that situation, the government will also be limited in what it can do. State governments should work with activists and community organizations to build accurate data. The government has decided to resume the Census in 2026, but the enumerators who go door to door must be sensitized to engage respectfully with the transgender community. The government should also improve awareness of housing schemes, because many people simply do not know they exist. A single-window system is needed.”

The transgender community has been part of India’s social fabric for centuries, but decades of policy neglect pushed many into poverty and inadequate health care. 

The Supreme Court formally recognized trans people as a third gender in 2014, yet state-level services developed slowly. Telangana opened India’s first dedicated trans clinic, the Mitr Clinic, in 2021 with support from the U.S. Agency for International Development and Johns Hopkins University. Jharkhand State has now ordered all government hospitals and medical colleges to establish dedicated outpatient units for transgender patients.

People for Change, an LGBTQ organization, spent the past year mapping gaps in trans health care across Jharkhand. Its surveys of 100 trans residents in five districts found limited access to gender-affirming care, hormone therapy, dermatology, and mental-health services. The group followed this survey with a May 2025 consultation in Jamshedpur, an industrial town in Jharkhand, that brought together clinicians and community leaders to outline a feasible outpatient model. 

Those findings were presented to Health Minister Irfan Ansari in June, backed by input from allied organizations and more than 50 trans leaders. The process helped inform the state’s decision to introduce dedicated trans outpatient departments in all government hospitals and medical colleges.

People for Change, which played a central role in shaping the policy, noted that government hospitals in Jharkhand still face infrastructure and resource gaps. Even so, the group said the order reflects a clear policy commitment to creating dedicated trans health services.

If Jharkhand’s trans outpatient departments system functions as planned, it could become a regional model for states with comparable gaps in public health access. 

Government data from the 2011 Census — the latest official count to identify an “other” gender category — lists 13,463 trans residents in Jharkhand, alongside sizable populations in neighboring states: 40,827 in Bihar, 30,349 in West Bengal, 22,364 in Odisha, 18,489 in Chhattisgarh, and 137,465 in Uttar Pradesh. Though likely underreported, these figures underscore the scale of need across eastern and central India.

“The decision to start dedicated transgender OPDs (outpatient departments) is not just an administrative step — it is a statement of inclusion, a recognition that the transgender community deserves discrimination-free, dignified, and responsive healthcare. When the government takes such a deliberate step, it sets a tone for systemic change,” said Souvik Saha, founder of People for Change. “It creates an official entry point for transgender healthcare.”

“For the first time, transgender persons will have a recognized and respectful space within the public health system,” added Saha. “That itself is a major shift. It signals to doctors, nurses, and administrators that transgender health is a priority. This leads to sensitization, accountability, and the gradual improvement of attitudes within hospitals.”

Saha told the Washington Blade the policy is likely to trigger broader improvements, noting that once a service is formally notified, budget allocations, training, infrastructure, and staffing typically follow. He said the move could strengthen the system gradually, “step by step.”

“We are realistic: we know improvements won’t happen overnight. But we are also optimistic because the state has already shown genuine leadership and empathy by issuing this order,” said Saha. “And since Jharkhand is celebrating its 25th year of formation, this decision reflects the state’s intention to move towards greater equality and social justice.” 

“For the transgender community, this is not just a service — it is dignity. It is visibility. It is inclusion,” he added. “And with the government, civil society, and community working together, we believe this will lead to meaningful and lasting change in the years ahead.”

Saha told the Blade that the dedicated transgender outpatient will operate within existing government medical colleges and hospitals in Jharkhand and will be staffed by current medical and paramedical teams, with no separate funding required at this stage. He said the policy does not call for separate wards or beds, but for clearly designated outpatient spaces for trans patients. The service, he added, will be run by existing staff who will receive training and orientation as needed.

“At this moment, the specific operational details are still being discussed with the government of Jharkhand. However, what is clear is: the OPD will function as a dedicated space within the hospital, not limited to a specific day,” said Saha. “Transgender individuals will have access to focused, discrimination-free services through this dedicated space. The clinic will run through existing hospital systems, with linkages to psychiatry, dermatology, endocrinology, and other departments when required.”

“This structure allows the government to start services immediately without needing new construction, new staff positions, or separate budget lines,” he added. “It is a practical and efficient first step, making the service accessible while keeping the doors open for: future budget allocations, specialized staffing, expansions into gender-affirming services, and strengthened infrastructure. The government’s intent is very clear: to ensure dignified, equitable, and discrimination-free healthcare for the transgender community. This order is a strong beginning, and operational details will continue to evolve through collaborative discussions between the government, hospitals, and People for Change.”

Saha acknowledged that taboos, misinformation, and stereotypes about the trans community persist in Jharkhand and in many other states. However, Saha said there are encouraging models at which to look. 

He pointed to Kerala and Chhattisgarh, which have introduced sensitization programs and begun integrating trans-inclusive practices into their public health systems. These examples, he noted, show that when health departments invest in training and awareness, attitudes shift and services become more respectful and accessible.

“In Jharkhand, People for Change has proposed a similar approach. We have formally recommended to the government that civil surgeons, chief medical officer, doctors, nurses, and other hospital staff be trained on gender sensitization and transgender health challenges. This includes understanding gender identity, psychological needs, respectful communication, medical protocols, and ways to ensure discrimination-free services,” said Saha. “The encouraging part is that these proposals are already being discussed in detail with the government of Jharkhand. The government has shown strong intent through the issuance of the transgender OPD order, and training health professionals is naturally the next crucial step.”

Saha noted that it remains unclear whether trans people will be recruited into government health roles, saying it is too early to make any definitive statement. He explained that recruitment requires separate processes, policies, and approvals, and the current order does not address new staffing or the creation of government positions.

A recent performance audit by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, the constitutional authority responsible for auditing government spending and administration, outlined severe human-resource and medicine shortages across Jharkhand’s public health system. 

Tabled in the state assembly in February, the report found that about 61 percent of sanctioned posts for medical officers and specialists were vacant, along with more than half of all staff-nurse positions and roughly four-fifths of paramedic posts. The audit also documented acute shortages of essential drugs in the hospitals it reviewed, with stock gaps ranging from 65 to 95 percent during the 2020-2022 period. The findings highlight the systemic constraints that the new trans outpatients will have to navigate.

Saha acknowledged that drug shortages remain a serious issue in government hospitals and said the concern is valid. Even so, he added that he is approaching the new outpatient policy with hope and confidence.

“The government of Jharkhand has made a historic and intentional decision by opening dedicated transgender OPDs,” said Saha. “When a government takes such a strong step of recognition and inclusion, it also shows the readiness to understand the specific health challenges and medication needs of the transgender community.” 

“As more transgender persons start coming to the OPDs and their health requirements become clearer through proper documentation and reporting, we are confident that the state will make every effort to ensure that essential medicines are available for them,” he added.

Saha said People for Change is also seeking support outside the public system. The organization has begun briefing civic service groups — including Lions Club, Rotary Club and Inner Wheel, international volunteer organizations that run local welfare and health projects — on the outpatient order and the community’s needs. According to Saha, several of these groups have indicated they may help trans patients with medicines and other essentials when prescribed by a doctor.

“So the effort is two-fold: the government is creating an inclusive health system and will be informed of the community’s specific medicinal needs through the OPDs. People for Change and partners are strengthening the safety net to ensure that transgender persons are never left unsupported,” said Saha. “We truly believe that this collaborative approach will ensure that transgender individuals receive the medication and care they deserve — with dignity, consistency, and compassion.”

“Every hospital may take a slightly different amount of time depending on internal readiness, but overall: The foundational work is already underway, Hospitals have started preparing their designated OPD spaces, And coordination is happening at the level of civil surgeons, medical superintendents, and hospital management teams,” he added.