Listen to this article:

The upper caste anger at the University Grants Commission (UGC) Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions Regulations, 2026 (the “Equity Regulations”), and the prompt stay granted by the Supreme Court on fears of its misuse, have implications that go beyond the implementation of the regulations. They offer an insight into how castelessness is manufactured and weaponised against Bahujan students in India today. 

As sociologist Satish Deshpande points out, the structure of the constitution explicitly recognises caste as a source of deprivation but not as a source of privilege. This framing allows the privileged upper castes or the “general” castes to frame themselves as casteless citizens. This means that the story of the conversion of their hereditary caste capital (such as historical access to education) into more modern forms of capital like property, and dominance over lucrative professions, is individualised.

Freed from considering or acknowledging the role played by their own caste privilege, their success is narrated entirely in terms of individual effort or brilliance. The “reserved” category (in effect, all other castes) on the other hand have their stories stripped of individuality, effort and brilliance and their success is presumed to be solely or predominantly due to reservation.

Assumptions of upper caste castelessness form and shape ideas of merit in our educational institutions in a manner that can create a hostile and exclusionary space for young students entering university through the reserved categories. First, the belief in meritocracy can paradoxically reinforce discriminatory behaviour. Second, the ascription of merit to certain castes often encourages and legitimises casteist and exclusionary behaviour and third, the constitutional framing of affirmative action as an exception to the principle of equality encourages upper castes to view themselves as the casteless victims of affirmative action. These conditions have grave and material consequences for SC, ST and OBC students, including high drop-out rates and several deaths by suicide. 

The meritocracy paradox

Emilio Castilla and Stephen Benard coined what is termed the “paradox of meritocracy,” where they demonstrate that emphasising meritocracy has the causal effect of increasing ascriptive bias. Simply put, people who are convinced of their own lack of bias become less inclined to examine their own behaviour for signs of prejudice, leading to a reinforcement of their biases. Due to their strong self-perception of objectivity, they also have the confidence to act on those biases leading to active discrimination. 

In the context of Indian universities, the conviction that the upper castes are casteless and guided solely by a belief in meritocracy makes them........

© The Wire