A routine name-change dispute brought by a 23-year-old student has triggered an unprecedented judicial examination into the legal foundations, governance structures, and regulatory oversight of India’s booming private university sector. The Supreme Court now wants answers not just from one institution, but from every authority responsible for creating and monitoring private universities across the country.
The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday expanded the scope of a petition originally filed against Amity University, converting it into a broader inquiry into how private universities are established, regulated, and granted privileges across India.
A bench of Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice Aniruddha Bose expressed strong concern over what it described as “serious irregularities” in the functioning and regulatory compliance of private universities, stating that the issue went “far beyond the grievances of a single student.”
The Court has now directed the Central government, state governments, Union Territories, and the University Grants Commission (UGC) to furnish detailed affidavits explaining the statutory basis for the creation, governance, and oversight of these institutions.
With private universities witnessing rapid expansion over the past decade, the Court said it was necessary to understand “how they came into existence, who authorised them, and what benefits and exemptions they continue to receive.”
A Student’s Petition Opens a National Debate
The judicial scrutiny began with the case of Ayasha Jain, formerly Khushi Jain, who approached the Supreme Court after Amity University allegedly refused to update her academic records following her legal name change in 2021.
Despite supplying every required document including a Government of India Gazette notification the university declined to amend its records, resulting in Jain being barred from classes and examinations. She also claimed that officials subjected her to harassment, including remarks about adopting a “Muslim name.”
Frustrated by repeated inaction from both the university and regulatory authorities, Jain filed a petition in the Supreme Court in early 2025, accusing Amity of discrimination, arbitrary behavior, and misuse of administrative power.
The Court, dissatisfied with the university’s responses in earlier hearings, summoned top administrators including the President of the Ritnand Balved Education Foundation, Dr. Atul Chauhan, and the Vice-Chancellor to appear personally.
But what began as a specific grievance soon swelled into a broader legal question.
Court Seeks Answers: Who Creates Private Universities — and Under What Law?
During Wednesday’s hearing, the bench bluntly asked:
“Under which laws are private universities created? Who grants approval? What statutory provisions govern their functioning? And what benefits land, tax exemptions, or administrative privileges do they receive from governments?”
The Court requested clarity on:
- The governing bodies of each private university
- Ownership, management, and accountability structures
- Legal basis for conferring degrees
- State and central level oversight mechanisms
- Any special benefits or exemptions granted to them
Noting that private universities have multiplied rapidly, the Court observed that “the country deserves transparency about how these institutions operate.”
The next hearing is scheduled for January 8, 2026, where the Court expects comprehensive disclosures.
Beyond Contempt: A Larger Question of Public Accountability
What initially appeared to be a contempt proceeding against two university officers has evolved into a landmark judicial moment. The bench noted that this case raises “broader and deeper issues” related to the credibility, legality, and transparency of private higher education in India.
India hosts more than 400 private universities, many of which enjoy substantial autonomy while charging high fees and operating with limited public oversight.
The Court suggested that public interest demanded closer examination of their establishment procedures and the nature of government support extended to them.
