“I cleared the NET after two failed attempts. When my name finally appeared in the NFSC list, it felt like justice after years of struggle. But my application was rejected because my university’s NAAC certificate was renewed two months after I enrolled. How is this my fault?”
— a Scheduled Caste research scholar from Punjab
THIS IS NOT AN ISOLATED GRIEVANCE. It mirrors the anxieties of hundreds of Dalit scholars caught in a bureaucratic web that denies them what they have already earned. As Savitribai Phule once wrote, “Awake, arise, and educate, smash traditions — liberate.” Yet, even after clearing the National Eligibility Test (‘NET’), Scheduled Caste students are being denied the very fellowship designed to liberate them through education.
In an earlier article for The Leaflet, I argued that the National Fellowship for Scheduled Castes (NFSC), envisioned as a corrective measure for Bahujan scholars, had been “warped in bureaucratic casteism.” Recent data obtained through RTI confirms this: out of 805 candidates selected in the June 2024 NFSC cycle, only 109 applications have been approved so far. The majority remain pending or rejected — many on the technical ground that their university’s NAAC accreditation was invalid at the time of admission.
What should have been a historic opportunity has turned into systemic denial against lakhs of Scheduled Caste students in India’s universities.
A new Memorandum and its retrospective trap
The Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, through its Office Memorandum dated November 29, 2024 (K-11022/5/2024-SCD-V-(NOS), has made NFSC eligibility conditional upon whether a candidate’s university had valid NAAC accreditation at the time of their admission.
This is a radical departure from earlier norms, which only required that:
The institution held NAAC accreditation at the time of fellowship application, or
The institution was government-funded and empowered to award degrees.
The timing of this shift is devastating. The results for UGC-NET, conducted in June were declared on October 17, 2024, leading many students to enrol promptly. Many of them have taken admission in the year 2023 itself . Yet, many universities restored their NAAC accreditation later . Students who acted in good faith, joining reputable universities, are now punished for lapses beyond their control.
Legal precedents and constitutional principles
The retrospective application of this memorandum collides with settled constitutional principles.
In P.D. Aggarwal v. State of U.P. (1987), the Supreme Court held that once a candidate acquires a vested right under prevailing rules, it cannot be taken away by later changes unless explicitly retrospective and constitutionally justified. Applying the November 2024 memorandum to students who enrolled before its issuance violates this doctrine of vested rights.
In K. Manjusree v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2008), the Court reiterated that “rules of the game cannot be changed after the game has begun.” Here, Dalit scholars who had cleared NET and joined institutions under one set of rules are being retroactively disqualified under a different set.
In Amit Kumar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. (2025), although the Court was not directly adjudicating fellowship criteria, it recognised the systemic disadvantages Scheduled Caste students face: institutional apathy, caste-based pressures, and financial precarity. The spirit of that judgment — fairness and substantive equality — directly applies here.
To ignore these precedents is to erode both constitutional morality and social justice. As Dr. B.R. Ambedkar wrote, “Constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment. It has to be cultivated. We must realise that our people have yet to learn it.” The retrospective application of fellowship rules is a failure of precisely this constitutional morality.
Administrative lapses, student punishment
NAAC accreditation is the sole responsibility of universities. When institutions delay renewal, it is unjust to pass the penalty onto students. In fact, what we see here is double injustice:
Universities delay accreditation renewal.
Dalit students are retrospectively declared ineligible.
This reflects what Ambedkar described as the persistence of caste in new guises: “Caste is a notion; it is a state of mind.” Here, it takes the form of administrative casteism — rules framed without accounting for their disparate impact on marginalised communities.
Unequal standards across fellowships
The NFSC is not the only fellowship scheme under the Ministry. Others demonstrate more equitable standards:
National Fellowship for OBCs (‘NFOBC’): No requirement that NAAC be valid at the time of admission.
The Junior Research Fellowship (‘UGC-JRF’): Requires only that the institution be recognised under the UGC Act, with no retrospective NAAC condition.
Why must Scheduled Caste students face stricter conditions? Why is a scheme designed to undo inequality, reproducing it?
As the anti-caste poet and novelist J.V. Pawar put it, “The struggle is not for concessions, it is for equality and self-respect.” By setting harsher criteria for SC students than for others, the NFSC undermines equality itself.
The scale of exclusion
RTI data lays bare the magnitude:
Of 805 scholars selected in June 2024, only 109 approvals.
Most rejections cite NAAC invalidity at admission.
Ambiguities around “fully funded institutions” exclude universities funded jointly by Centre and State.
The psychological and material impact is severe. Scholars report anxiety, disrupted research, delayed publications, and financial distress. Opportunities for conferences, networking, and career progression are lost.
Constituent Assembly member ‘Babu’ Jagjivan Ram once warned, “The community which is denied education is bound to lag behind.” By denying fellowships through administrative technicalities, the state risks perpetuating the very backwardness it claims to address.
Time for corrective action
The NFSC was conceived as an instrument of social justice. To restore its integrity, corrective steps must be taken:
Exempt all students admitted before 29 November 2024 from the new memorandum.
Ensure university-level accreditation delays do not affect student eligibility.
Harmonise NFSC eligibility criteria with NFOBC and UGC-JRF to prevent discriminatory double standards.
Role of the National Task Force
The Supreme Court-appointed National Task Force (‘NTF’), constituted precisely to oversee fairness in SC fellowships, must urgently intervene. In Amit Kumar (2025), the Court recognised how delays, caste-based discrimination, and institutional neglect undermine constitutional guarantees. The present situation falls squarely within its remit.
The NTF should direct the NSFDC and the Ministry to:
Withdraw retrospective rules.
Process pending fellowships without delay.
Guarantee that no Dalit scholar abandons research due to administrative negligence.
Ambedkar reminded us that “political democracy cannot last unless there lies at the base of it social democracy.” Denying fellowships through retrospective technicalities is not mere bureaucratic inefficiency; it is a betrayal of social democracy itself.
For Dalit scholars — often first-generation learners — this is not only about policy. It is about justice, dignity, and the constitutional promise of equality.
To conclude, I would like to quote a heartening dialogue that I couldn’t help but identify with from a wonderfully made documentary India Untouched: Stories of a People Apart (2007) by Stalin K:
You are born a Dalit, You Live a Dalit
You die a Dalit, buried as a Dalit.
Therefore, by birth, you are segregated while alive, and you are segregated thereafter too,
Forever buried as a Dalit.