The Supreme Court has ordered a countrywide review of private universities after Amity University allegedly harassed a student for changing her name. The move aims to ensure transparency, accountability, and proper regulation in private higher education.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has issued important directions to the Union government, all States and Union Territories, and the University Grants Commission (UGC) to clearly explain how private universities across India are established, regulated, and monitored.
This direction came while hearing a petition filed by 23-year-old student Ayesha Jain against Amity University, Noida.
A Bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and NV Anjaria observed that the issue raised in the case goes beyond one student and one institution and affects the entire system of private higher education in the country.
According to the Court, it is necessary to closely examine how private universities are formed, the legal system under which they operate, and the various benefits they receive from governments.
The Court ordered the Centre, all State Governments and Union Territories to submit detailed affidavits.
These affidavits must explain the background of each private university, the legal provisions under which they were created, and the financial or administrative benefits given to them, such as land allotment, relaxed rules, or special treatment.
The Court also demanded full clarity on who actually runs and controls these institutions and how their governing bodies are selected and formed.
This case started when Ayesha Jain approached the Supreme Court claiming that Amity University refused to update her name in its official records even after she submitted all valid legal documents.
She alleged that university officials harassed her, stopped her from attending classes, and even mocked her for changing her name to a Muslim name.
In her petition, she stated that she repeatedly complained to the UGC and the Ministry of Education but no effective action was taken, even after their intervention. She further claimed that because of the university’s behaviour, she lost one full academic year.
The issue dates back to 2021 when Ayesha legally changed her name from Khushi Jain to Ayesha Jain and published the change in the Gazette of India. In 2023, she completed a certificate course at Amity Finishing School under her new name.
Later, in 2024, she joined Amity Business School for an MBA in Entrepreneurship. Despite this, the university allegedly refused to update her name in its system, which resulted in her being barred from classes and exams.
After several ignored requests and complaints, she finally moved the Supreme Court in mid-2025, accusing Amity University of arbitrary behaviour and discrimination.
During earlier hearings, the Supreme Court strongly criticised the university. On October 9, it ordered the Chairman and Vice-Chancellor of Amity University to personally explain their stand.
When the matter came up again on October 14, the Court stated that the university had made a “mockery” of its orders after it offered ₹1 lakh as compensation.
The Court then directed Dr. Atul Chauhan, President of the Ritnand Balved Education Foundation which runs Amity Universities, and the Vice-Chancellor to appear in person in the next hearing.
On November 20, both officials appeared before the Court and submitted their affidavits. However, instead of closing the case, the Bench chose to widen the issue, stating that the problem has serious implications for the governance and regulation of private higher education in India.
The Court clearly stated its intention to review how private universities are created, under what laws or notifications they come into existence, and what kind of benefits they receive from governments.
The Bench said,
“The issues have now come before this Court, which the present coram has also deliberated in detail, in the larger public interest, it is deemed appropriate to examine the aspects relating to the creation/establishment/setting-up of all private Universities, either under the State Governments/Union Territories or the Central Government, and connected concerns,”
The Court directed all governments to reveal the legal foundation under which each private, non-government or deemed university has been established.
It also asked for complete details of land allotments, concessions, special relaxations, and any other financial or administrative advantages granted to them.
It further demanded information about the organisations and individuals managing these institutions, including the structure and selection process of their governing bodies.
It said,
“Full details of the concerned personnel connected with the establishment/management of such Universities shall be placed on record,”
The UGC was also instructed to clarify its powers and role in regulating private universities and explain the real mechanism it follows to ensure compliance with laws and policies.
The Court said,
“The affidavit by the UGC shall cover what the statute/policy mandates as also the actual mechanism to monitor/oversee compliance by the institutions,”
The Court also asked for information regarding admission policies, faculty recruitment, compliance checks, grievance redressal systems, salary payments to staff, and whether institutions claiming to function on a no profit, no loss basis are genuinely following this model.
To make the process stricter and more transparent, the Court clearly fixed accountability for all disclosures.
The Court said,
“Responsibility for every disclosure and its correctness shall rest with the deponent concerned,”
It further warned that any attempt to hide or manipulate facts would be dealt with strictly.
The Bench said,
“If there is any attempt to withhold, suppress, misrepresent or mis-state facts in the affidavits called for, this Court will be compelled to adopt a strict view,”
To ensure that the highest level of administration takes responsibility, the Court directed that the affidavits must be personally signed and affirmed by the Cabinet Secretary of India, the Chief Secretaries of all States and Union Territories, and the Chairman of the UGC, with no delegation allowed.
The matter will now be heard on January 8, 2026, when the Supreme Court is expected to review the disclosures and take further steps based on the information submitted.
Ayesha Jain was represented by advocates Mohd Fuzail Khan and Shisba Chawla. The respondents were represented by advocates Amitesh Kumar, Priti Kumari, Pankaj Kumar Ray, Abhinav Singh, Shashank Shekhar Singh, Parmanand Gaur, Vibhav Mishra and Megha Gaur.
This case is now seen as a landmark moment that could bring major reforms in the functioning, transparency, and accountability of private universities across India, especially with regard to students’ rights, governance standards, and regulatory oversight.
Case Title:
Ayesha Jain vs. Amity University, Noida & Ors.
Read Order:
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Private Universities
