New Delhi, Sep 16 (IANS): The Delhi High Court on Wednesday declined to urgently hear the Kshatriya Karni Sena’s plea challenging the Delhi Police’s refusal to grant it permission to hold a protest against the UGC regulations at Jantar Mantar on September 20.
The plea was mentioned before Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya, who said the matter would be listed in the ordinary course after the defects in the petition were cured.
The Chief Justice indicated that the petition would be auto-listed on Thursday once the defects were cured.
Counsel appearing for the petitioner, Kshatriya Karni Sena President Dr Raj Shekhawat, submitted that permission had earlier been granted for the proposed protest scheduled for September 20, but the Delhi Police subsequently informed the Sena that the protest could not be held on that date.
The matter relates to the Kshatriya Karni Sena’s proposed peaceful demonstration at Jantar Mantar on September 20 from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. against reservation and the recently notified University Grants Commission (UGC) regulations.
On September 7, the Delhi High Court had directed the Delhi Police to decide by September 14 a fresh application submitted by the Kshatriya Karni Sena seeking permission for the September 20 demonstration.
A single-judge Bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma had directed Shekhawat to submit the fresh application after his counsel informed the High Court that the organisation had changed the date of the proposed protest to September 20.
The Delhi High Court had directed the competent authority to consider the application and take a decision within a week, while making it clear that appropriate conditions could be imposed in accordance with law.
The Delhi Police had earlier denied permission for a protest proposed for September 6, citing preparations for the BRICS Summit.
The Kshatriya Karni Sena has been seeking withdrawal of the UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026, and has relied upon a Supreme Court order in which certain provisions of the regulations were kept in abeyance after the apex court found ambiguities in some of them and noted the possibility of their misuse.
