by KL News Desk
In the upcoming private universities in Jammu and Kashmir, rules provide 25% for domiciles within the reservation system in vogue for jobs and admissions, leaving the balance 75% for open competition.
Jammu and Kashmir has made it mandatory for private universities established under its 2026 law to reserve at least 25 per cent of their student intake, teaching positions and non-teaching posts for candidates holding domicile of the Union Territory. This creates a framework that extends local preference beyond admissions to employment across the university system.
The Jammu and Kashmir Private Universities Rules, 2026, notified through Government Order SO 285 on November 2, give effect to the local-reservation provisions of the Jammu and Kashmir Private Universities Act, 2026. The rules prescribe a minimum 25 per cent share for domicile holders in each programme and separately in the sanctioned teaching and non-teaching staff strength.
The provisions place J&K among the states and Union Territories that have written local-resident preferences into their private-university legislation. However, the scope and design of such provisions vary considerably: some states reserve a defined share of student seats, some extend reservation to particular categories of jobs, while others require private universities to follow the State’s general reservation policy for admissions and recruitment.
Local Quota
The rules make a distinction between the local quota and the wider admission pool. Admissions are open to candidates from Jammu and Kashmir, other States and Union Territories, as well as foreign nationals. The 25 per cent provision is a minimum earmarking in every programme, not a restriction that excludes domicile holders from competing for the remaining seats. A J&K domicile candidate can compete for seats outside the reserved share on merit, just as candidates from elsewhere can compete for the non-domicile share.
The rules provide for the release of unfilled domicile-quota seats after completion of the prescribed admission process. Such seats, including those earmarked for reserved categories within the domicile quota, can be filled by other eligible candidates on merit. Where candidates from a reserved category are not available, the rules also provide for de-reservation or conversion of the seats in accordance with the J&K Reservation Act, 2004, and the Reservation Rules, 2005.
The employment provisions cover both teaching and non-teaching positions. Rule 25 requires at least 25 per cent of the sanctioned teaching positions to be filled from among J&K domiciles. Rule 26 prescribes the same minimum for sanctioned non-teaching posts. The latter category can include administrative, accounts, clerical, technical, laboratory, library and support staff, depending on the posts sanctioned by the university.
The rules do not prescribe a separate local quota for individual non-teaching designations. Instead, they apply the 25 per cent requirement to the overall sanctioned non-teaching staff positions. Nor do they expressly extend the requirement to every person engaged through an outside contractor. Their wording is tied to sanctioned posts of the university.
For teaching appointments, universities must comply with the qualifications and standards prescribed by the University Grants Commission and relevant professional regulators. The rules require transparent and merit-based selection, and provide for category-wise apportionment within the domicile quota under the J&K Reservation Act, 2004, the Reservation Rules, 2005 and the domicile-certificate rules. Vacancies remaining unfilled under the local quota after the prescribed selection process can be filled by other eligible candidates on merit. Similar provisions apply to non-teaching posts. Universities are also required to maintain reservation rosters and furnish appointment-related information to the Government and the regulatory authority.
The 2026 Act itself provides for a 25 per cent reservation for local students in every programme and requires the quota to be apportioned among eligible categories in accordance with Government guidelines and orders. It also provides for merit-cum-means scholarships for at least 10 per cent of the students. The scholarship provision is separate from the domicile quota.
An important distinction concerns the application of the existing J&K reservation law. The Reservation Act, 2004 was primarily framed around public employment and specified professional institutions. Its provisions cannot simply be assumed to apply in their entirety to every private university. The new Private Universities Rules, however, expressly refer to the 2004 Act and the 2005 Rules for category-wise distribution within the domicile quota. This makes the category-based reservation framework applicable to the local quota, although the precise operation of every public-sector roster and carry-forward provision in private university employment may require further Government instructions.
The rules apply to private universities established under the J&K Private Universities Act, 2026. They do not, merely by their existence, extend the same quota to every private college or to public universities governed by separate legislation.
State Models
A comparison of private-university laws in other states shows that Jammu and Kashmir has adopted a model that combines a local admission quota with a separate local employment quota for both teaching and non-teaching staff. The other laws examined do not follow one uniform formula.
Maharashtra has prescribed a 40 per cent domicile quota in admissions to private universities under Section 41 of the Maharashtra Private Universities (Establishment and Regulation) Act, 2023. The same legislation provides for reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes, Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes, Special Backward Category and Economically Weaker Sections in accordance with State Government policy. The law does not, in that provision, prescribe a 40 per cent domicile quota in university employment.
The Maharashtra Act also requires universities to adopt Government policies and orders concerning reservation for these categories in student admissions. It requires them to follow the State Government’s general policy for the welfare of weaker sections and minorities as directed from time to time. The Act, therefore, makes a distinction between the 40 per cent local-student share and the social-category reservation policy.
Tamil Nadu has adopted a different admission model. Section 14 of the Tamil Nadu Private Universities Act, 2019 requires every private university to reserve 35 per cent of seats in each course for resident students of the State. The law defines a resident student as one who, or whose parent, has resided in Tamil Nadu for at least five years preceding the qualifying examination, or one who has studied in an educational institution in the State for at least five years leading to the qualifying examination.
The Act further provides that admissions to this 35 per cent share will follow the reservation applicable under the law in force. It does not prescribe a corresponding 35 per cent local quota in faculty or non-teaching appointments. Its local preference is expressly framed around student admissions.
Jharkhand has provided for a more extensive local employment preference. The Jharkhand Private Universities Act, 2024 reserves 25 per cent of seats in each course for students domiciled in the State. Category-based reservation within this 25 per cent share is to be regulated by State laws and Government orders.
The Act goes further in employment. It requires private universities to make provision for reservation of at least 75 per cent of their total non-teaching posts for persons domiciled in Jharkhand. It does not prescribe a comparable 75 per cent domicile quota for teaching positions. The Act also requires at least 75 per cent of regular teachers in each department or discipline to be regular employees of the university, but that is a requirement concerning the nature of employment, not a local-resident reservation.
The Jharkhand legislation is also subject to litigation. Several private universities challenged the State’s attempt to bring existing institutions under the 2024 umbrella law. The Jharkhand High Court granted interim relief in January 2025 against further proceedings arising from the Government’s direction under the transition provision. In April 2026, the High Court recorded that the matters remained pending and were listed for final hearing. The litigation concerns the application of the new umbrella legislation to existing universities; it should not be confused with a final judicial determination on the validity of the domicile-quota provisions themselves.
Uttarakhand has combined a 25 per cent local admission quota with a specific employment preference for lower-level posts. Section 13 of the Uttarakhand Private Universities Act, 2023, published as Act No. 2 of 2024, requires private universities to reserve at least 25 per cent of seats in their courses for permanent residents of the State, or the higher percentage declared by the university in its affidavit.
The State’s reservation policy applies to seats within this local share. If the seats remain vacant after the university publishes a last date for filling them, they can be offered to other eligible candidates. The law also provides a minimum 25 per cent tuition-fee rebate for permanent residents admitted under the local quota. On employment, however, the provision is narrower than the J&K model: qualified permanent residents are to be appointed against all Group C and Group D posts or vacancies. It does not prescribe a blanket local quota for teaching and senior administrative positions.
Uttar Pradesh has taken a different route. Section 13 of the Uttar Pradesh Private Universities Act, 2019 says that universities must remain open to persons of all classes and communities, but specifically provides that reservation in employee posts and recruitment, as well as seats for students belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Economically Weaker Sections, will be regulated by State Government orders and guidelines issued from time to time.
The provision is significant because it expressly covers both admissions and employment. Unlike J&K, however, it does not itself set aside a fixed percentage of seats or posts for people domiciled in Uttar Pradesh. Its focus is the application of the State’s social-category reservation policy.
Karnataka’s legislation requires a distinction between a general State-wide private-university law and Acts enacted for individual institutions. The BMS University Act, 2023, for example, provides that 40 per cent of admissions in all courses at BMS University must be reserved for students of Karnataka. Admissions within this share are to be made according to merit and the State Government’s reservation policy. The provision is contained in a university-specific law and should not be presented as a rule applicable automatically to every private university in Karnataka.
The Act’s admission provision does not establish a corresponding 40 per cent local quota in employment. The law is therefore closer to Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu in its focus on admissions, rather than to J&K’s combined admission-and-employment model.
Goa’s Private Universities Act, 2020 does not prescribe a fixed domicile quota for local students. Section 15 provides that reservation in employee posts and recruitment, as well as seats for students belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes, will be regulated by Government orders issued from time to time. A 2023 amendment added a provision allowing reserved admission seats to be filled by candidates from the unreserved category if an adequate number of eligible reserved-category candidates have not applied. The provision deals with social-category reservation, not a fixed local-resident share.
Bihar’s Private Universities Act, 2013 leaves the policy of admissions, including regulation of reservation of seats, to the university’s statutes, subject to the Act and rules. The provision examined does not itself prescribe a fixed domicile quota or a specific percentage of local appointments. It is therefore not directly comparable to the more explicit quota provisions in J&K, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Jharkhand or Uttarakhand.
Private Institutions
The position is further complicated by the legal status of private institutions that are not established as private universities under State Acts. BITS Pilani and OP Jindal Global University, for instance, are private deemed-to-be universities and have argued that the reservation provisions applicable to public institutions do not automatically extend to them. Their cases illustrate how institutional classification can affect the application of reservation laws.
BITS Pilani, a private deemed-to-be university and Institution of Eminence, told the Rajya Sabha’s Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education in 2025 that it did not implement reservation in student admissions or faculty recruitment. It argued that the reservation provision in the 2017 UGC Institutions of Eminence Regulations applied to public Institutions of Eminence and not private unaided institutions such as itself. The university said admissions and faculty appointments were based on academic credentials and competitive selection. Its reported student composition included students from SC, ST, OBC and EWS categories, but the presence of such students does not establish a reserved-seat policy.
OP Jindal Global University, which was originally established under Haryana’s private-university framework before acquiring deemed-to-be-university status, also told the Committee that it did not implement caste-based reservation in admissions or faculty recruitment. It cited its private deemed-university status and said admissions and recruitment were merit-based. The university referred to merit scholarships, need-based financial assistance and fellowships as forms of support. The continuing effect, if any, of its original State-law obligations needs to be assessed against its specific conversion and recognition documents; deemed status should not automatically be assumed to extinguish every obligation arising under its original legislation.
Ashoka University, also located in Haryana, presents a different position. Established under the Haryana Private Universities Act, 2006, it is subject to the State’s 25 per cent local-student quota, including the provision that 10 per cent of the seats in that share be reserved for Scheduled Caste students of Haryana. In its submission to the Parliamentary Committee, Ashoka said it followed the domicile provision but did not have a reservation policy for teaching appointments. Its case demonstrates that a private university may be required to implement a State’s local-student quota while retaining a different recruitment policy for faculty.
The three institutions also illustrate why EWS and caste-based reservation need to be examined separately. Article 15(5) of the Constitution enables the State to make special provisions for socially and educationally backward classes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in admissions to private educational institutions, excluding minority institutions. Article 15(6) separately enables special provisions for Economically Weaker Sections. These constitutional provisions are enabling and do not, by themselves, impose a uniform percentage on every private university. BITS and JGU reported no reservation policy in admissions, while Ashoka follows the Haryana domicile and Scheduled Caste provision. Scholarships and financial assistance offered by an institution are not equivalent to statutory reservation.
Job Laws
The comparison also requires a distinction between local-resident quotas written into private-university laws and broader State laws seeking to reserve jobs in private establishments for local candidates. The latter do not automatically apply to private universities merely because they operate in that State; their application depends on the definition of covered establishments and the wording of the relevant law.
Andhra Pradesh, Haryana and Jharkhand have enacted legislation seeking to reserve a share of specified private-sector jobs for local candidates. A 2021 review by PRS Legislative Research recorded a minimum 75 per cent local-candidate requirement for jobs in industries and factories in Andhra Pradesh, and 75 per cent for specified salary-linked jobs in Haryana and Jharkhand. The Haryana law was the subject of litigation, and its implementation and legal status have to be assessed separately from the State’s private-university legislation. These laws concern private establishments and industrial or other specified employment, not a uniform university recruitment quota.
The distinction is important because a State may have a law reserving jobs in private industry without having a corresponding provision for university appointments. Conversely, a private-university Act may reserve a share of posts for residents even where the State has no general local-employment quota covering all private businesses.
Legal Framework
These instances show that local preference in private higher education is being implemented through different legislative arrangements. Maharashtra provides a 40 per cent domicile share in admissions; Tamil Nadu prescribes 35 per cent for resident students; Jharkhand provides 25 per cent for local students and at least 75 per cent of non-teaching posts for domiciles; Uttarakhand provides 25 per cent or more for local students and reserves Group C and D vacancies for qualified permanent residents. Uttar Pradesh and Goa link social-category reservation in admissions and employment to State Government orders, while the Karnataka example examined is confined to a university-specific law.
Jammu and Kashmir’s framework is distinctive in applying the same minimum 25 per cent domicile requirement separately to student intake, teaching positions and non-teaching posts. It does not reserve all jobs for local candidates, but it makes local representation a statutory requirement across both academic and administrative staffing.
The wider legal position also reflects the division of responsibility between the Centre and the States. In a written reply in Parliament in February 2026, the Union Education Ministry said that State and private universities are established under laws passed by the respective legislatures and that it is the responsibility of State governments to make suitable legislative provisions for reservation in higher education institutions established by them. The Minister cited the Maharashtra, Karnataka, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Arunachal Pradesh laws as examples.
The provisions, however, do not mean that the remaining 60, 65 or 75 per cent of seats in these universities are reserved exclusively for candidates from outside the State. In the absence of a separate restriction, the balance is generally open to all eligible applicants on merit, including local candidates. Similarly, where a law provides for a local share in particular categories of employment, it does not automatically mean that every other post is reserved for non-residents.
