The University of Cambridge clashed with the Government yesterday over ministers’ suggestions that universities should ask for lower exam grades from applicants from deprived backgrounds.

Richard Partington, chairman of the University’s Admissions Research Working Party, told The Telegraph that applicants would be judged “on merit, not to achieve a particular social outcome” and that the University of Cambridge would not make “lower offers for people of different backgrounds”.

Ministers, in wake of the launch of the Coalition’s ‘Social Mobility Strategy  - Opening Doors, Breaking Barriers’, argued that lower offers should be given to students from disadvantaged backgrounds or from poor-performing state schools than to their privately-educated equivalents in order to increase the number of state school students accepted.

The Coalition, under their higher education reforms, require any university charging over £6,000 to put in new measures to increase the number of disadvantaged students being accepted. The suggestion for “differential offers” is an attempt to prevent poorer applicants from being put off by the increase in tuition fees.

The University of Cambridge has been criticised by the Government in the past for a low state school intake.

However, official University statistics from 2009 showed that 48% of accepted places were from maintained schools, and only 38% from independent schools (with 14% from overseas).

The Government is claiming top universities should look beyond A Level results to judge potential students and Universities Minister, Dave Willets, has even quoted research suggesting that students from state schools are more likely to get good degrees than independent school students admitted on a like-for-like basis.

However, research published by the University of Cambridge, led by Mr Partington, showed that A Level success was the key indicator of good performance during a degree, irrespective of the type of school.

The research, entitled 'The Predictive Effectiveness of Metrics in Admission in Cambridge University', looked at various factors, including exam results, school background and gender, but exam results proved the best indicator of a well-performing undergraduate.

Mr Partington said: “The consistency of this study’s findings is striking. A Levels … were overwhelmingly the best indicator available of likely future degree performance."

He added: “Admissions decisions are made on the basis of students’ ability, commitment and potential. While it's important that we take background into account on a case-by-case basis as part of holistic assessment, this study confirms that we are right to place achievement in public examinations at the centre of our judgments."

However, the Government is still insisting that universities find some way of encouraging students from all backgrounds to apply despite the higher tuition fees.

The Coalition has been surprised by the fact that around two-thirds of universities which have so far declared their tuition fees for 2012 have opted for the £9,000 maximum.

Business Secretary Vince Cable addressed a higher education funding conference yesterday, threatening university vice chancellors that if that institution finds places unfilled next year, the Government “might withdraw those places, and institutions should not assume they will easily get them back”.

He added: “The biggest mistake a university could make is to underestimate its consumers. Students will search for value for money and…some institutions could very well find themselves in trouble if students can’t see value”.

Sally Hunt, meanwhile, the general secretary of the University and College Union, has said: “The Government’s fee regime is in complete disarray and its sums clearly do not add up.

“Rushing through a vote on higher fees and then going into detail at a later stage was always a recipe for disaster.”