National News

SC asks CBSE to address implementation concerns over three-language policy

Supreme Court forms five-member panel headed by Justice R Subhash Reddy to probe alleged police excesses and protester violence during CJP protests.

Sentinel Digital Desk

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday questioned several aspects of the CBSE’s three-language policy for Class 9 students under NEP 2020, including the availability of textbooks and teachers, the burden on students, and its implementation across schools.

A bench headed by CJI Surya Kant heard petitions challenging the policy, under which students are required to study two Indian languages. Petitioners argued that some schools lacked the necessary textbooks, teachers and infrastructure, with concerns that students were being introduced to new languages without adequate learning material.

The CBSE and Centre said the scheme involved only internal assessment and that students would not be held back in Class 9 for failing to qualify in the additional languages. The CBSE also said 99.19% of schools already complied with the requirement to teach two Indian languages.

The Court clarified that students would not have to discontinue languages such as French that they were already studying. The CJI also said learning languages from other parts of India could promote national integration, while stressing that all regional languages should be respected.

The bench questioned whether requiring states to prescribe regional languages could amount to forcing students to learn a particular language. It also raised concerns about the availability of qualified teachers, particularly for Sanskrit, and whether schools across different categories could implement the policy effectively. Justice V Mohana noted that the courses had not yet begun and suggested that authorities would have an implementation plan. The Court also said the policy could first be allowed to operate, with practical difficulties assessed later and, if necessary, examined by experts.

Justice Bagchi questioned the policy’s terminology, particularly the classification of English as a non-indigenous language and the use of the term “native”. He said the constitutional implications of such classifications would need examination. (ANI)

Also Read: SC forms 5-member expert panel to probe police excesses and protest violence in CJP demonstrations