The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that the government can not impose a particular language, including mother tongue, for teaching children at the primary education level.
A five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Chief Justice R M Lodha said that the state cannot impose a language on a child and such a compulsion could be violative of fundamental rights of the children and their parents. The order came on a batch of petitions referred to a larger bench by a two-judge bench of the SC in July last year. The matter was referred matter after noting that a two-judge Bench had in 1993 upheld the mother tongue as the medium of instruction in the primary education while deciding a bunch of petitions from Karnataka. The state had come in appeal to the apex court again after the High Court quashed its subsequent orders of 1994, inserting additional clauses besides mandating the medium of instructions. These clauses had asked schools to teach in mother tongue or Kannada, with effect from 1994-95, in all government-recognised schools in class I to IV. The order allowed only children, who had English as their mother tongue, to be taught in English medium and said that schools not complying with the directives shall be shut down. The two-judge bench had requested the larger Bench to decide the questions whether a student or a parent had a right to choose a medium of instruction at the primary education stage and also if a government’s order to impose mother tongue impacted their fundamental rights. Framing a set of five questions for adjudication by a Constitution Bench, the court also sought an appropriate decision on succinctly defining the term ‘mother tongue’ and whether the government-recognised schools will include both government-aided as well as private and unaided schools. The court sought a definition for the term ‘mother tongue’ in view of the proposition that a child may be studying at a school in a state different from his native place and will hence have a different mother tongue. The Bench also called for a decision on who would decide on the language in which a child is comfortable with if parents are held to have no right to decide the medium of instruction. Another vital issue for adjudication for the larger Bench will pertain to the ambit of ‘government-recognised’ schools since if this does not cover private and unaided schools in the state, they cannot be compelled to teach in a particular language. http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/govt-can-not-impose-mother-tongue-for-teaching-children-at-primary-level-supreme-court/ Response:Hopefully this should bury the Medium of Instruction controversy once and for all. Regards, Marshall