'Worth a relook': Supreme Court questions whether English can be called an indigenous language
The court remarked that the question of what qualifies as an indigenous language, and whether English could be placed in that category, may need to be examined more carefully
- Jul 15, 2026,
- Updated Jul 15, 2026 11:18 AM IST
The Supreme Court has declined to pause the CBSE's three-language formula for Class 6, while raising a pointed question of its own: can English even be considered an indigenous language?
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohan was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the policy, which has been rolled out from the current academic session under the National Education Policy framework. The court refused to grant an interim stay, noting that such relief could not be considered without a detailed hearing. The matter has been posted to July 22, with the Centre and CBSE directed to file their responses in the interim.
What the court observed
While declining to intervene at this stage, the bench noted that the policy appeared to advance the constitutional objective of promoting Hindi and other regional languages, a reading that gave the government some breathing room. At the same time, the court remarked that the question of what qualifies as an indigenous language, and whether English could be placed in that category, may need to be examined more carefully.
What the petitioners argued
Senior advocates appearing for the petitioners raised concerns that go beyond the policy's intent. Even with students allowed to choose from 22 scheduled languages, they argued that implementation would prove difficult in practice. Schools would struggle to hire qualified teachers across that many languages and build the required academic infrastructure, they submitted.
A further gap was pointed out: although NCERT had committed to uploading study material for all 22 languages by July 1, textbooks were available for only three at the time of the hearing. The petitioners also noted that the challenge comes even after the CBSE had already walked back an earlier circular that would have made the three-language formula mandatory for Class 9 from the current session.
How the government responded
Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for the Centre and CBSE, told the court that detailed responses would be filed within 10 days. Defending the policy, the Centre described the NEP as envisioning an education system rooted in Indian ethos, aimed at building an equitable and vibrant knowledge society. It submitted that the three-language formula would be implemented in line with constitutional provisions, taking into account regional aspirations, the federal structure, and the broader goal of promoting multilingualism and national unity. The Centre also emphasised that the policy offers flexibility and that no language would be imposed on any state.
The matter returns to court on July 22.
The Supreme Court has declined to pause the CBSE's three-language formula for Class 6, while raising a pointed question of its own: can English even be considered an indigenous language?
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohan was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the policy, which has been rolled out from the current academic session under the National Education Policy framework. The court refused to grant an interim stay, noting that such relief could not be considered without a detailed hearing. The matter has been posted to July 22, with the Centre and CBSE directed to file their responses in the interim.
What the court observed
While declining to intervene at this stage, the bench noted that the policy appeared to advance the constitutional objective of promoting Hindi and other regional languages, a reading that gave the government some breathing room. At the same time, the court remarked that the question of what qualifies as an indigenous language, and whether English could be placed in that category, may need to be examined more carefully.
What the petitioners argued
Senior advocates appearing for the petitioners raised concerns that go beyond the policy's intent. Even with students allowed to choose from 22 scheduled languages, they argued that implementation would prove difficult in practice. Schools would struggle to hire qualified teachers across that many languages and build the required academic infrastructure, they submitted.
A further gap was pointed out: although NCERT had committed to uploading study material for all 22 languages by July 1, textbooks were available for only three at the time of the hearing. The petitioners also noted that the challenge comes even after the CBSE had already walked back an earlier circular that would have made the three-language formula mandatory for Class 9 from the current session.
How the government responded
Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for the Centre and CBSE, told the court that detailed responses would be filed within 10 days. Defending the policy, the Centre described the NEP as envisioning an education system rooted in Indian ethos, aimed at building an equitable and vibrant knowledge society. It submitted that the three-language formula would be implemented in line with constitutional provisions, taking into account regional aspirations, the federal structure, and the broader goal of promoting multilingualism and national unity. The Centre also emphasised that the policy offers flexibility and that no language would be imposed on any state.
The matter returns to court on July 22.