Cooperative federalism, not confrontation: SC’s message to Tamil Nadu on Hindi
The Supreme Court made pointed remarks against Tamil Nadu‘s continued resistance to Hindi-language education, while hearing the state’s challenge to a Madras High Court order directing it to set up Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas in every district. A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Augustine George Masih told the state it needed to “change its mindset,” adding that it “can’t be that Hindi will not be taught in the soil of Tamil Nadu.”
What Tamil Nadu Is Actually Arguing
Senior Advocate Jaideep Gupta, representing the state, was careful to draw a distinction: Tamil Nadu isn’t opposed to Hindi being taught or to Navodaya schools existing as such — its objection is to the three-language formula the Navodaya scheme requires, which the state says conflicts with its own two-language policy of Tamil and English, in place since 1968. Gupta argued that Hindi is being pushed as the predominant language in higher classes in a state where Tamil is mandated by law, and said this amounts to a kind of linguistic unification the Constitution doesn’t call for. He also told the Court that talks between the state and Centre on the issue had already taken place, but that the Centre had remained firm on Hindi.
The Court’s Response
Justice Nagarathna pushed back on treating the matter purely as a language dispute, urging cooperative federalism instead and remarking that “people in Chennai should not alienate Delhi and vice versa.” She suggested the state and Centre resolve the disagreement through direct discussion, floating the idea that Tamil could be taught as a second language within the Navodaya framework if that eased the state’s concerns, and directed Tamil Nadu’s Secretary to take that up with the Centre’s counterpart. The Court also observed that Navodaya schools, being centrally funded, wouldn’t lower Tamil Nadu’s existing educational standards and should be seen as an addition to the state’s system rather than a threat to it.
At an earlier hearing in this same case, the Court had gone further on curriculum specifics, questioning why the third language under the current policy becomes compulsory only from Class 9 — calling it needless added stress for students at an already demanding stage — and suggesting it be introduced earlier, around Class 5 or 6, and phased out by Class 9 instead.
Where The Case Stands
Despite the strong language, the Court has stopped short of accepting Tamil Nadu’s core objection. It reiterated an earlier direction — issued in December 2025 — that the state identify land in each district for the schools, noting that a central government policy of this kind isn’t simply optional for a state to accept or reject. The underlying dispute over the three-language formula itself remains unresolved, with the Court repeatedly nudging both sides toward talks rather than ruling definitively on the language policy question.
For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.
- Pakistan: At least 16 killed, over 50 injured in blast near mosque in Kohat Police Lines - September 18, 2026
- Sikh truck driver attacked days after federal “Mr. Singh” messaging draws outrage - September 18, 2026
- Iran Warns Against Politicising Mecca Drone Claims, Cautions Against “False Flag” Tactics To Divide Muslim Nations - September 18, 2026
Saaheb Vijay Galande
PGURUS Shree Iyer gave the language choice to the Judge to select & he would argue in that language only. Tamilian Judge, Tamilian DMK Lawyer is Hindi. So they conversed in English.
Shree Iyer then gave another extra option to the Judge to chose from Shakespearean English OR Yankee English. Judge was given few more choice Shakespearean / Snakespearean / Shakyspearean language. Judge choose Shakespearean
We join PGURUS in celebrating the SC ruling, for Shree Iyer can speak Telugu, Tamil, Malayalam (swim & talk forward & talk backward / reverse Malayalam), Kanada, Hindi, English, Spanish, when Shree Iyer can do it, rest of Tamilnadu also can do it better !! for Tamil has 247 alphabets unlike other languages which have only 56
Can the learned advocate argue the case in TAMIL?