Language policy, linguistic states and the language of courts

1. The constitutional scheme: Part XVII

• Article 343: Hindi in Devanagari script is the official language of the Union; English was to continue for fifteen years, and Parliament could extend it. The Official Languages Act 1963 continued English indefinitely alongside Hindi after the anti-Hindi agitations, especially in Tamil Nadu in 1965.
• Articles 344 and 351: an Official Language Commission and Committee; a directive to promote the spread of Hindi drawing on the other languages.
• Articles 345 to 347: each State chooses its official language(s); the Union language for inter-State and Centre–State communication; the President may recognise a language spoken by a substantial section of a State's population.
• Article 348: proceedings in the Supreme Court and High Courts, and the authoritative texts of Bills, Acts and rules, are in English until Parliament provides otherwise. Under Article 348(2) the Governor, with the President's consent, may authorise Hindi or the State language in High Court proceedings.
• Article 350: any person may submit a representation for redress of grievance in any language used in the Union or State. Article 350A (added in 1956): facilities for instruction in the mother tongue at the primary stage for linguistic minority children. Article 350B: a Special Officer for linguistic minorities.
• Articles 29(1) and 30(1): any section of citizens with a distinct language may conserve it; linguistic minorities may establish and administer educational institutions. Minority status is decided State by State (T.M.A. Pai Foundation, 2002).
• Eighth Schedule: 14 languages in 1950, now 22. Sindhi was added in 1967; Konkani, Manipuri and Nepali in 1992; Bodo, Dogri, Maithili and Santhali in 2003 (Ninety-second Amendment). Inclusion matters for the Official Language Commission, for recruitment examinations and for funding.

The compromise was reached in the Constituent Assembly (the Munshi–Ayyangar formula) after long debate: no national language is named, Hindi is the official language of the Union, English continues, and States choose their own. It is a federal answer to a question many States answer differently.

2. Linguistic States: boon or bane

The Congress had organised its provincial committees by language since 1920. After independence the Dar Commission (1948) and the JVP Committee (Nehru, Patel, Pattabhi Sitaramayya, 1949) warned against reorganisation on linguistic lines, fearing disintegration. The death of Potti Sriramulu after his fast forced the creation of Andhra State in 1953. The States Reorganisation Commission (Fazl Ali, K.M. Panikkar, H.N. Kunzru) reported in 1955, and the States Reorganisation Act and the Seventh Amendment of 1956 redrew the map. A unified Mysore State, bringing together Kannada areas from Bombay, Hyderabad, Madras and Coorg, came into being on 1 November 1956 and was renamed Karnataka in 1973. Bombay was split into Maharashtra and Gujarat in 1960; Punjab and Haryana in 1966.

3. Medium of instruction

The propriety of making a regional language the compulsory medium (November 2021) is answered through Karnataka's cases. After the Gokak Committee (1980–81) recommended Kannada as the first language in schools, a long series of government orders followed. In State of Karnataka v. Associated Management of English Medium Primary and Secondary Schools, 2014 INSC 360, a Constitution Bench held:

• the right to choose the medium of instruction is part of the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) and, for private unaided schools, of the right to carry on an occupation under Article 19(1)(g);
• linguistic minorities have the right under Article 30(1) to choose the medium in their institutions;
• “mother tongue” means the language the child is comfortable with, which the parent or guardian decides, not the State;
• the State cannot compel private unaided or minority schools to teach in the mother tongue or the regional language at the primary stage, though it may prescribe that language as a subject.

Pedagogy points the other way: UNESCO and the National Education Policy 2020 favour the mother tongue or home language as the medium at least to Grade 5. The law therefore allows the State to encourage and to teach the language but not to compel the medium. Karnataka has since moved through language-promotion legislation (the Kannada Language Comprehensive Development Act, 2022) rather than mandatory medium.

4. People's language as the language of courts

The April 2024 paper set this directly. The case for: access to justice under Article 39A and Article 21 requires that litigants and witnesses understand proceedings; most district courts already work in the State language; Hindi has been authorised in the High Courts of Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Bihar under Article 348(2); and the Supreme Court has begun translating its judgments into Indian languages. The case against: transfer of judges between States; a body of precedent and statute in English; the risk of fragmenting a national bar; and the cost and accuracy of legal translation. The Law Commission's 216th Report (2008) found it not feasible to make Hindi compulsory in the Supreme Court. A workable answer favours the State language in trial courts and first appeals, bilingual High Courts with authoritative English texts, and machine-assisted translation of all reported judgments.

5. Linguistic rights in comparative law

• ICCPR, Article 27: persons belonging to linguistic minorities shall not be denied the right, in community with others, to use their own language.
• The UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities (1992) and the Council of Europe's European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (1992).
• Canada: the Official Languages Act 1969 and minority-language education rights in section 23 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982).
• Switzerland and Belgium: territorial language principles, with each region using its own official language; Belgium shows how language can strain a federation.

6. Non-discrimination on the ground of language

Language is not a prohibited ground in Articles 15 or 16, but Article 29(2) bars denial of admission to State-aided institutions on grounds of religion, race, caste or language, and Article 16(3) permits residence requirements only by parliamentary law. Insisting on knowledge of the State language for State jobs is generally upheld as a reasonable qualification, provided time is given to acquire it.

How this is examined

Essays: “Critically evaluate language policy under the Constitution”; “Formation of linguistic States is a boon or bane”; “How far has the formation of linguistic States solved the language problem? Comment on non-discrimination on the ground of language”; “Propriety of imposing a regional language as compulsory medium”; “People's language as the language of courts”. Short notes: linguistic rights, the Eighth Schedule and regional languages, medium of instruction in primary schools, official language and regional language.