New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India on Thursday issued a sharp observation to the Tamil Nadu government, directing it to reconsider its long-standing opposition to teaching Hindi in the state's schools and educational institutions. A two-judge bench, comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Augustine George Masih, held that there was no legal or constitutional basis for preventing Hindi from being taught on Tamil Nadu's soil.
The comments were made during the hearing of a petition filed by the Tamil Nadu government relating to the implementation of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, which mandates the teaching of Indian languages, including Hindi, across the country. The state has been one of the most vocal opponents of any perceived imposition of Hindi, arguing that Tamil, as one of India's oldest classical languages, deserves protection and primacy in its educational system.
During the proceedings, the bench questioned the logic of treating Tamil Nadu as an exception to the national educational framework. Justice Nagarathna and Justice Masih observed that Chennai and New Delhi could not be viewed as distant or alien from one another, emphasizing that all states are equal partners in the Indian union. "You cannot imagine a situation where Hindi will not be taught on this land," the court remarked, using the phrase to underline the idea that no state can opt out of engaging with India's link languages.
The court also stressed that promoting Hindi does not entail suppressing Tamil or any other regional language. Legal experts note that the NEP itself guarantees that mother-tongue instruction will continue to be a priority, while simultaneously introducing Indian languages — including Hindi — as optional or mandatory subjects depending on the stage of schooling.
The Tamil Nadu government had argued before the court that forcing Hindi on students would undermine the Dravidian linguistic heritage that has shaped the state's identity for decades. However, the bench appeared unconvinced by the argument that learning Hindi equates to cultural erasure. The court suggested that the state government should open its mind to the possibilities of bilingual and multilingual education rather than treating language policy as a zero-sum game.
Senior advocates appearing for the central government supported the court's position, stating that the Constitution itself recognises Hindi as an official language of the Union and that states have a duty to promote mutual understanding among linguistic communities. They pointed out that several southern states, including Karnataka and Kerala, already incorporate Hindi into their school curricula without any reported adverse impact on local languages.
The matter was adjourned to a future date, with the court likely to issue further directions on how Hindi should be introduced in Tamil Nadu's schools in a phased and sensitive manner. Legal analysts say the judgment, when delivered, could set a significant precedent for other states that have resisted the language provisions of the National Education Policy.
