‘Can’t say no to Hindi in Tamil Nadu’: SC tells govt to change stand
text_fields
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has urged the Tamil Nadu government to reconsider its opposition to establishing Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas in the state, stressing that Hindi cannot simply be excluded from schools on Tamil Nadu’s soil and calling for discussions between the Centre and the state over the language issue.
A bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Augustine George Masih made the observations while hearing Tamil Nadu’s challenge to a Madras High Court order directing the establishment of Navodaya schools in every district.
The court emphasised cooperative federalism and said institutions funded by the Centre should not automatically be viewed as a threat to Tamil Nadu’s existing education system. It also rejected the state’s argument that the schools would lower their educational standards, observing that Navodaya schools would instead provide students with additional educational opportunities.
The bench directed Tamil Nadu to comply with its December 15, 2025, order requiring the state to identify suitable land for Navodaya schools in every district. However, it granted the government another three months to complete the land-identification process and directed representatives of both governments to continue discussions on policy issues.
Tamil Nadu’s opposition is largely linked to the language policy followed by Navodaya schools. While the schools follow a three-language system that includes Hindi, Tamil Nadu follows a two-language policy. Senior advocate Jaideep Gupta, appearing for the state, argued that the dispute was not over schools or Hindi education itself but over the language policy attached to the Navodaya scheme.
The state also argued that education is in the Concurrent List and that Tamil Nadu has constitutional authority to formulate its own education policy. It contended that the judiciary could not force the state to adopt a central policy through a writ petition.
The Centre, however, said the state’s principal responsibility would be to provide land, while construction and other major expenses would be borne by the Union government.
The court noted that the project was still in its early stages and said the language differences could be resolved through discussions over the time required to construct the schools.