The Supreme Court on Thursday (August 20) continued hearing a batch of pleas challenging the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE’s) three-language policy. The Chief Justice of India (CJI)-led Bench raised concerns over the treatment of English as a foreign language and the availability of teachers, textbooks and infrastructure for Indian languages.
Petitioners have challenged CBSE’s circulars introducing the revised three-language framework from the 2026-27 academic session. Under the new policy introduced this year, students are required to study three languages, with at least two of them being Bhartiya Bhashas (Indian languages).
Senior Advocate Anand Grover, appearing for some petitioners, raised concerns over students being required to change languages they have studied for several years. “This is an issue which concerns the third language,” Grover said. He claimed that students who had been studying foreign languages such as French were suddenly asked to take another language under the new framework.
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant questioned whether learning Indian languages could not be viewed as being in the interest of national integrity. “Let’s not have inferiority complex with respect to native language,” he stated, adding that such apprehension and fear is natural whenever a new concept is being introduced.
The CJI also observed that learning any language is a big asset and something invaluable. He asked whether students could continue studying a language of their choice even if they were not required to appear for an examination in it.
The petitioners, however, argued that learning a new language would require qualified teachers and appropriate teaching material. He further alleged that the textbooks available online contain advanced sentences and do not necessarily cater to students who are beginning to learn a language.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi also raised concerns over the availability of teachers and infrastructure for newly introduced languages. “If they are introducing language, they will also have a plan for teachers. It’s their obligation,” the judge observed.
SC Questions English Being Treated As Foreign Language
One of the key issues raised during the hearing was CBSE’s treatment of English as a non-native or foreign language under the new language policy.
The petitioners argued that since the policy requires students to study at least two Bhartiya Bhashas (Indian languages), only one slot remains for a non-Indian language. According to the petitioners, since most students choose will English for that slot, other foreign languages that students have studied for several years could effectively be pushed out of the curriculum.
It was further argued that foreign-language proficiency can open up more employment opportunities for students, particularly those from middle-class and lower-middle-class families. This prompted Justice Bagchi to question “Can English be called a foreign language?”
“I personally have reservation about term ‘native’, it is colonial,” he said and suggested that “indigenous” would be more appropriate.
Justice Bagchi also pointed to the historical roots of English in Indian society and said the court would have to examine whether, from a constitutional perspective, English could be considered a non-indigenous language.
Petitioners Raise Concerns Over Exams, Textbooks
The petitioners also raised concerns over the immediate implementation of the policy and its impact on students. One counsel informed the apex court that half-year examinations were approaching, and while CBSE had provided some concessions to Class 9 students, several implementation issues remained.
Peitioners also alleged that although 22 Indian languages are available under the framework, schools are not offering students all these choices and many institutions are allegdly offering only Hindi and Sanskrit.
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan also alleged that adequate books and teachers were not available for the newly prescribed languages. “I have screenshots from this morning. No books are available anywhere. There are no teachers. No classes are taking place,” he told the court.
Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati disputed the allegation and said the government had made the necessary arrangements
The Bench also raised concerns over the implementation of the policy for students currently in Class 6. Justice Bagchi suggested that the current Class 6 batch should be given a reprieve from taking the final third-language examination when they reach Class 10. He also added that if another Indian language is suddenly introduced, schools would need time to bring their infrastructure and resources up to the required level.
The CJI-led Bench also asked CBSE, NCERT and the Centre to review the policy and “go back to the drawing board”. The CJI also urged CBSE to consider some reprieve for Class 6 students for the current academic year.