The Supreme Court on Thursday questioned the decision of the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) to introduce a compulsory third language in Class IX, stating that it put avoidable academic pressure on students already preparing for the board exams, and instead suggested introducing any such language from Class VI.
Justice BV Nagarathna’s remarks assume significance as they come barely two weeks after CBSE announced a one-time relaxation for the current batch of Class IX students, exempting them from taking the third language in the Class X board examination following widespread concerns from schools, parents and students over the sudden implementation of the policy.
Justice Nagaratna made the remarks during the hearing of the Tamil Nadu government’s appeal against the 2017 Madras High Court ruling directing the state to facilitate the establishment of Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas (JNVs) in every district. Tamil Nadu has consistently opposed the scheme, holding that the JNVs follow a three-language policy that is inconsistent with the state’s long-standing two-language policy.
Read also: The SC seeks the Centre’s response on the revised three-language policy
Although the validity of the three-language policy passed by the Central Board of Secondary Education was not under consideration before the bench which also comprised Justice R. Mahadevan, however, the discussion has veered towards the stage where a third language is introduced in schools.
When the Tamil Nadu lawyer asserted that the third language becomes compulsory only from ninth grade, Justice Nagaratna responded, saying: “No, that’s too bad. IX standard is cumbersome. Why introduce a new language in ninth grade? You introduce it in sixth grade.”
Based on her school education, the judge noted that students in her school began learning the third language during middle school so that they would be adequately prepared before high school. “In middle school, third language learning starts…and the earlier, the better,” she noted.
Addressing the Union government directly, Justice Nagarathna said: “Please, the Indian Union does not have a third language in IX standard. CBSE, ICSE, state boards, 10th standard is a board exam. From the end of VIII standard onwards, the pressure begins.”
Recalling her academic experience in the 1970s, she said students were introduced to Class 10 concepts as early as Class 8 due to the rigors of board exams. “So, if we have this kind of setup and everything, what about today’s students? Don’t start a new language in ninth grade. Start it in sixth… I remember my experience from 1976,” she commented.
Its observations reflect concerns raised by schools and parents after the CBSE, through a circular issued on May 15, directed affiliated schools to make three languages compulsory for Class IX students from July 1, 2026, though its revised scheme of studies had envisaged a phased rollout starting from Class 6.
Read also: Three Language Policy: CBSE gives a one-time exemption to existing students of classes 7-9
The circular issued on May 15 asks schools to immediately implement the policy for the current Grade 9 batch, even asking them to use third language textbooks for Grade 6 as a temporary arrangement until the allocated materials become available.
After widespread objections over logistical and academic difficulties, CBSE on June 29 announced a one-time transitional relaxation. The current Class 9 batch, as well as students currently in Classes 7 and 8 who have already chosen two non-native languages, have been allowed to continue their existing language combinations by adding just one Hindi language. Importantly, the Board has clarified that the third language for this batch will be assessed internally only and will not form part of the Class 10 Board examination.
The CBSE circular issued on May 15 is being separately challenged before a bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, which has scheduled a hearing next week.
During the hearing on Thursday, Justice Nagaratna also rejected the suggestion that the policy mandated Hindi. “The state language must be taught, English and any third language must be taught. It does not say Hindi,” she observed.
When counsel for the respondent NGO pointed out that the National Education Policy prohibits the imposition of any language, the judge asked counsel for Tamil Nadu: “You don’t want Hindi, but if it’s Sanskrit, what’s the problem?”
She also advised the state not to reject central schemes just because they are issued by the Union government, saying: “You may have your own education system, but do not block central government schools.”
The bench noted that consultations between the Union and the state on setting up the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya were still ongoing, and adjourned the matter for further hearing on August 11.
