TN govt firm on 2-language policy after SC asks for mindset change on Hindi

Tamil Nadu has refused to allot land for Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas despite the Supreme Court asking it to reconsider its stand on Hindi. The row has also brought the ruling TVK and Opposition DMK onto the same side over the state's two-language policy.

In Short

• School Education Minister Rajmohan Arumugam said court observations during hearing were not final
• State says protecting Tamil differs from opposing Hindi or other languages
• Centre wants land identified while it bears costs of new schools

Tamil Nadu is digging in on its two-language policy, refusing to provide land for Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas even a day after the Supreme Court told the state to “change its mindset” on Hindi and said it could not take the position that the language would not be taught on its soil.

Reacting to the court's observations, School Education Minister and TVK leader Rajmohan Arumugam said Tamil Nadu would continue to stand by its two-language policy and withhold land for Navodaya schools.

He stressed that the Supreme Court's remarks came during the hearing and were not a final verdict, while maintaining that the state was not opposed to Hindi or any other language but was seeking to protect Tamil.

Meanwhile, Leader of the Opposition and DMK leader Udhayanidhi Stalin welcomed the TVK government's decision to stand firm on the state's two-language policy. He also called for a special session of the Tamil Nadu Assembly, if necessary, to pass a resolution against the establishment of centrally sponsored Navodaya schools in the state.

As the dispute escalates, it is worth looking beyond the immediate courtroom exchange to understand what lies beneath the conflict.

WHY NAVODAYA SCHOOLS ARE AT THE CENTRE OF THE ROW

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas are centrally funded, co-educational residential schools administered by the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti under the Union Ministry of Education. The schools follow a three-language formula, with Hindi forming part of the language structure in the system. They were established to provide quality residential education, particularly to talented students from rural areas.

The Centre has sought the establishment of Navodaya schools in Tamil Nadu as part of its wider network of such institutions across the country. The state, however, has resisted the proposal, with its opposition rooted in its longstanding two-language policy and the political and cultural history surrounding language in Tamil Nadu.

But the language question is only one layer of the dispute. The immediate sticking point is far more tangible — land.

The state has not merely objected to the construction of individual schools. It has also refused to allot land to the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti. The decision is tied to its argument that Tamil Nadu should not be compelled to facilitate a Central education scheme whose language framework does not align with the state's own policy.

During the Supreme Court proceedings, Tamil Nadu argued that the issue involved questions of its policy-making powers and cooperative federalism. Its position has been that the Navodaya scheme is a Central initiative and that the state should not be compelled to facilitate it when it has chosen to follow a different education and language framework.

The Centre, on the other hand, has maintained that Tamil Nadu should identify and provide suitable land, while the Centre would bear the cost of establishing the schools.

The Supreme Court has now kept that dispute alive by giving the state three more months to comply with its earlier direction to identify suitable land in every district.

WHAT DID THE SUPREME COURT SAY?

The Supreme Court's latest observations came while hearing Tamil Nadu's challenge to directions concerning the establishment of Navodaya schools in the state.

The Bench questioned Tamil Nadu's resistance to Hindi in the context of the schools and urged the state to reconsider its position. Justice BV Nagarathna told the state to “change its mindset” and observed that it could not take the position that Hindi would not be taught on the soil of Tamil Nadu. The court also cautioned that individual states could not function like separate countries.

The court questioned why the state should oppose the establishment of an additional set of schools and indicated that Navodaya schools could provide another educational opportunity without requiring Tamil Nadu to shut down or alter its existing institutions.

At the same time, the court did not finally decide the larger language-policy question through those oral observations. This is the distinction Rajmohan has highlighted in his response, stressing that the comments were made during the hearing and should not be treated as the final judgment in the case.

The court also urged the Centre and Tamil Nadu to continue discussions and resolve their differences through cooperative federalism rather than allowing the disagreement to prevent the establishment of the schools.

It has given Tamil Nadu three more months to act on its earlier direction on identifying suitable land, keeping the immediate legal dispute alive.

A RARE POLITICAL CONVERGENCE

For much of the past few years, Udhayanidhi Stalin and Tamil Nadu Chief Minister C Joseph Vijay have occupied opposite ends of the state's political battlefield.

The two leaders have traded sharp political attacks since the Vijay-led TVK emerged as a major force in state politics and formed the government. Their rivalry reached a particularly bitter point in August, when Udhayanidhi was arrested over a remark at a Cauvery protest that was widely interpreted as a double entendre involving actor Trisha. Udhayanidhi denied making any objectionable remark and was later released on station bail.

Against that backdrop, the latest Navodaya dispute has produced an unusual moment of political convergence.

Udhayanidhi, despite being the Leader of the Opposition, has backed the Vijay government's decision to hold the line on Tamil Nadu's two-language policy. He has said the state does not need Navodaya schools and argued that Tamil Nadu already runs model and residential schools that provide quality education to disadvantaged students. He has also urged the government to continue putting forward a strong case before the Supreme Court and said a special Assembly session could be convened, if necessary, to pass a resolution reiterating the state's opposition to Navodaya schools.

On the Hindi question, Udhayanidhi has sought to draw the same distinction as the state government — between opposing Hindi itself and opposing its compulsory imposition.

“We are not against any language, including Hindi. We are not functioning as a separate state. We are a state with our own uniqueness,” he said.

His intervention gives the dispute a political dimension that cuts across the ruling-opposition divide. The two sides may continue to disagree on almost everything else, but on the question of retaining Tamil Nadu's two-language policy and resisting Navodaya schools, they have found common ground.

- Ends