'Mother tongue fortifies conceptual ability': State asked to frame policy promoting Rajasthani as medium of instruction in schools

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday said the ability to understand and be understood in one’s own language is not a matter of convenience, but a matter of existential rights as it directed the Rajasthan government to formulate a comprehensive policy to recognise and promote Rajasthani as a medium of instruction in schools.

The court emphasised that instruction in the mother language, or a language of choice, fortifies the learner’s conceptual clarity, ensures deeper cognitive engagement, and secures the constitutional promise of meaningful access to knowledge.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta directed the Rajasthan government to formulate an appropriate and comprehensive policy for the effective implementation of the constitutional mandate relating to mother tongue-based education, particularly in the backdrop of the National Education Policy, 2020.

The bench said the ability to understand and be understood in one’s own language is not a matter of convenience, but a matter of existential rights, for comprehension must necessarily precede meaningful participation in society and day to day life activities.

“It is in this context that language, being the means of expression, is the very essence of an individual,” the bench said.

In its judgment on a plea by Padam Mehta and another, the bench directed the state to take necessary measures to recognise and accord due status to the Rajasthani language as a local/regional language for educational purposes and to progressively facilitate its adoption as a medium of instruction, initially at the foundational and preparatory stages of schooling and progressively at higher levels, in a manner consistent with constitutional principles and pedagogical requirements.

The bench noted that Rajasthani is presently being taught as a subject in universities across Rajasthan, including Jai Narain Vyas University, Jodhpur (offering M A in Rajasthani Language), Maharaja Ganga Singh University, Bikaner (offering M A in Rajasthani), University of Rajasthan, Jaipur (offering B A and M A in Rajasthani Language).

“Yet, the procrastinating stand consistently taken by the state is that only those languages included in the Eighth Schedule to the Constitution are being taught as additional languages in government primary and upper primary schools,” the bench said.

The court felt such a position discloses an apparently pedantic approach, as the academic recognition of Rajasthani at the higher educational level itself belies all suggestions that the language lacks institutional or pedagogical acceptance.

It directed the state to take affirmative and time-bound steps towards introducing and providing Rajasthani as a subject in all schools, government and private, in a phased and progressive manner consistent with the constitutional and policy framework.

The bench stressed these directions are necessitated by the palpable vacuum presently operating in an area of significant constitutional importance.

“Constitutional guarantees and policy declarations, particularly those bearing upon access to meaningful and inclusive education, cannot be permitted to remain dormant for want of executive action,” the bench said.

The court also said it cannot remain a silent spectator to the stark dilution of rights so clearly recognised in constitutional text, legislative enactments, and binding precedents.

“While it is not the province of this court to enter upon the arena of policy formulation, it is nonetheless its solemn constitutional duty to ensure that the guarantees enshrined in Part III of the Constitution are not rendered illusory by executive inaction or indifference,” the bench said.

The court pointed out that once the Union government itself has, through legislative measures and policy frameworks, acknowledged the necessity of imparting education in a language intelligible to the child, a corresponding obligation arises for the states to take timely, effective and purposive steps towards its realisation.

“A failure to discharge such obligations cannot be countenanced, for constitutional rights, once recognised, must be translated into tangible outcomes and cannot be permitted to languish as mere abstractions,” the bench said.

The bench said the right to receive education in one’s mother language finds its normative basis in Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, for the guarantee of freedom of speech and expression necessarily encompasses the right to receive information in a form that is both meaningful and comprehensible.

The bench said true value of this freedom lies not merely in the ability to communicate, but in the ability to understand, internalize, and process information so as to make informed choices.

“Viewed through this constitutional lens, it follows that education, being a primary vehicle for transmission of knowledge, must, to the extent practicable, be imparted in a language that the child understands best. Instruction in the mother language, or a language of choice, fortifies the learner’s conceptual clarity, ensures deeper cognitive engagement, and secures the constitutional promise of meaningful access to knowledge,” the bench said.

The bench observed that the mother tongue serves not merely as a medium of communication but also as a vital instrument for cognitive growth, cultural continuity and meaningful participation in the educational process.

The judgment came on the plea challenging the exclusion of Rajasthani from the syllabus of the Rajasthan Eligibility Examination for Teachers (REET) and seeking recognition of the language in school education.