India's 3-language policy in a tug-of-war: Balancing national unity and state rights

Time of India

01-07-2025

A contentious debate that has simmered for decades in Indian education is boiling over once again. Multiple states are reassessing their alignment with the Centre's three-language policy outlined in the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
While some states continue to adhere to a two-language model, others have paused or scaled back implementation of the Centre's recommendations, highlighting the persistent tension between national education guidelines and regional linguistic priorities.
At the heart of this debate is the three-language formula, a framework originally introduced in 1968 to promote multilingualism, national cohesion, and equitable access to language learning.
Though reaffirmed in successive education policies, its adoption has remained uneven across India. The most recent flashpoints, involving Karnataka, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu, have drawn renewed attention to the formula's legal status, practical challenges, and implications for federalism in Indian education policy.
Understanding the three-language formula
The three-language policy traces its roots back to the Kothari Commission recommendations of 1964-66 and was first implemented through the National Policy on Education in 1968.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Memperdagangkan CFD Emas dengan salah satu spread terendah?
IC Markets
Mendaftar
Undo
The framework has since been reinforced in subsequent education policies, including the current NEP 2020.
The policy's requirements are straightforward on paper:
Every student must learn three languages during their school education
At least two must be native Indian languages
States, regions, schools, or students themselves can choose which languages to include
Implementation should cover both government and private institutions
Crucially, no language can be imposed on any state or individual
However, the practical application varies dramatically across India's diverse linguistic landscape. Hindi-speaking states typically combine Hindi, English, and a modern Indian language – often from southern India. Non-Hindi-speaking states generally opt for their regional language, Hindi, and English.
The resistance: States assert their rights
The current pushback against the three-language formula reflects long-standing regional concerns about linguistic autonomy and cultural preservation.
Tamil Nadu has maintained its opposition since the late 1930s, consistently offering only Tamil and English in its curriculum. The state's resistance to Hindi instruction has remained unwavering through multiple policy iterations.
Karnataka recently declared its intention to continue with the two-language model of Kannada and English, particularly in government schools, despite earlier indications of compliance with the central policy.
Maharashtra has suspended implementation of the three-language policy in primary education, becoming the latest state to formally step back from the Centre's recommendations.
Constitutional framework: Where authority really lies
The legal landscape surrounding language education reveals why states feel empowered to challenge central directives. India's constitutional structure provides clear protections for state autonomy in educational matters.
Education falls under the Concurrent List in the Constitution's Seventh Schedule, meaning both the centre and states can legislate on the subject.
However, Article 350A specifically mandates that states arrange primary education in the mother tongue for linguistic minorities.
Most importantly, there exists no legal compulsion for states to adopt the three-language formula. This constitutional freedom has enabled states to design language policies that reflect their regional demographics, historical contexts, and cultural priorities.
The funding controversy: Conditional support raises stakes
The debate has intensified due to concerns over conditional funding through the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA), the centre's flagship education scheme that typically covers 60% of costs whilst states contribute 40%.
In 2024, central assistance worth over INR 570 crore was reportedly withheld from at least one state due to non-compliance with NEP 2020 provisions, including the three-language formula. This development has raised alarm bells about the centre using financial leverage to enforce policy compliance, potentially undermining the federal structure of Indian governance.
Implementation reality: A patchwork approach
Across India, the three-language policy's implementation reveals stark regional variations:
Non-Hindi-speaking states like Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, and Odisha typically offer their regional language alongside English and Hindi, though with varying degrees of emphasis and quality.
Hindi-speaking states often fulfil the requirement through Hindi, English, and a third option such as Sanskrit, Urdu, or Punjabi – though critics argue that choosing classical languages defeats the policy's modern communication objectives.
Private institutions, particularly those affiliated with international boards, frequently substitute foreign languages like French, German, or Spanish for the third Indian language, catering to parental aspirations for global competitiveness.
The broader implications
This ongoing tension reflects fundamental questions about India's federal structure and the balance between national unity and regional identity. The three-language policy, designed to promote multilingualism and national cohesion, has now become a flashpoint for debates about cultural autonomy and state rights.
The centre continues to advocate for the policy as essential for national integration and equitable access to opportunities.
States, however, view their linguistic policies as core to their cultural identity and constitutional prerogatives.
As the debate continues, the three-language formula remains what it has always been; a non-mandatory framework that states can choose to adopt or reject. The current resistance from major states suggests that any future resolution will require greater sensitivity to regional concerns and perhaps a more flexible approach to implementation. The outcome of this debate will likely shape not just language education in India, but also set important precedents for federal-state relations in educational policy-making.
Is your child ready for the careers of tomorrow? Enroll now and take advantage of our early bird offer! Spaces are limited.