Final decision on three-language formula after talks with stakeholders: Maharashtra CM Fadnavis
MUMBAI: Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis has said a final decision on the three-language formula will be taken only after consultations with all stakeholders, including litterateurs, language experts and political leaders.
Fadnavis chaired a meeting at his official residence in south Mumbai late Monday night to deliberate on the issue.
Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde, School Education Minister Dada Bhuse, Minister of State Dr Pankaj Bhoyar and senior officials from the education department were present.
The state government last week issued an amended order, stating Hindi will generally be taught as the third language to students in Marathi and English medium schools from Classes 1 to 5.
The government had maintained that Hindi would not be compulsory, but mandated consent of at least 20 students per grade in a school for studying any Indian language other than Hindi.
During the meeting chaired by CM Fadnavis on Monday, detailed discussions were held on the implications of the three-language policy under the New Education Policy (NEP).
It was decided that the actual ground situation in various states will be presented for reference, and a comprehensive presentation would be made on the academic impact, especially with regard to Marathi students, a statement from the Chief Minister's Office said.
"It was agreed that a structured consultation process be conducted with scholars, writers, political leaders and other stakeholders before arriving at a final decision," Fadnavis said in the statement.
Following the meeting, School Education Minister Dada Bhuse is expected to initiate the next phase of consultations, the statement said.
After the meeting, Bhuse told reporters that the state government will hold discussions with various stakeholders, including political leaders and litterateurs, to address concerns over the implementation of the NEP.
All decisions have been taken keeping the interest of students at the forefront, he asserted.
Bhuse said a review meeting was held earlier on Monday to assess previous decisions made under the NEP framework.
"We will engage with all concerned, whether it is (MNS chief) Raj Thackeray or noted writers. We will place all facts before them and explain that the policy has been implemented after a thorough study, ensuring our students do not lag behind," he said.
Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) head Raj Thackeray last week asked what was the need to "impose" Hindi on students and appealed to schools in the state to foil the government's "hidden agenda to deliberately create a language divide."
Hindi is the state language of some northern states and it is wrong to force it on Maharashtra, where Marathi is widely used, he asserted.
Bhuse said while formulating the education policy, the government has always prioritised students' welfare and is open to suggestions from all quarters. "We will meet those who have raised objections and are hopeful of a positive outcome through dialogue," he said.
Bhuse also said the government would share a comparative analysis of the situation in Maharashtra and other states to support its decisions.
Earlier, Cultural Affairs Minister Ashish Shelar on Monday made it clear that only Marathi is mandatory in the state, and not Hindi, and said the ongoing controversy on teaching a third language in schools was "unreasonable and illogical."
Talking to reporters here, Shelar insisted teaching Hindi has not been introduced as a mandatory third language from Classes 1 to 5 as being claimed in some quarters. "In fact, our government has removed the earlier compulsion of teaching Hindi from Classes 5 to 8. Instead, we have made it (Hindi) available as an optional choice alongside several other languages. Therefore, the ongoing discussion around the issue is unrealistic, unreasonable and illogical," he said.
"We are staunch supporters of the Marathi language and equally committed to the interest of students," averred Shelar, who is also the Mumbai BJP president.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
35 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Corporate India has a caste problem. And it is time to talk about it
On June 23, the Indian aviation industry was again in the news, however, for all the wrong reasons. Reports started coming in of an IndiGo pilot trainee alleging caste based discrimination by his bosses. An FIR has been filed, and a police investigation is underway. Meanwhile, IndiGo has strongly refuted such claims, saying it stands for 'zero-tolerance policy towards any form of discrimination'. The investigation will take its own course, but it opens the avenue to talk about a much larger issue: Corporate India's caste problem. Post the 1990s, when the private sector started to expand immensely owing to policy changes, it was primarily the Savarna entrepreneurs who benefited greatly. Among them, the rise of Bania capital within India Inc has been mapped extensively. However, this has been perceived as an organic development, born out of inherent merit, developed in some sort of 'casteless vacuum'. However, the material realities of labour and capital are intrinsically caste-coded. The overrepresentation of communities in some sectors of the economy is directly and (often) proportionally related to the absence of other communities in the same. Babasaheb Ambedkar had analysed caste as not just a system of division of labour, but rather a division of labourers. Within corporate India, this division and categorisation of labourers is starkly visible. In the last decade or so, even as corporate culture internationally veered towards 'Diversity, Equity, Inclusion', also known as DEI practices, India Inc has remained caste-blind. Not just within corporate structures and the industry, but even within allied ecosystems — from B-schools to market commentators, journalists, and podcasters — there has been no serious or critical conversation on caste as a key variable in business management and planning. This is very surprising because most of the real economy is based on kinship networks and 'contacts' which often overlap with political funding and are ultimately mediated through caste connections. In the absence of any meaningful discourse on these intersections, the corporate understanding of Indian market realities remains stunted, myopic and unsuited for Indian needs, as it frequently over-fixates on some socio-cultural segments while invisibilising large swathes. India's commerce minister, Piyush Goyal's recent comments on the lopsided nature of startup/business priorities of corporate India also seem to suggest the same. The minister's comments stirred up a debate. Most business leaders responded with a litany of complaints against the government itself and lamented the business challenges they faced. While there is certainly a lot of validity in their collective grievance, very few actually acknowledged that there was a 'priority gap'. Fewer still tried to analyse why the 'gaze' of India Inc remains limited only to a very small range of business models, often urban-situated and catering usually to high-net-worth individuals. Even as every B-school teaches its MBAs to 'think outside the box' and all industry captains talk ad nauseum about innovation — it seems that in the last 30 years no one has realistically found a way to innovatively create value for large sections of Indian masses outside those wealthy urban enclaves (almost always populated by other wealthy Savarnas like themselves). It may well be because of the lack of diversity in their leadership, in the one-dimensional, non-diverse pedagogy (in spaces of training) that celebrates itself as ground-breaking and inventive. India Inc, despite three decades of neoliberalisation, remains a social formation that is run by Savarnas, for other Savarnas and trained by Savarnas. This total ubiquity of Savarna-ness renders corporate culture in its own shape, where the omnipresent becomes the invisible. As per David Foster Wallace's allegory about the fish swimming in water does not 'see' the water, the caste stratified codes of corporate India become invisible to Savarnas within it. But almost immediately, it manifests to folks who come from different socio-cultural realities, often in hostile and contradictory ways. So much so that for many marginalised people, to survive and move ahead in India Inc, they have to internalise and validate Savarna idioms of business success. Whether it is the casteist ad campaign run by Zomato, Narayan Murthy's work-life balance ideas or Swiggy's decision for veg-only fleets (rescinded upon backlash) — that is how you emerge with statements or decisions. And on occasion, where friction within teams emerges, inherent, embedded caste prejudices come to the fore in ways that are traumatic for caste-marginalised people but may seem totally normal or par-for-the-course to other Savarnas. It remains to be seen whether this is the case in the aforementioned IndiGo matter. Irrespective of how the matter unfolds, these types of flashpoints remain an unspoken reality for the minority caste-marginalised professionals working in top positions. In most cases, one stays silent and compliant, and internalises the bias as the structure itself is coded in the vocabulary of the dominant caste. At a time when a strong online campaign is emerging against caste-based reservation among educated, elite Savarnas, it is perhaps time for India Inc to reflect upon itself and give shape to the unfulfilled promise of diversity and consider reservations in the private sector as an innovative, bold and progressive step in bridging market reforms, nation-building mandates as well as dignity to all working professionals. The writer is Associate Dean at Woxsen University, Hyderabad. His latest book is Meet the Savarnas: Indian Millennials Whose Mediocrity Broke Everything
Hindustan Times
38 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Is language row the reason for MNCs' exit from Bengaluru? Social media debates
A social media post on the ongoing Kannada language row in Bengaluru and the resultant divide between locals and migrants sparked a fresh discussion on Monday. A social media user shared a picture of a sign that read, 'Please communicate in Kannada,' saying it is the reason why companies were exiting Bengaluru.(X) "When my children ask me in the future, "Why did IT and Electronics MNCs move out of Bengaluru?", I will show them this," a social media user posted on X, sharing a picture of a sign that read, 'Please communicate in Kannada.' It amassed more than 23,000 views and over 600 likes at the time this article was being written. It also garnered several replies, with most users agreeing with the sentiment. ALSO READ | 'Bengaluru deserves the hate it's getting…': Woman's viral post on growing divide sparks debate 'No wonder why companies are leaving bangalore and moving to Hyderabad,' a user replied. 'Bhai, the number one reason would be the insane traffic and cost of living. This will be the 2nd,' another wrote. ALSO READ | 'I'm not for it, people are already...': Karnataka labour minister opposes controversial 12-hour workday proposal 'Seriously. I live in Hong Kong and everyone here services me in English in my daily life. No such thing like learn Chinese. Same when I visit Dubai, no one expects me to learn Arabic, or Bahasa in Singapore..,' one more response said. 'Will they speak to their foreign clients also in Kannada,' a user shared. On the other hand, many came to the support of locals, with one writing, 'Full support to kannadigas for this, go for that, we Marathis are with you...'. 'Nobody is moving out for language. You will keep hearing global giants opening new offices almost every week. Even if some move out, it will be only because of civic mismanagement and cost of living,' another said. ALSO READ | Bengaluru airport faces major disruptions, 16 international flights cancelled amid Middle East tensions: Report 'Bengaluru deserves the hate…': Woman's viral post In a similar instance, another social media post by a Bengaluru resident has gone viral, igniting conversations around class tensions, attitudes of locals, and the changing social dynamics of the tech hub amidst the language row. 'I'm a Kannadiga and I'm done defending Bengaluru. This city deserves the hate it's getting,' the woman posted on Reddit.
Hindustan Times
42 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Panchayat season 4 review: Phulera loses its innocence, originality as murky politics, repetition of formula take over
Panchayat season 4 review Cast: Jitendra Kumar, Raghubir Yadav, Neena Gupta, Faisal Malik, Chandan Roy, Sanvikaa, Durgesh Kumar, Sunita Rajwar, Ashok Pathak, and Pankaj Jha Director: Deepak Kumar Mishra Rating: ★★.5 For years, Panchayat served as a reminder of the power of Indian streaming. In a wave of crime dramas and gun battles, this show - about the life of a Panchayat secretary - had won hearts and impressed critics. But like they say, nothing lasts forever. And sadly, Panchayat's goodwill seems to be ending before the show itself calls it a day. The latest season, focused on Phulera's Panchayat elections, completely disregards what had made the show great - simplicity and relatability. Panchayat season 4 sees formula creeping in finally, and also an overload of the murkiness of politics over the simplicity of human emotions. Panchayat season 4 review: The old favourite is back, but isn't up to the mark this time. Panchayat season 4 opens a few weeks after the end of season 3. The elections are upon us, and Manju Devi (Neena Gupta) and Pradhan ji (Raghuvir Yadav) face their toughest challenge in the form of Kranti Devi and Bhushan (Sunita Rajwar and Durgesh Kumar). Abhishek (Jitendra) has long given up the hope of being non-partisan and is actively campaigning for Manju's party. But despite Pradhan's 'dabdaba' in Phulera, winning may not be as easy as it has been so far. The spectre of elections looms large on Panchayat season 4 and is easily its undoing as well. The first two seasons were splendid, largely because of the anthology-like quality of storytelling, where each episode was a self-contained story creating an overarching narrative. Season 3 digressed a little but still managed to hold its own, largely due to crisp writing and some memorable sequences. What Panchayat season 4 lacks But season 4 gets lost in the political machinations and one-upmanship of the elections. It was important for the makers to keep the focus on the elections. But one feels that it sucks the joy and innocence out of Panchayat, which had been its USP all along. The new season also feels more manufactured than before, with the sameness of formula appearing to finally show its face here. That robs the narrative of the freshness that Panchayat had managed to retain for three seasons. The biggest disservice the show does is to Pradhan ji himself. Raghuvir Yadav's character has been shown as a clever politician, but a good man who is the right choice for Phulera. That is why Abhishek is comfortable letting go of his impartiality to side with him over the years. However, this season turns him into just a politician who tries to win votes and get back into power through populist measures. If the intent was to show how flawed he is, it did not translate. In fact, if anything, it makes him come across as inefficient. There are a few stray moments in the show that highlight this, from unclean drains to unhappy voters. But the show misses the chance to really drive home the point. All it does is generate sympathy for the other side. Panchayat had a chance to act non-partisan here, too. If only it had presented Bhushan with an ounce of humanity. But it messes up there too, reducing Bhushan and Kranti to stereotypical bad guys, right down to a sinister 90s' background theme for them. What works in season 4 But then, the show does redeem itself with the arc it gives to Vinod (Ashok Pathak). It is praiseworthy how the show manages to bring a supporting character's arc to the forefront. If it was Prahlad in season 2, it's Vinod here. Pathak's heartfelt performance also deserves a mention. In the ensemble, the heavy lifting has yet again been done by the support cast, with Ashok Pathak, Durgesh Kumar, Chandan Roy, Sunita Rajwar, and Raghuvir Yadav shining the brightest. Despite how his character has been handled, Raghuvir Yadav manages to give one of the most memorable scenes of the show in the final episode. Neena Gupta and Jitendra Kumar are capable as always, but somehow get subdued with everything happening around them. It's not their fault that their characters come across as passive somehow. Panchayat season 4 is not bad. It is just a letdown by the show's lofty standards. On its own, Phulera still breathes, and there are stories and characters (the electrician and Manju's father being worthy additions) that stand out. Some old returnees also steal the spotlights. But the chuckles are fewer, the narrative a little jaded, and the sheen somewhat less bright than it had been.
