<div dir="ltr"><h1>Kannada can't be compulsory medium of instruction in schools: SC to Karnataka</h1>
<div class="" id="googletopad"><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td style="padding:5px 5px 2px 0px" valign="top"><a href="http://www.googleadservices.com/pagead/aclk?sa=L&ai=CBAiVH1FpU4-pMNin-gOwtYGYCqyK0LgDhJXlx5wBk_nq53kQASCoodQJUJHTy6D6_____wFgyf7oirSk5A-gAezQzf4DyAEBqAMBqgTNAU_Qjwz4TLdYMk1WNmo-f5DRLlfgLv8VxNGyeV7V59iDgEaEWihepqCd45K3UUj1eGbKnVkCzd5n5qKHaBSCom8hEWvfk-xweN0UeVFcwCoCJ30zFjWS2J3KbO6TZIyCeS2jtPTW-YtzgzTsFcisFx3omkt7uj0auqPC7LtBXahvhruKcuV-29sPnj7p6EngK7TTWwud7-Y-UM0NfSyt83ATQwBL9_eRjb4kldoUHnTgnmLoSItIiD64_Kb-bxalktqanKbwWnw1OgAAu4WIBgGAB_yusgE&num=1&cid=5GhoAglp0plbh6seeWf-QrEF&sig=AOD64_0inlQlkhiygVc5zIFpdibSFAfJCw&client=ca-ibnlive_site_js&adurl=http://driverupdate.net/articles/windows-8-drivers" target="_blank" style="font:18px/20px Arial;color:rgb(0,0,0);text-decoration:none">Windows 8 Driver Download</a></td>
</tr> <tr><td style="padding:0px 5px 0px 0px" valign="top"><br></td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" style="text-align:right;padding-right:5px"><br></td></tr></tbody></table></div>
<div id="btbox" class="">
<div class="">
<a href="http://ibnlive.in.com/agency/CNN-IBN.html">CNN-IBN</a><br> May 06, 2014 at 01:40pm IST<br> <div class="">
</div>
</div>
<div class=""><a href="http://ibnlive.in.com/newstopics/karnataka.html">#karnataka</a> <a href="http://ibnlive.in.com/newstopics/kannada-language.html" class="">#kannada language</a> <a href="http://ibnlive.in.com/newstopics/primary-schools.html" class="">#primary schools</a> <a href="http://ibnlive.in.com/newstopics/supreme-court.html" class="">#supreme court</a> </div>
</div>
<div id="vote_469901_news">
<div id="pvb_box"><span>35</span><span>37</span></div>
</div>
<p><b>Bangalore:</b> The Supreme Court, in a
landmark judgement on Tuesday, struck down a Karnataka government order
imposing Kannada language as the medium of instruction in all primary
schools of the state.
</p><p>A Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court said that imposing
the mother tongue as the medium of instruction violated the fundamental
rights. This highly emotive issue is likely to create more controversy
across the state.
</p><p>The Karnataka Government had filed an appeal against the division
bench judgment of the Karnataka High Court in the Supreme Court.
</p><p>An association of private schools had been fighting against the
imposition of Kannada as a main language or medium of instruction in
primary schools. Their advocate KV Dhananjaya argued that they were not
questioning the greatness of Kannada or its primacy in the state. They
maintained that the knowledge of English is very essential and the
children should not be deprived of it. During the hearing, advocate
Dhananjay, representing more than 1,800 private unaided English medium
schools in Karnataka, told the Bench how language is not ingrained in
the human brain and teaching in the mother tongue in primary classes
cannot do much to improve career prospects.
</p><p>"The Government wholly errs when it assumes that a parent's
preference for English medium education is a rejection and devaluation
of Kannada language. Kannada is a language of immeasurable greatness. A
child could learn through English medium in his school and still be
perfectly wedded to Kannada culture and hold it with the greatest
respect and regard," Dhananjay said.
</p><p>Citing the example of Nagaland where 90 per cent of the
population is declared as Scheduled Tribes and English is the preferred
medium of instruction, Dhananjay said, "Today, 51 per cent of all
children in India in the primary education system are enrolled in Hindi
medium. Then comes English medium, which has 11 per cent."
</p><p>"If English cannot be protected by the courts because it did not
originate in India, what about the religions of Islam and Christianity?
These religions did not originate in India. Are not these two religions
entitled to protection?" he questioned.
</p><p>Countering his arguments, Karnataka Advocate General Ravi Varma
Kumar stressed that the state had the Constitutional obligation to
provide instructions to people in way of regulation.
</p><p>Citing various provisions, Kumar told the Bench how important it
was to protect minority rights and institutions. "Primary school
language should be one's mother tongue and not English, for, English is
an alien language," he said.
</p><p>"The state has the power to regulate and the right to oppose
restrictions is the right of the state," Kumar said, concluding his
arguments.
</p><p><b>Factual Background:</b>
</p><p>According to 'Legal Junction' in 1982, Government of Karnataka
issued an order thereby prescribing that Kannada shall be the sole first
language from 1st standard of primary school itself. The order was
challenged before the High Court, which held this as unconstitutional.
</p><p>Thereafter, in 1989, State Government, vide an order, made
"mother tongue' as the medium of instruction at the primary school
level. Along with this, State Government made it obligatory for one to
take "Kannada" as second language, if the same has not been chosen as
the first language. The 1989 order was challenged before the Supreme
Court in English Medium Students Parents Association vs. The State of
Karnataka & Ors, which consequently upheld it.
</p><p>Following this, in 1994, State Government came up with another
order ("1994 Order") which, after revising the policy, made the 'medium
of instruction' from 1st to 4th standard in all schools recognised by
the State Government as either Kannada or mother tongue. Contending 1994
order as violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 21, 29(2) and 30(1) of the
Constitution of India ("Constitution"), writ petitions were filed
before the High Court. By its order, full bench of the High Court
quashed the disputed clause No. 2, 3, 6 and 8 of the 1994 Order with its
application to schools other than the schools run or aided by the
Government. It is against this order of the High Court that the State
Government has preferred an appeal before the Supreme Court, i.e., the
present case.
</p><p><b>What is the issue?</b>
</p><p>On one hand, it is the State Government that wants schools
recognized by it to impart primary education in mother tongue or
Kannada. On the other hand, there is a group which [consisting of
parents and the schools] wishes to impart such primary education in
English language.
</p><p>If one does not want one's wards to study in a particular
language; or, if one wants them to study in a particular language, can
such wish be declined by the State Government? This is, in fact, a very
vital question.
</p><p>On behalf of the State Government, arguments were made by PP Rao,
Senior Advocate and an eminent constitutional lawyer. He argued that
the High Court failed to notice the mandate behind Article 350A of the
Constitution, and further argued that the High Court ignored the
decision of Supreme Court in English Medium Students Parents Association
vs The State of Karnataka and others.
</p><p>On the other hand, counsel for the respondent contended that
English Medium Students Parents Association case did not go into the
question of medium of instruction. Rather, it dealt only with question
of mother tongue/Kannada as one of the language. However, Supreme Court,
in the present petition, held that the English Medium Students Parents
Association case dealt with the question pertaining to the "medium of
instruction".
</p><p>Following are the significant questions decided by the Constitutional Bench:
</p><p>(i) What does Mother tongue mean? If it referred to as the
language in which the child is comfortable with, then who will decide
the same?
</p><p>(ii) Whether a student or a parent or a citizen has a right to choose a medium of instruction at primary stage?
</p><p>(iii) Does the imposition of mother tongue in any way
affects the fundamental rights under Article 14, 19, 29 and 30 of
the Constitution?
</p><p>(iv) Whether the Government recognized schools are inclusive
of both government-aided schools and private and unaided schools?
</p><p>(v) Whether the State can by virtue of Article 350-A of
the Constitution compel the linguistic minorities to choose their
mother tongue only as medium of instruction in primary schools?</p><p><br></p><p><a href="http://ibnlive.in.com/news/kannada-cant-be-compulsory-medium-of-instruction-in-schools-sc-to-karnataka/469901-62-129.html">http://ibnlive.in.com/news/kannada-cant-be-compulsory-medium-of-instruction-in-schools-sc-to-karnataka/469901-62-129.html</a><br>
</p><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+<br><br> Harold F. Schiffman<br><br>Professor Emeritus of <br> Dravidian Linguistics and Culture <br>Dept. of South Asia Studies <br>University of Pennsylvania<br>
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6305<br><br>Phone: (215) 898-7475<br>Fax: (215) 573-2138 <br><br>Email: <a href="mailto:haroldfs@gmail.com">haroldfs@gmail.com</a><br><a href="http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/">http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/</a> <br>
<br>-------------------------------------------------
</div>