[lg policy] India: Supreme Court on Sanskrit-KVS controversy: Blunting the outrage factory

[Harold Schiffman]

 Supreme Court on Sanskrit-KVS controversy: Blunting the outrage factory

#Sanskrit <http://www.niticentral.com/tag/sanskrit>

#Sanskrit controversy <http://www.niticentral.com/tag/sanskrit-controversy>
 432
 [image: Supreme Court of India]

*Supreme Court of India*

In the needless controversy and outrage that followed the decision by
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) of which the Minister of HRD Smriti
Irani is the ex-officio chairperson to rectify a violation of the Central
government’s Three Language Formula in vogue since the 1960s, the Supreme
Court too got involved. And, as it turns out, SC has laid to rest at least
one issue that the ‘seculars’ latched on to in their baseless cries of
“saffronisation”.

Writing for *Niti Central*, this author has earlier explained at length
<http://www.niticentral.com/2014/11/18/german-kendriya-vidyalayas-controversy-little-known-facts-245478.html>
what the entire matter was all about. The manner in which this decision was
misinterpreted and distorted by some sections betrayed a sense of
ignorance. The Three Language Formula that the Congress government devised
back in the 1960s did not contain the option of having a foreign language.

Despite this, MoU was entered into between KVS and Goethe-Institute Max
Mueller Bhawan in 2011 in the presence of UPA’s MoS (HRD) which sought to
offer German as the third language in KVS schools. Note that Congress-led
UPA could have changed the three language policy itself and then introduced
German. It could have addressed the nation on the importance of German for
Indian school students and why the three language formula needed change.

But it didn’t. Instead, without officially changing the policy, UPA took
this step.

The term of the MoU being three years, it came up for renewal in end of
August this year. August is, indeed, bang in the middle of the academic
term. Ms. Irani, therefore, had to decide whether to continue with this
violation of the Union’s three language formula to avoid a mid-term change,
or to take a bold stand to end this infirmity.

<http://www.niticentral.com/niti_spotlight/islamic-state-and-a-new-caliphate>


She chose the latter and was roundly criticized for it. What was bizarre
was the fact that most of the criticism was based on a conjured up charge
against her of ‘saffronising’ education by replacing German – a ‘modern’
and ‘global’ language – with Sanskrit – an ‘ancient’ and ‘obsolete’
language. As this author again explained
<http://www.niticentral.com/2014/11/22/german-vs-sanskrit-controversy-created-deliberately-246235.html>,
Ms. Irani’s decision was to end the violation of government’s own policy.

It wasn’t a simple case of replacing Sanskrit with German as most
ignoramuses saw it as. German could not be the third language and was,
therefore, made as an optional language still available to students who
desired to learn it. What became the third language was Sanskrit or any
other modern Indian language – exactly as the three language formula
required.

And this, as we will see, was exactly how SC saw it too.

The real question – which eluded most critics obsessed with saffronisaton –
was how the mid-term change would affect students in Classes 6, 7 and 8 who
studied German since the MoU came into effect. That’s what SC focused on
solely – how to ensure that students are not adversely affected.

It disposed of the petition challenging Ms. Irani’s decision with the
following measures:

–          In the current academic session (2014-2015), there wouldn’t be
any examination/assessment for Sanskrit language for students in Classes 6,
7 and 8;

–          Students who were already learning German language as the third
language would take the examination/assessment for current academic session
as an optional language;

–          From the next academic session, students of Classes 6, 7 and 8
will take examination in Sanskrit or any other modern Indian language as
the third language;

–          Those students who wanted to continue to learn German could be
free to do so as an optional subject;

Here is the link to the judgment
<https://www.scribd.com/doc/250658024/Supreme-Court-Judgment-Sanskrit-Issue>
.

The underlined portions clearly convey that the three-judge Bench of the
Supreme Court (Justice Anil Dave, Justice Kurian Joseph and Justice Arun
Mishra) reaffirmed Ms. Irani’s decision to ensure that the third language
is Sanskrit or other modern Indian language and German was available an
optional subject.

Indeed, while examination in Sanskrit or another modern Indian language
wouldn’t be taken in this academic year (given that students would have
little time to prepare), examination in German would mean examination in
the optional language. Even in taking measures to avoid hardship to
students, SC did not think it proper to reverse Ms. Irani’s decision, thus
confirming Ms. Irani’s decision to uphold the Union’s three language policy.

With this decision, the apex court has quite clearly blunted the outrage
factory that loves to spread fear of a conjured up ‘saffronisation’.
http://www.niticentral.com/2014/12/22/supreme-court-sanskrit-kvs-controversy-blunting-outrage-factory-292649.html


-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to its
members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner or
sponsor of the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who
disagree with a message are encouraged to post a rebuttal, and to write
directly to the original sender of any offensive message.  A copy of this
may be forwarded to this list as well.  (H. Schiffman, Moderator)

For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to
https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/
listinfo/lgpolicy-list
*******************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lgpolicy-list/attachments/20141222/c5a07fdc/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list