Click the Play button to listen to article

The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) to extend the same relaxation already available to Class 7 students to those in Class 6 regarding evaluation under the three-language formula.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the CBSE's 3-language formula.

At the beginning of the hearing, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta informed the court that detailed discussions had taken place on the Court's earlier suggestion that present Class 6 students be exempted from the 3-language formula. He submitted that the government would persuade the bench to allow implementation for Class 6 from the current year.  Out of 28,819 schools, except for 1.2% of schools, the rest were compliant, textbooks and materials were available, and students had opted for the scheme, he said.

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati pointed out that Class 7 students (along with Classes 8 and 9) have been granted a transitional relaxation under which there will be no CBSE Board examination in the third language when they reach Class 10. The third language is assessed only through internal school-based evaluation, with no pass/fail consequence linked to Board results.

Justice Bagchi observed that by this stage the CBSE had almost entirely covered its ecosystem. Noting that the policy was notified in March, he suggested a “soft launch” so that Class 6 students could receive the same privilege as Class 7 students, given logistical difficulties.

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for petitioners, argued that students had complied only because they had no choice. He pointed out that textbooks were not available online initially and that CBSE deals with about 28.83 lakh students. Neither the ICSE board nor state boards were imposing similar requirements on children mid-way through their schooling, he said. He urged that the policy for Class 6 be deferred at least until 2027.

One counsel flagged the issue of English being notified as a non-native language, because of which students had to forego many foreign languages they were already studying. When the Constitution is written in English and the Supreme Court proceedings are held in the same language, how can it be regarded as "non-native", she asked. Justice Bagchi said that this issue will be considered by the Court. During the previous hearings, the Court had questioned the rationale of this approach towards English.

Other counsel highlighted academic pressure on students, infrastructure issues in schools, limited language options (with only Hindi and Sanskrit being offered in some cases), and difficulties faced by students in accessing books, particularly in rural areas. One counsel representing a parent of a Class 9 student said online textbooks were insufficient. Justice Mohana responded by noting that children had studied during the Covid period using mobile phones and asked for better reasons against the policy.

Senior Advocate Anand Grover raised the issue of limited language choices, asking what options existed for a student wanting to learn Punjabi.

Ultimately, taking note of the ASG's explanation regarding the relaxations from Board evaluations for Class 7-9, the bench directed that the same be extended to Class 6.

 “There will be no pass/failure. There will only be appearance certificate,” the CJI indicated.

In its order, the bench recorded the submission that 99% of schools had provided adequate infrastructure and only 1.2% were yet to make facilities. “In light of this, we direct that students of 6th standard may be granted same exemption as granted to class 7 students,” the court ordered.

The bench further directed the CBSE to appoint an officer to reach out to the remaining schools and ascertain their difficulties. Justice Bagchi observed that if any school held back a student in internal assessment, the court would intervene.

The Supreme Court directed the CBSE to file a counter-affidavit within four weeks, with a rejoinder to follow. The main matter has been posted for further hearing.

Case : Yashica Bhandari Jain and others v. Union of India and others. W.P.(C) No. 694/2026 (and connected cases)

Tags: