The Delhi High Court recently dismissed a Petition seeking a direction to the Delhi University (DU) to conduct the entrance exam for its LLB course in Hindi.
The Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C. Hari Shankar was hearing a Petition filed by one Mr. Ayush Tiwari.
The Court took note of a decision rendered by a Single Judge of the Court in 2014 relying on the decision in the case of Hindi Hitrakshak Samiti & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., wherein the Apex Court had rejected the contention that not holding entrance examination in any particular language amounts to a denial of admission on the ground of language.
The Apex Court had further observed, "It may be that Hindi or other regional languages are more appropriate medium of imparting education to very many and it may be appropriate and proper to hold the examinations, entrance or otherwise, in any particular regional or Hindi language, or it may be that Hindi or other regional languages because of development of that language, is not yet appropriate medium to transmute or test the knowledge or capacity that could be had in medical and dental disciplines. It is a matter of formulation of policy by the State or educational authorities in charge of any particular situation."
Besides, the single Judge had also noted that Article 348 of the Constitution of India stipulates the usage of English as the language in the Supreme Court and High Courts as well as for Acts and Bills. He had further opined that if the relief was granted, it would tantamount to interfering with DU's autonomy.
The single Judge's decision had been upheld by a Division Bench the same year, with the observation, "We cannot shut our eyes also to the fact that the language of the Courts, particularly at Delhi, primarily remains English and the judgments of the Courts are pronounced and reported in English language. Use of English language is also necessitated owing to the present day policy of transfer of Judges of the High Court and of the Chief Justice being necessarily from another Court and who may or may not be versed in the Hindi language."
These precedents with identical facts, the Court now asserted, bind it to reach the same conclusion. It, therefore, dismissed the petition.