Court Not An Expert In History Of Origin Of Race: Madras High Court Asks State To Review Aryan-Dravidian Theory Taught In Schools

The Madras High Court recently refrained from passing any orders on a plea questioning the Aryan-Dravidian race theory taught in educational institutions. The bench of Chief Justice KR Shriram and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy remarked that the court was not an expert in the history of origin of race and thus could not grant the relief as requested for. The court thus observed that it was for the experts to determine whether the claims made by the petitioner on the two race theory was valid or not. “The court is not an expert in history or the origin of races. The relief requested for by the petitioner cannot be granted by this court without examining and deciding whether the two-race theory, which the petitioner claims to be false, is valid or invalid. It is appropriate that this determination be made by experts in the field, and not by the court,” the court observed. The court was hearing a petition filed by Mahalingam Balaji. Balaji had contended that the educational institutions were propagating a false theory that there were two races – Aryan and Dravidian and this would in turn promote divisiveness among people. He argued that the two-race theory is false and would cause substantial harm to impressionable minds. The Department of School Education submitted that the syllabus was decided based on inputs received from experts in respective field. He also submitted that the petitioner could submit a representation to the State Council of Education Research and Training (SCERT) and the same could be considered and disposed within a reasonable time. The Ministry of Education and the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) also submitted that the representation should be submitted to the NCERT which could consider the same. Since the court deemed it fit not to express any opinion in the case, the court directed the NCERT and SCERT to consider Balaji's representation and dispose the same within 12 weeks after providing a reasonable opportunity including a personal hearing. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.Mahalingam Balaji Party-in-person Counsel for the Respondent: Mr.Rajesh Vivekananthan Deputy Solicitor General, Mr.J.Ravindran Additional Advocate General assisted by Ms.Maithily Additional Government Pleader, Mr.A.Edwin Prabakar State Government Pleader assisted by Mr.T.K.Saravanan Government Advocate Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 408 Case Title: Mahalingam Balaji v. The Secretary and Others Case No: W.P.No.30424 of 2024Click here to read/download the judgment

Court Not An Expert In History Of Origin Of Race: Madras High Court Asks State To Review Aryan-Dravidian Theory Taught In Schools

Upasana Sajeev

Tags