'Article 350A Cannot Be Used To Mandate Incorporation Of Any Specific Language In Syllabus': MP HC Dismisses PIL For Induction Of Urdu In School Education

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed a PIL contending that the state is not ensuring induction of Urdu language as subject in school education despite millions of Indians speaking Urdu and Urdu being officially recognised as a regional language of India. The petition sought a direction to make Urdu a compulsory subject in all schools upto Class XII. The division bench notd that Article 350A (Facilities for instruction in mother- tongue at primary stage) has been inserted by Constitution (7th Amendment) Act, 1956 in Chapter IV of the Constitution, wherein 'Special Directives' were incorporated. "This Article is designed to implement one of the recommendations of the State Reorganisation Commission, to safeguard the interests of linguistic minorities after the reorganisation of States", observed the Court. It proceeded to state that Article 350-A of the Constitution of India is not couched in mandatory language. The aforesaid Article reflects that an endeavour shall be made by the State to provide adequate facilities for instruction to be given in the mother-tongue at the primary stage of education to the children belonging to linguistic minority groups. "That means, Article 350A says that to the children belonging to specific linguistic minority groups instructions be given in their mother- tongue. Thus the intent behind Article 350-A of the Constitution is to develop the skill of specific linguistic minority groups children by communicating them with their mother-tongue. If the education is given in their mother-tongue, that would be more receptable for them. It does not direct that primary education be given in the mother-tongue of specific linguistic minority groups children", opined the bench. "That means, this Article limits its intent by incorporating the word 'instruction' and not 'education'", it concluded. It was clear to the court that the provision made under Article 350A, which is incorporated in Chapter of 'Special Directives', is only to safeguard the interest of linguistic minorities after reorganization of the State. It cannot be used to make it mandate, to incorporate any specific language in any specific syllabus, otherwise the object which is enshrined in Preamble of the Constitution will be frustrated. "It is apparent from the record produced by the petitioner, i.e., Annexures 'A' and 'B', that specific posts of Teacher for Urdu language have been sanctioned by the Lok Shikshan Sanchalnalaya, Madhya Pradesh. That means, sufficient endeavours have already been made by the Government with regard to Article 350-A of the Constitution of India and by this way, the mandate and spirit of Article 350-A of the Constitution is taken care of", held the Court. It noted that the Preamble is the source of Constitution, to secure to all it citizens Justice, social, economic and political; Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; Equality of status and of opportunity; it shows the ideals and aspirations of the Preamble and the objects which the Constitution-makers intended to be realised by its enacting provisions and "to promote among them all Fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation." The bench opined that our Constitution is not an ephemeral legal document embodying a set of legal rules for the passing hour. It sets out principles for an expanding future and is intended to endure for ages to come and consequently to be adapted to the various problems of human affairs. Hence, a purposive approach rather than a strict literal approach to interpretation should be adopted. "It is relevant to reiterate here that a constitutional provision must be construed not in a narrow and restricted sense but in a wide and liberal sense. The Preamble to Constitution given way to anticipate and take account of changing conditions and purposes so that a constitutional provision does not get fossilised rather remains flexible enough to meet the newly emerging problems. Therefore, it can be said that the generous and purposive construction of the Constitution is the basic object of the Preamble", it stated. The Court expressed the opinion that the Constitution is an ongoing document, therefore, it should be interpreted liberally. It should be interpreted in the light of past experience. It is the duty of courts to interpret the Constitution to fulfill the needs and aspirations of the people depending on the needs of the time. Interpretation of the Constitution stands on a separate footing as compared to our Statute. The Constitution unlike other Statutes, is meant to be a durable instrument to serve through a longer number of years without frequent revision. It is intended to serve the needs of the changing conditions of the future. Constitutional adjudications are not like other interpretations or decision-making. There are moral dimensions to every major constitutional case. The Constitution works on generalities, and...

'Article 350A Cannot Be Used To Mandate Incorporation Of Any Specific Language In Syllabus': MP HC Dismisses PIL For Induction Of Urdu In School Education

Mehal Jain

Tags