Why is Article 350A in News? | Supreme Court | Mother Tongue Education | By Ankit Singh | StudyIQ

Summary

In this video, Ankit from Stiqis English explains why Article 358 and related constitutional provisions are in the news, focusing on the Supreme Court's review of the Rajasthan High Court’s 2024 order. The discussion highlights the lack of mother tongue instruction in Rajasthani languages in schools, its impact on educational rights, and the petitioners’ demand to include Rajasthani in teacher recruitment exams. The Supreme Court emphasized that exclusion violates Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 21A, and 350A, and mandated the state to create a policy ensuring mother tongue education, aligning with the National Education Policy 2020. The ruling has broader implications for minority languages across India.

Takeaways

• 😀 The Supreme Court of India is reviewing language rights in education, specifically regarding Rajasthani in Rajasthan.
• 😀 Many students in Rajasthan face a disconnect between their mother tongue and the medium of instruction in schools.
• 😀 Petitioners sought inclusion of Rajasthani in teacher recruitment exams and as a medium of instruction in primary education.
• 😀 The Rajasthan government argued that Rajasthani is not in the 8th Schedule, so it is not obligated to be taught in schools.
• 😀 The Supreme Court stated that linguistic minorities have rights beyond 8th Schedule languages, emphasizing constitutional protections.
• 😀 Article 350A requires the state to provide instruction in the mother tongue for children from linguistic minority groups.
• 😀 Article 21A ensures the right to free and quality education, which cannot be met if instruction is in an unfamiliar language.
• 😀 Article 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech and expression) includes the right to express oneself in one’s mother tongue.
• 😀 Excluding Rajasthani while including other regional languages violates Article 14, which guarantees equality and prevents discrimination.
• 😀 The Supreme Court directed the Rajasthan government to develop a policy for mother-tongue-based education, recognizing Rajasthani as a medium of instruction and subject.
• 😀 Language in education is central to inclusivity, identity, and meaningful access to learning, as emphasized by the Supreme Court and the National Education Policy 2020.

Q & A

What was the main issue discussed in the video?

The video discussed the Supreme Court review petition regarding the inclusion of Rajasthani language in teacher recruitment exams and as a medium of instruction in primary schools in Rajasthan, highlighting its constitutional implications.

Why did the petitioners approach the Rajasthan High Court and the Supreme Court?

The petitioners, aspirants of teacher recruitment exams, requested that Rajasthani be included in the syllabus for recruitment exams and mandated as a medium of instruction in primary education, citing the linguistic rights of Rajasthani speakers.

What was the state government's defense against the inclusion of Rajasthani language?

The Rajasthan government argued that only languages listed in the 8th Schedule of the Constitution are eligible to be taught in government schools and included in recruitment exams, and Rajasthani is not part of that schedule.

What did the Supreme Court say about the 8th Schedule argument?

The Supreme Court stated that while 8th Schedule languages receive specific constitutional protections, this does not absolve the state from providing benefits or education in languages not included in the schedule, such as Rajasthani.

Which constitutional provisions did the Supreme Court find were violated by the Rajasthan government?

The Supreme Court found violations of Article 350A (instruction in mother tongue for linguistic minorities), Article 21A (right to quality education), Article 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech and expression), and Article 14 (right to equality) due to discriminatory exclusion of Rajasthani.

Why is mother tongue instruction considered important according to the Supreme Court?

Mother tongue instruction is crucial for inclusivity, identity, and meaningful access to learning. Education in an unfamiliar language undermines comprehension and the quality of education, affecting foundational development and social recognition.

How does the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 relate to this case?

NEP 2020 recommends that children receive instruction in their home or regional language at least up to class 5 and encourages efforts to continue this up to class 8. The Supreme Court used this policy to support mother tongue-based education.

What did the Supreme Court direct the Rajasthan government to do?

The Court directed the state government to formulate a comprehensive policy for mother tongue-based education, recognize Rajasthani and other local languages for instructional purposes, and progressively implement Rajasthani as both a subject and medium of instruction.

How does this judgment impact other states in India?

The ruling sets a precedent for teaching minority languages in other states, emphasizing that linguistic rights extend beyond 8th Schedule languages and that mother tongue-based education should be implemented nationwide.

Which sections of the Right to Education (RTE) Act are relevant to mother tongue instruction?

Section 29(2)(f) of the RTE Act 2009 stipulates that the medium of instruction should, as far as practicable, be in the child’s mother tongue, supporting the Supreme Court’s emphasis on quality education and language comprehension.