Contrary to what is frequently bandied about in certain influential political circles, and nationalist Right-wing cliques, India does not have a national language. The Eighth Schedule of the Constitution of India has a list of 22 languages, which are all designated as ‘official languages’. Hindi is one of those, and so is English.
It is disconcerting that in the official website of the Committee of Parliament on Official Language we come across the following nomenclature: “Department of Official Language – MHA”! How come? What has happened to the 22 listed and designated languages as official languages that the singular ‘language’ has been adopted here?
Again, while providing the background of the committee, it is stated that the “Committee of Parliament on Official Language came into existence as a result of the arrangements made in the Official Language[sic] Act, 1963. The said Act was created to determine the official language policy of the Union after 26 January, 1965, envisaged to adopt Hindi for official purposes”.
How and why a single language that has been carved out from the clutch of 22 official languages, gets granted legitimacy as the prima donna and sole official language, and that sole entity happens to be Hindi? Under what compelling circumstances do 21 other official languages get orphaned, and thrown to the winds?
Be that as it may, the recent report of the committee under the chairpersonship of the Home Minister has, in its report presented to the President on September 9, made certain sweeping recommendations that appear drastic, and not in keeping with what should normally be expected in a multicultural and highly-diverse country like India.
Moreover, the committee seems to have grossly crossed and overrun the remit accorded to it as per the Official Languages Act, 1963. According to the provisions of the Act, the committee is supposed to review the progress made in the use of Hindi for the “official purposes of the Union and to submit report to the President while making recommendations on it”.
When this committee recommends that Hindi is to replace English as the sole language of instruction in central universities and other central institutions such as the AIIMS’, IITs, IIMs, Kendriya Vidyalayas, and the like, it has far exceeded its mandate. Also, when there were strong reservations and resistance during the early 1960s to the declaration that Hindi would be the official language, it was provided that English would continue to be the official language too, in addition to Hindi, for 15 years. Subsequently, due to protestations from many quarters, it was mandated that English would continue as an additional official language indefinitely. Now that policy and promise is being flagrantly flouted.
Besides, the committee’s recommendation that regional languages could be used in state universities and other non-central educational institutions, seems quite charitable, but its implications have not been considered and analysed at all, and in case they have been, then no application of mind has been accorded to the highly-significant consequences and repercussions that may ensue due to the recommendations.
Let first take up the case of central institutions; the students who get admitted here are, invariably, on an all-India basis. That is, they are ranked as per their qualifying marks, and come from different linguistic and cultural regions/states of India. Many of them may never have achieved the required competency in Hindi to have Hindi as the language of instruction. Also, the faculty in the central institutions are drawn from different parts of India based on their merit and capabilities in the subjects and their areas of research — and not because they have expertise or even a smattering of Hindi.
Given this scenario, what legitimacy is there for a complete switchover to Hindi from the prevailing English language instruction which in no way has proved to be a failure, or has been shown to possess any flaws in the way things are functioning in the contemporary context.
The policy of having regional languages as the medium of instruction in educational institutions in the different linguistic zones/states is equally flawed, as students who get admitted to educational institutions in these areas too come from different backgrounds in terms of language, ethnicity, and culture, and in no way can we assume that all of them have had their early education in the language spoken and prevailing in that particular zone/state. This argument holds good for the faculty too, as they come from different backgrounds, and have not been recruited for competence in the language of a particular given state.
A larger question that crops up is what would be the future of the students who qualify from institutions of such central or state kinds? Where do they go next, either for higher education or for seeking employment? They have to get confined to the circles and areas demarcated for them in their respective Hindi or regional/state spheres, forget seeking employment or higher education abroad in overseas institutions.
Also, the fact remains that even within India there could be compelling enclaves demarcated on the basis of the linguistic competence of the students, and not because of their expertise in the chosen area of study or research in which they have qualified. Will India then be moving far off from the avowed dream of national integration to national isolation, which in turn will be a very successful attempt at international seclusion too?
MA Kalam, a social anthropologist, is Visiting Professor, Centre for Economic and Social Studies, Hyderabad. Views are personal, and do not represent the stand of this publication.
Discover the latest Business News, Sensex, and Nifty updates. Obtain Personal Finance insights, tax queries, and expert opinions on Moneycontrol or download the Moneycontrol App to stay updated!
