In a significant judicial intervention, the Kerala High Court has issued an interim stay on the implementation of a contentious government order issued by the Lakshadweep Administration that sought to introduce ‘Hindi’ as the compulsory third language in the school curriculum across the Union Territory, effectively removing Arabic and Mahal (Jeseri) as available options.
Background and Government Order
The impugned government order, dated 14 May 2025, mandated a revised language policy for schools under the Lakshadweep Administration. This order introduced “India” interpreted to mean Hindi as the mandatory third language, irrespective of local linguistic traditions or preferences. This directive was proposed to be implemented from 1 July 2025, aligned with the onset of the new academic session.
Petition and Legal Challenge
The said order was challenged through a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by P I Ajas Akber, the Lakshadweep unit president of the National Students’ Union of India (NSUI). The petitioner contended that the directive amounted to a violation of Article 29(1) of the Constitution of India, which safeguards the rights of minorities to conserve their distinct language, script, and culture.
He further argued that the order undermined linguistic pluralism, particularly in Minicoy Island, where Mahal, a dialect of Dhivehi is the native tongue, and across the archipelago where Arabic plays a significant cultural and religious role.
High Court Observations and Interim Order
The Division Bench of Kerala HC, comprising Chief Justice A J Desai and Justice V G Arun, while hearing the matter, took cognizance of the immediate resumption of school activities scheduled for 9 June 2025, and held that any abrupt enforcement of the new language policy could cause administrative confusion and irreparable harm to students and teachers.
The court observed that the rights of linguistic minorities must be protected with due sensitivity, especially in regions like Lakshadweep, which are culturally and demographically distinct from the Indian mainland. The Bench, therefore, granted an interim stay on the implementation of the order until further notice, thereby allowing schools to continue instruction in Arabic and Mahal as third language options.
Government’s Position
The Counsel for the Union Territory administration argued that the directive was prospective in nature, set to be enforced only from July 1, and that the petition was premature. The government also contended that the introduction of Hindi was in alignment with the Three-Language Formula envisioned by National Education Policy, 2020; National Curriculum Framework for the Foundational Stage, 2022 and National Curriculum Framework for School Education, 2023.
The high court said that the National Educational Policy, 2020 only says that of the three languages to be taught in school, two should be native to India. The court also said that according to the Kerala Education Rules, 1959 and Kerala Curriculum Framework, Arabic is a prescribed subject of study.
However, it also held that educational policy directives, especially those impacting minority linguistic rights, cannot be implemented without due consultation, sensitivity, and constitutional scrutiny.
Conclusion and Way Forward
The matter is now pending further hearing, and the interim stay remains in effect. This case raises critical questions about federalism, linguistic identity, cultural preservation, and the constitutional balance between national integration and regional diversity. The outcome could potentially establish new jurisprudence on how language policies are shaped in culturally distinct Union Territories.
