Gujarat High Court
Matrubhasha Abhiyan vs State Of Gujarat on 22 February, 2023
Author: Sonia Gokani
Bench: Sonia Gokani
C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 76 of 2022
==========================================================
MATRUBHASHA ABHIYAN
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR AMAR N. BHATT, Ld. Advocate assisted by MR. ARCHIT P JANI(7304)
for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6
for the Opponent(s) No. 2,3
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, AGP ADVANCE COPY SERVED TO GOVERNMENT
PLEADER/PP for the Opponent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s) No. 4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MS. JUSTICE
SONIA GOKANI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 22/02/2023
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI)
1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, this Court on 04.10.2022 issued notice with the following order:-
"1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the nature of a Public Interest Litigation having been preferred by the petitioners, a Public Charitable Trust and its trustees registered under the provisions of the Gujarat Public Trust Act bearing Registration No.E/20392/ Page 1 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 Ahmedabad, where the petitioners, for the interest of the students of primary school studying in the State of Gujarat, have approached this Court for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, seeking the direction to the State to ensure that the Government Resolution dated 13th April, 2018 issued by the Education Department, State of Gujarat is followed and implemented in its true letter and spirit so as to introduce Gujarati language as one of the mandatory subjects to the students studying in the primary school, i.e, from Standard 1 to 8 in the State of Gujarat.
2. We have heard learned advocate Mr. Amar Bhatt assisted by Mr. Archit Jani, learned advocate for the petitioners, who have taken us through the report of National Policy on Education-1968 (Kothari Commission 1964-66), where three language formula at the secondary level has been proposed to be adopted by the State, which eventually culminated into the Government Resolution dated 13th April, 2018. It is insisted that this resolution provides for the Gujarati language to be taught as a compulsory subject from the 1st standard. However, the primary schools in the State of Gujarat do not offer Gujarati as a subject in the curriculum specially the schools which are affiliated with CBSE, ICSE and IB Board.
3. The prayers, sought for, are as follows;
"(A) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to command the respondents to implement the Government Resolution dated 13.04.2012 (at Annexure-A hereto) in its true letter and spirit and Page 2 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 command the respondents to issue appropriate directions to all schools within the State of Gujarat, irrespective of the Boards with which they are affiliated to offer/introduce Gujarati language as a subject in the curriculum at the primary education level from the academic year 2022-23 or from the date the Hon'ble Court deems appropriate.
(AA) Command the respondents to place before the Hon'ble Court the data as regards the steps taken by the respondents for implementing the Government Resolution dated 13.04.2018 (at Annexure-A hereto) and furtehr command the respondents to withdraw//revoke the No Objection Certificate granted by the respondents to those schools within the State of Gujarat, which are not complying with the Government Resolution dated 13.04.2018 (at Annexure-A hereto).
(AAA) Command the respondents to come out with the policy of protecting, promoting, preserving and propagating Gujarati language and to issue appropriate directions to the Schools/Colleges offering Gujarati subject to introduce refresher coruse for the teachers teaching Gujarati language.
(B) During pendency and final disposal of this petition, direct the respondents to withdraw the No Objection Certificate granted to the schools in the State of Gujarat which are not complying with the Government Resolution dated 13.04.2018 (at Annexure-A hereto) (C ) Pass such other and further order as the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper."
4. The copy of this petition has been in advance served to the office of the learned Government Pleader and therefore, the officer of Ld. Government Pleader is present.
5. We have heard Ms. Shruti Pathak and Ms. Dhvani Tripathi, learned Asst. Government Pleaders appearing for the State-respondents. Insistence on the part of the learned AGPs for impleading the Boards as the party respondents who are otherwise required to implement the policy which the State has already made, they have also urged the Court Page 3 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 that the State, being conscious of the need of the Gujarati language to be taught in every primary school, has already formulated the policy and the resolution is made way back in the year 2018. It is now for the Boards to implement it, and hence their presence would be necessary.
6. Considering the prayers in the petition, request of joining the 3rd parties may not be acceded to presently.
7. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for both the sides, we deem it appropriate to issue notice. Hence, let the notice be issued making it returnable on 18.10.2022. The learned AGP waives service of notice for and on behalf of the respondent No.1. The respondent Nos.2 and 3 to be served through e-mode, the email Id of which, shall be furnished by the learned AGP to the petitioner in today's date."
2. Learned AGP Ms. Shruti Pathak had appeared for the State and from time-to-time various orders came to be passed by this Court.
3. We have heard both the sides. The written note have been tendered by the parties, which are as follows;
Page 4 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 3.1 Written submissions on behalf of the petitioners:-
I. Prayers in the PIL:
In this PIL, the Petitioners have inter alia prayed for -
(i) implementation of the GR dated 13.04.2018 at Annexure-A to the Petition (pages 30-32) in its true letter and spirit,
(ii) directing the Respondents to issue appropriate directions to all schools within the State of Gujarat irrespective of their affiliation with the Boards to teach Gujarati language as mandatory subject at primary education level which is Standards I to VIII as mentioned in the GR at Annexure-A to the Petition,
(iii) requiring the Respondents to withdraw/revoke the No Objection granted to those schools which are not complying with the GR at Annexure-A to the Petition and to revoke the approval of those schools and
(iv) introducing refresher courses for the teachers teaching Gujarati language in the Gujarat State to see that the Gujarati language is promoted, preserved, propagated and protected.
Before filing the Petition, the Petitioners made a representation dated 23.04.2022 (Annexure-H, pages 493-
497). The Petitioners declare that this is not an adversarial litigation. It is filed for the effective implementation of the GR at Annexure A to the Petition in the larger interest of promoting, preserving, protecting the mother tongue Gujarati and thereby the culture.
Page 5 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 II. GR dated 13.04.2018:
The GR is issued as a policy decision of the State of Gujarat. The Preamble of the GR takes note of the following:
(i) The Report of Kothari Commission (1964-66) which recommended 3 language formula, according to which the first language is the mother tongue.
(ii) Number of schools affiliated with CBSE, ICSE, IB, SGBSE, CIC, etc. Boards has been increasing in Gujarat.
(iii) In these schools, the medium of instruction is in English and Hindi and some foreign languages are being taught as other languages AND Gujarati language is not taught in these Schools.
(iv) Because of the above, the children of Gujarat are deprived of their expected knowledge of their mother tongue Gujarati.
Taking note of the above, the GR dated 13.04.2018 was issued under Section 38 of the Bombay Primary Education Act, 1947 which provides that from 2018-19 all schools except Gujarati Medium Schools shall have to be mandatorily teach Gujarati language starting from Standard I and II in 2018, Standard III in 2019, Standard IV in 2020 and onwards upto Standard VIII. The GR also provides that the curriculum of Gujarati language shall be as prepared by GCERT and in the NOC which is given to those schools desirous of getting affiliation with other boards, there shall be a following condition "after obtaining affiliation with other boards, Gujarati language shall be compulsorily taught as per the conditions of this GR".
It is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Punjab Page 6 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 State Power Corporation and another Vs. Bal Krishan Sharma (2022) 1 SCC 322 that in absence of any rules or regulations, the administrative instructions/ executive order will govern the matter till laws are framed. Therefore, the GR is having a force of law as per Article-162 of the Constitution of India.
III. Reasons for the PIL and the credentials of the Petitioners:
To the representation at Pp 493-497, there was no effective response. The RTI information obtained by the Petitioners revealed that several Schools were not following the mandate of the GR. The Petitioners were concerned with the non- implementation of the GR and non-inspection of the Schools on the issue of implementation of the GR. The Petitioner no.1 is a Public Charitable Trust involved in the field of promotion, preservation and protection of the mother tongue. The activities undertaken by the Petitioner no. 1 is enlisted at Pg.-33. The credentials of the Petitioners are at Pg. 40-b. The PIL is filed for preservation and promotion of Matrubhasha Gujarati through effective implementation of the GR at Annexure A hereto. PIL is therefore maintainable.
IV. Basis of the Petition: (a) The Petitioners have invoked Articles 21, 21A and 29 of the
Constitution of India as the fundamental rights.
(i) Cultural and linguistic rights are under Article 29. As held in the case of Usha Mehta Vs. State of Maharashtra (2004) 6 SCC 264, the State can validly take a policy decision to compulsorily teach its regional language. Kindly see paragraphs 10, 11 and 12 as under:Page 7 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023
C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023
10. In the light of the above-discussed cases, it is clear that the State can impose reasonable regulations on the institutions covering (sic) Article 30 for protecting the larger interest of the State and the nation. The "choice" that could be exercised by the minority community or group is subject to such reasonable regulations imposed by the State. While imposing regulations, the State shall be cautious not to destroy the minority character of institutions. It is not the case of the petitioners herein that the respondents prevented them from teaching Gujarati language. On the other hand, they are only challenging the compulsory imposition of Marathi language for students and asking for a right "not to learn" Marathi language while living in the State of Maharashtra. The regulation in this case imposed by the State of Maharashtra upon the linguistic minority right is to make Marathi language a compulsory course in school syllabi. The issue for resolution here is to find whether this action is reasonable or not. The impugned policy decision was taken by keeping in view the larger interest of the State, because the official and common business are carried on in that State in Marathi language. A proper understanding of Marathi language is necessary for easily carrying out the day-
to-day affairs of the people living in the State of Maharashtra and also for proper carrying out of daily administration. Hence the regulation imposed by the State of Maharashtra upon the linguistic minorities to teach its regional language is only a reasonable one. This Court ruled that the right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of "their choice" under Article 30(1) read with Article 29(1) would include the right to have choice of Page 8 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 medium of instruction. (See generally the Constitution Bench decisions in D.A.V. College v. State of Punjab [(1971) 2 SCC 261] and D.A.V. College v. State of Punjab [(1971) 2 SCC 269] .) But this exercise of "choice" of instructive language in schools by the linguistic minorities is subject to the reasonable regulation imposed by the State concerned. A particular State can validly take a policy decision to compulsorily teach its regional language. (See also English Medium Students Parents Assn. Case [(1994) 1 SCC 550] .) In our opinion, the impugned decision taken by the Government of Maharashtra is within the regulatory ambit of Article 30. It is a reasonable one, which is conducive to the needs and larger interest of the State.
11. It is difficult to accept the proposition advanced by the petitioners that minority character would only be protected by learning Gujarati as a first or second language. There is enough opportunity, in the impugned school syllabi, for students in English-medium schools run by Gujarati minority group to offer Gujarati language as a composite subject. Students who want to learn Gujarati language can certainly learn it even according to the present scheme in English- medium schools. It is also open to the Gujarati minority community to run exclusive Gujarati-medium schools subject to the regulation of teaching Marathi language. But it won't be in the fitness of things to establish English-medium schools and asking for not teaching the regional Marathi language. It is difficult to read Articles 29 and 30 in such a way that they contain the negative right to exclude the learning of regional language. Ipso facto it is not possible to Page 9 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 accept the proposition that the people living in a particular State cannot be asked to study the regional language. While living in a different State, it is only appropriate for the linguistic minority to learn the regional language. In our view the resistance to learn the regional language will lead to alienation from the mainstream of life resulting in linguistic fragmentation within the State, which is an anathema to national integration. The learning of different languages will definitely bridge the cultural barriers and will positively contribute to the cultural integration of the country. In our view, the impugned policy decision is in the paramount interest of the students who are living in the State of Maharashtra and also in the larger interest of the country. Therefore, we cannot rule that the impugned policy will result in destroying the minority character of the Gujarati community in Maharashtra.
12. We may also notice one other aspect of the matter. In State of Bombay v. Bombay Education Society [AIR 1954 SC 561 : (1955) 1 SCR 568] the position was settled that the language of Article 29(2) is wide and unqualified so as to cover both majority and minority groups within its ambit. In Bombay Education Society [AIR 1954 SC 561 : (1955) 1 SCR 568] the impugned order denied admission to all pupils whose mother tongue was not English in English-medium schools. Because the right to admission into an educational institution is a right that an individual citizen has, as a citizen and not as a member of any community or class of citizens. The right of a minority to establish and maintain educational institutions of its choice is a necessary concomitant to the right to conserve its distinctive language, script or culture.
Page 10 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 But this right is subject to Article 29(2). So if we allow the petitioners to exclude the teaching of Marathi in their schools, then the student whose mother tongue is Marathi will be denied opportunity to learn his mother tongue and regional language as well as right to admission to a chosen school in the State of his origin for his non-proximity to Gujarati language.
The GR at Annexure-A to the Petition is in furtherance of the fundamental rights under Article 29 of the Constitution of India as enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Thus, the "choice" of medium of instructions in the schools is subject to reasonable regulation imposed by the State concerned. Article 29 does not contain a negative right to exclude the learning of the regional language. The object of the GR at Annexure-A to the Petition is, though laudable, its implementation has to be effective and to the dot.
(b) In the case of English Medium Students Parents Association Vs. State of Karnataka reported in (1994) 1 SCC 550, the Hon'ble Supreme Court inter alia held as under:
19. Mahatma Gandhi, the Father of the Nation, on more than one occasion emphasised on the mother tongue being the medium of instruction. He forcefully said:
"The babe takes its first lesson from its mother. I, therefore, regard it as a sin against the motherland to inflict upon her children a tongue other than their mother's for their mental development.
*** I hold it to be as necessary for the urban child as for the rural Page 11 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 to have the foundation of his development laid on the solid rock of the mother tongue.
*** Who can calculate the immeasurable loss sustained by the nation owing to thousands of its young men having been obliged to waste years in mastering a foreign language and its medium, of which in their daily life they have the least use and in learning which they had to neglect their own mother tongue and their own literature."
20. All educational experts are uniformly of the opinion that pupils should begin their schooling through the medium of their mother tongue. There is great reason and justice behind this. Where the tender minds of the children are subject to an alien medium the learning process becomes unnatural. It inflicts a cruel strain on the children which makes the entire transaction mechanical. Besides, the educational process becomes artificial and torturous. The basic knowledge can easily be garnered through the mother tongue. The introduction of a foreign language tends to threaten to atrophy the development of mother tongue. When the pupil comes of age and reaches the Vth standard level, the second language is introduced. The child who has not taken Kannada as a first language is required to take it as a second language. At the secondary stage the three language formula is introduced. However, in cases of non-Kannada speaking students grace marks up to 15 are awarded. Certainly, it cannot be contended that a student studying in a school from Karnataka need not know the regional language. It should be the endeavour of every State to promote the Page 12 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 regional language of that State. In fact, the Government of Karnataka has done commendably well in passing this GO Therefore, to contend that the imposition of study of Kannada throws an undue burden on the students is untenable. Again to quote Mahatma Gandhi:
"The medium of instruction should be altered at once and at any cost, the provincial languages being given their rightful place. I would prefer temporary chaos in higher education to the criminal waste that is daily accumulating."
The Hon'ble Supreme Court also held that the GR in question in the said case desired to bring about the academic discipline as a regulatory measure which is a matter of policy. The GR at Annexure A hereto therefore reflects the policy decision of the State and the said policy decision is in force.
(c) It is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ram Sharan Autyanaprasi and another Vs. Union of India that "life" under Article 21 includes the tradition, culture and heritage within the compass and extends the concept of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is an accepted fact that the language and culture go together and if language perishes, culture will also perish. In a way therefore language and humanity are related.
(d) Article 21A of the Constitution of India also provides for right to education which is also now a fundamental right and right to education would include a right to receive such education which enables the child to fully enjoy the other fundamental Page 13 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 rights including right to engage in gainful employment and right to a cultured life. Language experts are ad idem on the fact that learning of mother tongue plays an essential part in the development of the child.
V. Laws passed by other States:
While the Respondents have issued the GR at Annexure-A to the Petition, several other States of India have passed law to provide for mandatory teaching of regional language of the State. The Petitioners have produced the laws framed by Telegana (pages 499-502), Maharashtra (pages 511-515), Karnataka (pages 516-518) and Punjab (pages 519-523). Therefore, many other States who have thought for enacting laws for preservation, permission and protection of their regional languages.
VI. National Education Policy, 2020:
As per the National Education Policy, 2020 also, 3 language formulas are emphasized. It also provides that wherever possible, the medium of instruction atleast till Standard V to preferably till Standard VIII and beyond will be home language, mother tongue/local language/regional language and thereafter home language/mother tongue shall be continued to be taught t as a language wherever possible. This will be followed by public and private schools. High quality text books including science will be made available inhome language/mother tongue. Kindly see paragraphs 4.11 to 4.15 of the National Education Policy, 2020 (pages 438-
439).
Page 14 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 VII. (a) History of Gujarati language: (i) Gujarati is an Indo-Aryan language native to the Indian
state of Gujarat and spoken predominantly by the Gujarati people. Gujarati is part of the greater Indo- European language family. Gujarati is descended from old Gujarati (c.1100-1500 CE). The language "Gujarati" is named after Gurjar/Gujar community people who are said to have settled in this region sometime in the middle of 5th century CE. Gujarati language comes under one of the 22 official languages and 14 regional languages recognized by Government of India as included in Schedule-VIII of the Constitution of India. Gujarati language stands at 26 th position amongst the most spoken language in the world and at least 5 crore people speak Gujarati throughout the world. Gujarati language in its present form has seen influences of neighbouring languages like Rajasthani and Marathi apart from Hindi-Gurjar dialect. In the middle period (15th-17thcentury), Persian and later Urdu became the Court language which exerted a great influence on Gujarati. In the modern period (after 19thth century), there was western influence on Gujarati literature can be seen as the traditions of British Romanticism and styles crept into Gujarati literature. Thus, the Gujarati language is a part of Indo-European language family and its origins are traced at least 12th century A.D.
(ii) Gujarati language forms part of Schedule-VIII at Entry no.5 in the Constitution of India and thus, recognized under the Constitution of India as schedule language. Article 351 of the Constitution of India provides that Page 15 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 the Union has to promote the spread of Hindi language, but the covenant is made providing that the development of Hindi language should not interfere with genus, forms, style and expression used in expression of the languages specified in Eighth Schedule. Article 21A of the Constitution of India provides for right to education and as the mother tongue or regional language is inalienable part of education, mother tongue or regional language forms inseparable part of Article 21A of the Constitution of India.
(iii) The fact that the primary education should be imparted in the mother tongue only is recognized by several reports of Experts and even the United Nations. According to the Experts, education of the mother tongue is not only necessary for inclusive, quality education but also to respect the human rights of all children. Kindly see pages 350 to 424.
(b) Efforts made by procedure for promotion, preservation and protection of Gujarati language:
(i) Premanand- the medieval Gujarati poet of 17th Century vowed that-"I shall not put on a turban on my head till I earn a respectable position for Gujarati language." At that time the following saying was popular devaluing Gujarati language-
"અબેતબેકાસોલહઆનાઅઠે કઠે કાબાર ઇકડમતિતકડમઆઠહીઆનાશુશં ાંપૈસાચાર"
(ii) Poet Dalpatram in mid 19thCentury appealed to the Gurjarnaresh Khanderao Gaekwad for promoting Page 16 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 Gujarati language as an Advocate for the language in the following words-
"ગિ રા જ ુ રાતીતણાતિપયરની ાદીપામીમુખ્યતોમરાઠીમાનીદે ખીદુ ઃખીતિદલછુ ં અરજીતોઆપીદીઠીમરજીતથાતિપનહીં, આવ્યોઆપઆ ળઉચ્ચરવાઅપીલછુ ં માંડતામુકદ્દમાનેચારજણાચૂથ ં શેતેશોચનાથીસાહે બગિશગિથલછુ ં , ં શેતોશુથ દાખેદલપતરામખુદાવદ ં ખડ ં ેરાવ, રૂડી જુ રાતીવાણીરાણીનોવકીલછુ ં ."
(iii) Poet Umashankar Joshi, who was awarded Gnanpith Award wrote a poem revering Gujarati-
સદા સ મ્યશી વૈભવૈઊભરા તી , મળી મ તીભ ષા મનેગૂજરા તી રામ મ તીભ ષા મખેગૂજરા તી .
મળી હેમઆશિશીષા, નેરાશિસહે-મ રા , થય પ્રામભટનેઅખે ભક્તીધી રા .
પૂજીનેમ'દા, કા ન્તી, ગૂ વૈધી'નેજ, સજીન્હે નેલેકાલ્પૂને ભવ્યતીજ ધ્રુવૈ સત્યસ થ અશિહેસ સહે તી નેમ ધીન્યગૂ ધી શિગૂરા ગૂજરા તી !
(iv) Father Wales, who despite being a Spanish, adopted Gujarati as his own language, has uniquely associated language with culture. Kindly see page 561.
(c) Mahatma Gandhi on mother tongue:
The father of the nation - Mahatma Gandhi- has also emphatically advocated mother tongue as a medium of instructions in the schools. The petitioners also crave leave to reproduce an extract from the book'Gandhiji Ane Panch Saksharo' by Dr. Dhirubhai Thaker, which is from the reply given by Mahatma Gandhi on 24.07.1918 in Gujarati in response to Page 17 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 letter to Mahatma Gandhi written in English by Shri B.K.Thakore-well known poet and to whom the credit of bringing Sonnts as a form of poetry in Gujarati language is attributed.
"જયારે આપણી ધારાસભા થશે ત્યારે ફોજદારી કાયદામાં એક કલમ દાખલ કરવાની તિહલચાલ કરવી પડશે, એમ હું જોઉ ં છુ ં . બન ં ે તિહન્દુ સ્તાનની એક જ ભાષા જાણવા છતાં, એક માણસ બીજાને અં ્રેજીમાં લખે અથવા બીજાની સાથે તે ભાષામાં બોલે તેને ઓછામાં ઓછી છ માસની સખત મજૂરી સાથે સજા કરવામાં આવશે. આવી કલમ તિવશે તમારો અગિભપ્રાય જણાવશોજી અને સ્વરાજ નથી મળ્યું તે દરતિમયાન જે, (આવો) ન ુ ો કરે તેને સારુ શાઈલાજ થવા ઘટે એ પણ જણાવજો."
Kindly also see the thoughts of Gandhiji published in 'Gandhiji-no AksharDeh" (pages 491-492).
(d). The Petitioners are interested in seeing that the efforts made by the predecessors-literary persons and poets- for preserving and promoting the mother tongue Gujarati do not go in vain and the next generation and the posterity does not get deprived of learning our mother tongue Gujarati.
VIII. Affidavits of the State and the Petitioners' Submissions:
(a) The Petitioners have, right from the beginning emphasised that this is not an adversarial litigation. However, the Petitioner No.1 being a Public Charitable Trust engaged in the activities of promotion, preservation and protection of the mother tongue is concerned about strict implementation of Page 18 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 the GR at Annexure-A to the Petition.
(b) Pursuant to the orders passed in this Petition from time to time, the Respondents have furnished certain details.
According to the first Affidavit of the State (Pg.-548), 14 Schools were not implementing the GR. Thereafter, when this Hon'ble Court called for individual certificates from the respective Schools, a Second Affidavit (Pg.-582) was filed according to which the total number of schools of other Boards is 471 of which 23 schools are not teaching Gujarati language as per the GR at Annexure-A to the Petition.On a conservative aspect, one School would be having 4 divisions of each standard with 40 students in each division and there fore the number of students deprived of learning their mothertongue for 23 Schools would be about 29,440 considering total 8 standards with 4 divisions in each standard. In para 16 at Page 578, the State has stated that action will be taken against the Schools not implementing the GR. In oral submissions, it is also submitted on behalf of the State that notices have been issued to the erring Schools and the consequences of violation of the GR can go up to the cancellation/withdrawal/revocation of the NOC and affiliation. It is also stated on behalf of the State that from 2022, the form of NOC is having the specific condition as required under clause 8 of the GR at Annexure A to the Petition.
(c) During the course of hearing, the Petitioners submitted a data of 109 schools pertaining to ICSE, IB, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan(KVS), from the website of the respective schools which according to the Petitioners were not implementing the GR at Annexure-A to the Petition. The Page 19 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 number of students deprived of learning Gujarati language shall be much more if the data of the Petitioners is looked at. So far as the KVS schools are concerned, there is a separate code for those schools framed by Union Education Ministry and the Petitioners shall make a separate representation to the said ministry for the teaching of Gujarati language in KVS Schools in Gujarat.
(d) The Petitioners also furnished on 20.01.2023 a list of CBSE Schools not teaching Gujarati as per the GR at Annexure-A to the Petition. Pursuant to the inspection carried out by the Respondents, it transpired that out of the list given by the Petitioners, about 17 such schools are not adhering to the GR. Considering the fact that the GR is meant for the schools of other Boards other than Gujarat Board, the percentage of schools not teaching Gujarati as per the GR will be more than 10%. At any rate, the question of number of students or number of schools is really not material since the question is of implementing the GR at Annexure-A to the Petition in its true letter and spirit.
IX. Suggestions of the Petitioners:
Taking the above into consideration, the suggestions made by the Petitioners which are incorporated in the order dated 20.01.2023 are required to be taken into account and appropriate orders are required to be passed so as to include atleast the following:
(i) The State should ensure strict implementation of its GR dated 13.04.2018 at Annexure-A to the Petition.For this purpose the State should ensure that there is regular and effective inspection.Page 20 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023
C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023
(ii) To see that the GR dated 13.04.2018 is implemented in its true letter and spirit,the State should issue appropriate directions to all schools within the State of Gujarat, irrespective of boards with which they are affiliated, to mandatorily teach Gujarati language as a subject at the primary education level from Standard I to Standard VIII atleast from the next academic year i.e. 2023-2024.
(iii) The State should ensure that the consequences for violation of the GR dated 13.04.2018 are provided and if required, the affiliation/no objection granted to the concerned schools not complying with the GR dated 13.04.2018 is withdrawn/revoked/cancelled. For this purpose, State should come out with another GR/Circular providing for the consequences of violation. Till the fresh GR is issued, the State shall take measures under Sections 38, 40 and 40A (7) of the Gujarat Primary Education Act, 1947 and/or under any other GR providing for the consequences/penalties for violation of the policies of the State against the erring schools. Explanation (i) of Section 8 as well as Section 9(j) of the Right to Education Act, 2009 provides for giving training facility for teachers. Section 29 (2)(f) also provide for medium instructions shall as far as practicably be in child's mother tongue. In this regard, State should be requested to come out with a clear language policy which would provide for mandatory refresher course for teachers of Gujarati language in primary schools with a view to see that the teachers will passionately teach the mother tongue Gujarati.
Page 21 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023
(iv) The State may be requested to come out with a specific law like laws passed by other States referred to in paragraph V above. The Petitioners have also made representation to the State of Gujarat (Hon'ble Law Minister and Hon'ble Primary Education Minister of the Gujarat State) on 17.01.2023 to enact a law in this regard. The said representation is part of the bunch submitted on 20.01.2023 (page 225).
X Conclusion :
In the end, the following words of Nobel Price Austrian Writer Elias Canetti from his Autobiography "Tongue Set Free"
aptly describe how loss of mother tongue is associated with death of identity:
"My earliest memory is dipped in red. I come out of a door on the arm of a maid, the floor in front of me is red, and to the left a staircase goes down, equally red. Across from us, at the same height, a door opens and a smiling man steps forth, walking towards me in a friendly way. He steps right up close to me, halts, and says: "Show me your tongue." I stick out my tongue, he reaches into his pocket, pulls out a jackknife, opens it and brings the blade all the way to my tongue. He says: "Now we'll cut off his tongue." I don't dare pull back my tongue, he comes closer and closer, the blade will touch me any second. In the last moment, he pulls back the knife, saying, "Not today, tomorrow."Page 22 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023
C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 He snaps the knife shut again and puts it back in his pocket. Every morning, we step out of the door and into the red hallway, the door opens, and the smiling man appears. I know what he's going to say and I wait for the command to show my tongue. I know he's going to cut it off, and I get more and more scared each time.
That's how the day starts, and it happens very often."
(From: the first volume entitled- "The Tongue Set Free") Considering the above, appropriate Orders may be passed for effective implementation of the GR at Annexure A to the Petition and thereby for the reservation, promotion and protection of the mother tongue Gujarati reserving liberty to the Petitioners to approach the Hon'ble Court in case of necessity.
3.2 Written submissions on behalf of the Respondent- State.
1. As per the recommendations of Kothari Commission and the National Education Policy, 2020 emphasis on the trilingual pattern of education. Endeavour was therefore on the part of State Government to see that Gujarati as a mother tongue and regional language is taught at primary level right from the inception across all the boards even to the boards other than Gujarat Board.
2. Textbooks are accordingly published qua each standard Page 23 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 by the GCERT.
3. The ratio of schools as per the data gathered during inspection is miniscule.
4. The notices have been issued to the erring schools who have not implemented the policy.
5. Assurances have been given by the schools to adhere to the strict implementation of the policy from the coming academic year.
6. State is not a toothless tiger as the NOCS can stand cancelled if it is found that the policy is not implemented to its true spirit.
7. In the NOC certificates with effect from 2022 a condition has been specifically imposed for the implementation of the policy dated 13.4.2018 to compulsory teach Gujarati.
8. As far as the nodal officers are concerned, the District Primary Education Officer (DEO) would be taking care of the implementation and under him there is specific post of Education Inspectors who would carry out necessary inspection. Under the education inspectors there are assistant education inspectors.
9. Under the District Primary Education officers also there are Taluka Primary Education Officers. All endeavors can be done to carry out time to time inspections.
10. With respect to the enactment and law, there is no Page 24 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 prayer or relief sought and that a writ of mandamus cannot be sought for seeking directions of enactment.
4. On the part of the State giving the assurance to adhere to strict implementation of the policy, no grievance remains in wake of this assurance from the State Government except that there should be a stricter mechanism for implementation. The suggestions given on the part of the petitioners, for the larger interest and out of their love for the mother tongue, insist on the strict implementation of the Government Resolution of 13.04.2018, which has already been assured by the learned AGP.
5. We are conscious of the fact as mentioned in the written submissions that this has been also backed by the decision of the Apex Court in the case of English Medium Students Parents Association Vs. State of Karnataka reported in (1994) 1 SCC 550 and in the decision of Usha Mehta Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in (2004) 6 SCC 264.
Page 25 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 5.1 The petitioners since have already been made the representations to the Ministry and they have been assured of the best implementation of this Government Resolution, nothing is further sought except the reiterative request of due implementation. According to this Court, unless there are mechanism for stricter implementation of the Government Resolution coupled with some sanctions, there will be tendency to evade it in the future.
6. The State has not treated as adversarial litigation, nor has the petitioners acted in that fashion. It is only to serve the cause of preserving and protecting 'Gujarati' language, which also is one of the language in the Schedule of the Constitution, this PIL has been preferred and we acknowledge with appreciation that it has been aptly responded to by the State.
6.1 From the next academic year, all the concerned, who have so far shown the lapses, shall gear up for its implementation and if not, the State shall be taking the necessary steps in that regard.
Page 26 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023
7. A proposal for statute to come in place for this purpose along the line of Maharashtra, can be suggested by this Court, as it is eventually the domain of the legislature and nothing further can be directed.
8. With the above directions, the petition stands disposed of.
(SONIA GOKANI,CJ) (SANDEEP N. BHATT,J) A. B. VAGHELA Page 27 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023