The Supreme Court on Monday raised an intriguing constitutional and linguistic question while hearing petitions challenging the Central Board of Secondary Education’s (CBSE) three-language policy: whether English, after centuries of use in India, can now be regarded as an indigenous Indian language. The observation came during arguments over the implementation of the revised language policy for the 2026–27 academic session.
A Bench of the apex court made the observation after petitioners argued that English is being treated as a non-native language under the CBSE framework. The judges remarked that the issue may require a fresh look, considering English has been used in India for generations and plays a significant role in education, governance, the judiciary and professional life. The court, however, clarified that the remark was an observation made during the hearing and not a final legal determination.
The case concerns CBSE’s decision to implement the three-language formula from the current academic year. Petitioners challenged the policy on multiple grounds, including the classification of languages, the availability of qualified teachers and textbooks, and the practical difficulties schools may face in implementing the revised curriculum.
The Supreme Court declined to grant an interim stay on the implementation of the policy, observing that learning additional languages is beneficial for students. The Bench remarked that “learning a language never goes waste” and decided to hear the matter in greater detail at a later date while allowing the CBSE to continue implementing the policy for now.
During the proceedings, concerns were also raised regarding the availability of learning materials in various Indian languages. The petitioners argued that educational resources are currently available in only a limited number of the Constitution’s scheduled languages, making implementation difficult in several regions.
The court’s remarks have sparked fresh debate over the evolving status of English in India. While English originated outside the country, it has served for decades as a key language in administration, higher education, business and the legal system. The Supreme Court’s observations are expected to add a new dimension to discussions on language policy, although the final decision on the constitutional issues raised in the petitions is yet to be delivered.
