Whether Right To Get Education In Mother Tongue Or Hindi Is A Fundamental Right?: Rajasthan High Court Answers

Essentially, the Bench of Justice Dinesh Mehta was dealing with a plea filed by the School Development Management Committee of a Jodhpur-based school which challenged the policy decision of the government converting petitioners' Hindi Medium school to an English Medium School.

The case in brief

The case relates to Shri Hari Singh Sr. Sec. School, Pilwa, that has been functioning in village Pilwa (Jodhpur) since 1980 and has been catering to the educational needs of about 600 children from all sects including girls residing in such village and nearby villages.

The medium of instruction in the school was 'Hindi' since its inception, however, the Director, Secondary Education in September 2021, permitted/sanctioned conversion of 345 Government Schools to Mahatma Gandhi Government Schools (English medium), which included the name of the present school also.

Challenging this decision of the State Government, the School Development Management Committee moved to the High Court.

Court's observations

In light of the factual matrix of the case, the Court, at the outset, framed 5 questions, one of them being Whether Right To Get Education In Mother Tongue Or Hindi Is A Fundamental Right. Importantly, the Other 4 questions have been dealt with in this article

Read more about it here: "English As A Medium of Instruction Can't Be Thrusted Upon A Child Even By A Legislation Much Less By A Policy Decision": Rajasthan High Court

At the outset, the Court stressed that the right to get education in a particular language is relatable to Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution (freedom of speech and expression) and that a child, or on his behalf, his parent(s), have the right to choose the language in which his/their child should be imparted education.

In this regard, the Court also referred to Apex Court's Judgment in the case of State of Karnataka & Anr. Vs. Associated Management of English Medium Primary & Secondary Schools & Ors. (2014) 9 SCC 485, wherein it was specifically held that the right to have education in mother tongue or in a particular medium is guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.

However, the Court did clarify that being a right guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (a), the right to have education in mother tongue or in a particular medium shall be subject to reasonable restriction, as per clause (2) of Article 19 of the Constitution of India.

Therefore, the court opined that the State can very well prescribe a medium of instruction considering the overall development of the child and Socioeconomic factors.

Against this backdrop, the Court, having analyzed the facts of the case, concluded that the Rajasthan Government's policy decision was purely administrative in nature, and not any law and also, it cannot be said to be a reasonable restriction for the purposes mentioned in clause (2) of Article 19 of the Constitution.

Right to Education Act

Importantly, referring to the Right to Education Act, the Court also observed that the right of having elementary education in mother tongue is also a statutory right conferred by section 29 (2)(f) of the Act of 2009, according to which medium of instruction, as far as practicable, is required to be in child's mother tongue.

In this regard, the Court also observed that the power to frame laws in the subject of education falls in the concurrent list of the VII Schedule of the Constitution of India, and since the RTE Act deals with Education and prescribes that the medium of instructions in elementary education as far as practicable, be in mother tongue/home language of the child, therefore, the Court added, any law made or framed by the State but for the assent of the President would be repugnant by virtue of Article 254 of the Constitution.

In this regard, the Court averred thus:

"In the opinion of this Court, English, as a medium of instruction cannot be thrusted upon a child even by a legislation enacted by the State Government, much less by a policy decision."

Summing it up all, the Court concluded that the instant decision taken by the State Government or the State's policy decision should be quashed and set aside as it can't whittle down the fundamental right of a child to be taught in a particular medium, which is assured rather protected by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.