Notwithstanding the statewide aspirations of even the poorest rural householders to make their children English-fluent, the powerful vernacular textbooks printing lobby in the southern state of Karnataka (pop. 57 million) is hell-bent upon retention of Kannada (and/or ‘mother tongue’) as the medium of instruction in the state’s primary schools.
And such is the lobby’s clout within the Vidhan Soudha, Bangalore — the imposing nerve centre of political power in Karnataka — that despite several court directives, the state government’s education department adamantly refuses to permit private unaided schools to adopt English as the medium of instruction.
On April 6, the Karnataka high court issued yet another order directing the state government’s department of public instruction (DPI) to respond within four weeks to applications submitted by unaided private schools, seeking permission to introduce or switch to English as the medium of instruction from the academic year beginning June. Earlier on February 25 the deputy director of public instruction (DDPI) had rejected the applications of nearly 500 private unaided schools, citing the state government’s 1994 language policy which mandates Kannada or mother tongue as the medium of instruction in all primary schools — including private unaided primaries — in the state. The Rajajinagar Education Society, Bangalore, one of the schools whose application was rejected, together with the Karnataka Unaided Schools Management Association (KUSMA), an umbrella organisation of 1,500 unaided private schools, had challenged the DDPI’s rejection order in the high court.
Disposing the petition, Justice Mohan Shantanagoudar reprimanded the Karnataka government for not resp-ecting the court’s detailed three-judge bench verdict of July 2, 2008 which had struck down the state government’s 1994 language policy. Although the learned judge acknowledged that the state government has challenged the July 2 verdict in the Supreme Court, as the apex court had not issued a stay order, the state government was bound by the Karnataka high court judgement, he opined.
The July 2 judgement passed by a full bench of the Karnataka high court (KAMS vs. State of Karnataka & Ors, Writ Petition No. 14363/1994) had held that the state’s 1994 language policy was violative of the fundamental rights of the promoters/owners of Karnataka’s 11,954 unaided or independent primary schools. The long-awaited judgement also upheld the fundamental right of parents and children to opt for a medium of instruction of their choice.
Behind the dogged obduracy of state government educrats to sanction English language teaching, is a murky mix of language chauvinism and commercial calculation. According to a school principal who preferred to remain anonymous, education inspec-tors demand bribes ranging from Rs.25,000-50,000 per year for turning a blind eye to unaided primaries teaching in English in violation of the 1994 policy. Moreover sanctioning English medium schools will also mean that slapdash vernacular textbook publishers and printers will lose their captive market for regional language textbooks of dubious quality and scholarship.
Comments G.S. Sharma, president of KUSMA, which has been in the forefront of the fight for English: “It suits the government to maintain the status quo as politicians and education department officials can make a lot of money. We believe the law of the land is greater than any order of the department. We will fight this language battle to the bitter end to ensure that the state does not violate the fundamental right of parents and children to choose their medium of instruction.”
Meanwhile with the state government’s special leave petition challenging the July 2 verdict scheduled for hearing by the Supreme Court this month, the DDPI is unlikely to clear the new applications within four weeks as directed by Justice Shantanagoudar. Despite the risk of being hauled up for contempt of court, state government educrats clearly intend to stonewall the applications of private school managements to the bitter end, i.e until the apex court’s verdict. Quite obviously they have too much to lose.
Debolina Sengupta (Bangalore)