While writing my previous blog on how and why Narendra Modi went out of his way to promote English when he was Gujarat chief minister — despite opposition from people in the Sangh Parivar — I came across an interesting write-up by Aakar Patel, a well-known name among journalists and civil society circles.

Titled “How Gujarat ignores the English language”, with a subheading “Exploring clichés about Gujarat’s English and education system”, the piece was published in the online edition of the Hindustan Times’ business daily, Mint. It is now 12 years old — one reason why I decided to review what Aakar had written.

While quickly going through the article, I found Aakar — who served as the head of Amnesty International India between 2015 and 2019, and currently chairs its board — was grossly mistaken in stating that the Congress in Gujarat “has supported introduction of English earlier but the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) reject this.”

Traditional Indian spices

As my two previous pieces on this site suggest (click here and here), poor English in Gujarat is actually a Congress legacy — one that sections of the Sangh Parivar wanted to continue. Modi, however, made efforts to reverse this by crafting policies and programmes supporting the teaching of the language.

That said, much of what Aakar wrote in his article — published online in Mint on October 18, 2013 — still holds true. Written after attending a function at a school in Surat where he had studied 25 years earlier, Aakar states he “was struck” to find school teachers speaking “an embarrassingly-broken English, sprinkled with errors and without felicity.”

I don’t know how much teachers’ knowledge of English has changed since then, but Aakar’s quotation from the Gujarat education department website suggests that Modi’s efforts to promote English seem to have failed — at least at the official level. The web address quoted by Aakar may have changed, but the gibberish English written on it remains stuck in time.

Indeed, the two long quotes from the website that Aakar reproduced in 2013 remain unchanged. They appear verbatim today as they did then — serving, as he called them, “an evidence on display” of the poverty of English in a department meant to support Modi’s language promotion policies through such grand programmes as SCOPE, or Society for Creation of Opportunities through Proficiency in English.

Let me now reproduce the two long quotes from the Gujarat State Education Department website which Aakar copied in 2013 to “explain” how the department puts together its textbooks — and which remain as incoherent today as they were back then.

The first appears under the “Overview” section (screenshot here) of Gujarat textbooks. It states (quoted verbatim, without correcting grammar):

“Establishment

“Gujarat state Textbook Mandal was established in AD 1969 on 21st October. Since 38 year mandals main target. High quality textbooks are published and to Gujarat students they are easily available at reasonable prices.

Through Mandal Std. 1-12 Gujarati Medium textbooks are published. Thereafter in Hindi, English, Marathi, Sindhi, Urdu, Sanskrit and Tamil Language also text books are published.

Board Committees

Mandals whole management is done properly; it decided objectives are fulfilled for that Board Committee is formed as below.

(1) General Board (2) Director Board (3) Working committee (4) Educational committee (5) Production committee (6) Research committee.

Above mentioned all committee’s administration works properly regarding that advise suggestions are given.

Aakar Patel

 

Mandal distribution related works

Printed textbooks are distributed in whole Gujarat at Government level working organizations through them with district distributor textbook are sold in retail for that work distributors are hired. Retailers registration is done in mandal. In Ahmedabad also Ahmedabad has its own selling centre. (Sale Depot, Godown no. 9 below Asarva Bridge, Ahmedabad – 380016, Ph. 22133920) is there. At any institute or personal level to any student from this sale centre textbook can be availed at retailing std. from outside Gujarat through money order or bank draft also textbooks can be obtained.

Mandals research related work

Textbook mandal by publishing textbook is not satisfied. Textbooks quality improves continuously for that research related work is also done. From primary teacher to university professors knowledgeable persons are joined in evaluation programme and other educational programme. Textbooks writers, advisers, translators etc. for them work of finding genius is done.

Mandal’s work in new sector

Basic subject’s textbook – AD 1999 to Std. 11-12, basic subject 26 textbooks publishing being done Mandal for general exam additional subjects through textbook relevant sectors students are provided basic literature. Due to this in village and Kurshi sector also Mandal human research development important work could give own contribution.”

The second is what the department calls a “Disclaimer” (screenshot here):

“Gujarat Government Education Department related information is easily available to people from one place only with that aim this website is developed. Regarding this matter if you have any opinion then you are requested to contact us. To keep this site latest and the mistake that come our consideration to correct those mistakes all efforts will be done. In this site document information created by people and private organizations is there. The information available for outside, on its exactness, co ordination latest or completion we have no control or we can give any promise, this matter has to be kept in mind.

The information of this web site is for the benefit of general public and from it any legal right or responsibility is not created. For over sight or any mistake of typing this department is not responsible.

If any information is not true or some corrections are needed in it, if this is known then the steps to solve it opinions can be given. This web sites documents/samples (PDF file) soft copy and hard copy thus from both they are taken. While conversion certain documents formatting may change that can happen for conversion raised mistakes efforts are done of correcting it. In spite of that now also there can be any mistake in it. If regarding this matter you have any questions then original documents respective copies have to be brought or you are requested to contact us. Moreover for linked sites policy or method we are not responsible.”

Established in 2007–2008, the site has had a whopping 19,816,644 visitors. Yet it hasn’t been updated since 2014 — the year Modi left Gujarat to become the country’s Prime Minister. On Google, interestingly, the site is labelled as “Not secure or Dangerous,” with its identity marked as “not verified” (screenshot here).

Courtesy: CounterView

The post Whither SCOPE? Twelve years on, Gujarat’s official English remains frozen in time appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Division Bench of Justices M.S. Karnik and N.R. Borkar passed the stay order in a batch of petitions filed by several minority educational institutions, including prominent South Mumbai colleges like St. Xavier’s, Jai Hind, KC, and HR College, as well as institutions from Solapur. The Maharashtra Association of Minority Educational Institutions (MAMEI) also joined the petitioners in challenging the State’s move. The petitions contested a clause introduced through a Government Resolution (GR) dated May 6, 2025, issued by the School Education Department.

Clause 11 of the May 6 GR lies at the heart of the controversy. It permits unfilled seats under the minority quota to be surrendered for allotment through the centralised admission process, making them subject to applicable social and parallel reservations. The State government contended that this mechanism was devised to ensure optimal utilisation of seats and claimed it was introduced in response to requests made by the institutions themselves.

Historically, minority colleges in Maharashtra have followed a well-established formula: 50% of seats reserved for the respective minority community, 5% for the management quota, and the remaining 45% kept open and unreserved. However, for the academic year 2025–26, the centralized FYJC admission portal began reflecting the application of SC/ST/OBC reservations on this 45% open category, prompting the current legal challenge.

Arguments for the petitioner: Senior Advocate Milind Sathe, appearing for the petitioners, argued that the GR violates constitutional protections granted to minority institutions under Articles 15(5) and 30 of the Constitution. Article 15(5) specifically carves out an exception for minority educational institutions from the scope of affirmative action policies, including caste-based reservations, while Article 30 protects their right to establish and administer institutions without State interference. Sathe emphasised that even unfilled minority quota seats must revert to open category admissions, and not be diverted to socially reserved categories.

Arguments for the defence: The Government Pleader Neha Bhide submitted that the clause did not infringe on the autonomy or rights of minority institutions. She argued that once minority seats were voluntarily surrendered to the centralized pool, applying social reservations to those seats was a legitimate policy tool aimed at promoting social equity. “Social reservation is the obligation of the State,” she contended.

Order of the court: the Court found substance in the petitioners’ arguments and held that an earlier judgment of the Bombay High Court—which had quashed a similar attempt by Mumbai University to enforce social reservations in minority institutions—was directly applicable in this case. The Bench observed, as per the report in BarandBench “Prima facie, we find that there is substance in the submissions advanced by the petitioners for the grant of interim relief.”

Consequently, the Court directed that, for the purpose of FYJC admissions, the mandate of SC/ST/OBC reservation shall not be enforced in any seats of minority educational institutions. The State government has been directed to file its reply within four weeks. The matter is slated for the next hearing on August 6, 2025.

Related:

Bowing to outrage, Delhi University V-C says that Manusmriti removed from curriculum, won’t teach in future

Bombay High Court orders immediate release of 18-year-old detained for father’s citizenship status

Mumbai Walks for Peace | Citizens Unite Against Hate

The post Bombay High Court stays SC/ST/OBC reservations in minority-run junior colleges for FYJC admissions appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“We will not teach any part of Manusmriti in any form in the University of Delhi. This direction has been issued even earlier by the vice-chancellor’s office, and departments should adhere to it. The department should not have put it down in the first place following these directions,” said Singh, reported the Times of India and the Indian Express. Days earlier, the objective of the course stated that “ancient Indian society, in terms of whole and its parts, has been depicted in the texts compiled in Sanskrit known as Dharmashastra.”

Just before this announcement on X (formerly twitter), the introduction of Manusmriti was widely criticised for extoling and reinforcing social, economic and gender inequalities, had prompted in some sections of faculty members in the varsity to raise concern over the move.

University of Delhi will not teach Manusmriti text in any course of the University. ‘Dharamshastra Studies’, the DSC of the Sanskrit Department, where Manusmriti is mentioned as a “recommended reading” stands deleted. @narendramodi @PMOIndia @EduMinofIndia @dpradhanbjp

— University of Delhi (@UnivofDelhi) June 12, 2025

Interestingly, other Hindu religious texts such as Ramayana, Mahabharata and Puranas have also been included as part of the course. The paper has been introduced as a core course in the current academic session and carries four credits. It is open to undergraduate students with working knowledge of Sanskrit.

Texts such as Apastamba Dharmasutra, Boudhayana Dharmasutra, Boudhayana Dharmasutra, Vashistha Dharmasutra, Manusmriti, Yajnavalkya Smriti, Narada Smriti, and the Kautilya Arthashastra have been included as primary readings.

“The text has been removed from the Sanskrit department’s ‘Dharamshastra Studies’. In the future also, whenever it comes to our notice that the text has been suggested for studying, the administration will remove it,” V-C Singh told the Hindustan Times.

DU removes Manusmriti from Sanskrit course

New Delhi : On the day TOI reported that Delhi University’s Sanskrit department had included Manusmriti in the core curriculum of its ‘Dharamshastra Studies’ course, the university announced its removal on social media.
The official DU tweet stated: “University of Delhi will not teach Manusmriti text in any course of the university. ‘Dharamshastra Studies’, the DSC of the Sanskrit Department, where Manusmriti is mentioned as a ‘recommended reading’ stands deleted.” The post tagged several govt dignitaries. The inclusion of Manusmriti had sparked widespread criticism. TNN

This retraction by the university just two days after the announcement of a “new course” has led to conclusions that it was obviously widespread protests that led to the decision. On June 12, the Times of India (“Manusmriti, caste system & marriage benefits to be part of DU curriculum”) had reported how students in Delhi University will now be taught how the varna or caste system organises society, how marriage helps build a “civilised” social order, and how morals regulate individual behaviour. These lessons were to form the core of a new Sanskrit course titled Dharmashastra Studies, which has Manusmriti as a primary text.

The newspaper also said that “Manusmriti, whose proposal for inclusion in the law and history honours syllabus was earlier held back by the administration amid backlash, has made a comeback, this time as essential reading in this discipline-specific course. Alongside it, other Hindu religious texts that had drawn similar objections, such as Ramayana, Mahabharata, and Puranas, have also been included in this course.”

The paper, introduced as a core course under discipline in the current academic session, carries four credits and is open to undergraduate students with working knowledge of Sanskrit. Discipline Specific Core refers to courses within a student’s chosen field of study that are mandatory for their programme.

Related:

BHU students granted bail 17 days after Manusmriti protest arrests

13 BHU students arrested and interrogated by ATS over allegation of burning Manusmriti

The post Bowing to outrage, Delhi University V-C says that Manusmriti removed from curriculum, won’t teach in future appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Most children from poor and marginalised families study in these government-aided schools. In fact, a large number of school-going children from families living in the worsening socio-economic situation are not entering the field of education.

The point is that education for the poor has reached rock bottom. What will be the consequences of this state of affairs?

The state government’s apathetic attitude toward education has created an atmosphere of fear. Not only the general public and guardians, but also officials in state and Union ministries discussed the education scenario in West Bengal at the end of April 2025. Both sides reportedly expressed “deep” concern over the dwindling number of students at the primary and upper primary levels.

The Basis for ‘Deep’ Concern

The number of mid-day meals that students partake is being considered a criterion at the government level. The decline in the number of students receiving mid-day-meals is a picture of decline among students in government-sponsored primary and upper primary schools. Students of both these levels receive mid-day meals.

In addition, parents seem reluctant to admit their children to government schools. Although there are exceptions, but this is broadly a state phenomenon, several school teachers this writer spoke to, said. Why?

During the last Left Front regime in Bengal from 2006-2011, about 50,000 teachers and non-teaching staff were recruited through specific examination (District Primary School Councils took the exam for primary teachers, and four regional School Service Commissions arranged for high and higher secondary teachers and non-teaching staff). A large portion of these recruitments were of primary school teachers.

“ The district primary school councils used to recruit teachers through examinations within a specific period of time”, Jyansankar Mitra, former Chairman of Bankura District Primary School Council, told this writer.

“The West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC) was constituted in November 1997 under the West Bengal School Service Commission Act. The Act was enacted on April 1, 1997, and came into effect on the same day. The Commission is responsible for recruiting teaching and non-teaching staff in government- aided schools in West Bengal.  Since then, teachers have been recruited to high and higher secondary schools through examination almost every year” said Professor Biswanath Koyal, first Chairman of Western Zone of WBSSC, whose jurisdiction was Bankura, Purulia, undivided Pashchim Medinipur, and Purbo Medinipur.

According to the Right to Education Act 2009, the Ideal student-teacher ratio should be 30: 1. In 2008, this ratio was 35: 1

Biman Patra, district secretary of All Bengal Primary Teacher Association, Bankura district committee, the largest primary teachers’ organisation of Bengal and Panab Mahato, his counterpart in Purulia, said due to the severe shortage of teachers, the current ratio had risen to 70:1.

After the Trinamool Congress came to power in 2011, the government recruited primary teachers in 2014 and 2016.  There are allegations of widespread corruption in recruitment of those who were appointed in 2017 after the 2016 exams. The matter is sub judice in the Calcutta High Court.

As of now, the jobs of over 32,000 primary teachers are hanging in uncertainty. Significantly, On April 3, the Supreme Court, having reached the conclusion that there was multiple corruption in the recruitment of teachers and non-teaching staff in high and higher secondary schools through WBSSC in 2016, cancelled the entire panel. As a result, 25,752 teachers and non-teaching staff lost their jobs.

There are similar allegations in the primary recruitment sector. In fact, many schools do not have enough teachers against the requirement. On the other side, a large portion of those who are in teaching positions are uncertain about the continuity of their jobs.

“Overall, it can be said that there has been an institutional crisis in the education sector in the state. This is having a devastating impact on students, teachers and parents in the area”, Panab Hazra, a librarian at Sidhu-Kanhu University of Purulia and Subikash Choudhury, former head of the department of economics, Bankura Christian College, told this writer.

“Despite financial difficulty, I have admitted my son to a private school, because I do not know when the government schools will close. The teachers are not adequate. I do not know if those who are  there, will continue”, said Mainuddin Mandal, a bread hawker in Vhikurdihi village of Bankura district. He hawks bread brough from Chandigarh in Punjab.

His wife, Rehena Bibi, said “We are struggling to run our family only for our children’s future. We have to somehow survive. We spend Rs 3,000 a month (in a private school) for my child in Class 4.” She said many parents were opting for this instead of government schools for the future of their children.

In Bagmundi area of Purulia district, this writer met a migrant worker, Ramesh Sardar. When asked, he said, “What will happen if my son completes his schooling? Will he get a job? Is there any job here? Several educated youths are sitting idle, counting their days. They are highly frustrated.”

He said he had admitted his son, Bachhu, in a high school. He studied up to Class 7. “There is only one teacher, how can this teacher manage four classes? What will students learn? Nothing. It is better to learn some manual labour skill from an adolescent age and find work in other states. At least, he will be able to eat and survive, and look after the family in the near future”.

A few days ago, some male and female agricultural labourers, along with their school- going children from Bankura, Purulia and Jhargram districts, were seen waiting at the Bankura bus stand under the scorching sun for buses to return home after harvesting boro paddy from various villages in Hooghly and East and West Bardhaman districts.

“There is no work in the area, matikatar kaj (MGNREGA work) has been closed for four years, and panchayats do not respond regarding our work. We have to survive somehow, so we go wherever we find work. Who do we leave our sons and daughters with? So, we take them along,” Urmila Lohar from Tilaboni village in Purulia, said.

When asked, all of them said that “education of our children are no longer on our minds. We have to survive first, then study.”

“This painful picture is common among jobless poor and marginalised families across West Bengal”, said Amiya Patra, leader of the Khetmajur Union and Sagar Badyakar, assistant secretary of the union’s Bengal unit.

Teachers Trying Hard to Bring Children to School

During the Left Front regime, there was a Village Education Committee (VEC) in every area. That committee consisted of an elected representative from the local panchayat/municipality, a member of the Opposition party, ICDS (Integrated Child Development Scheme) workers, an education expert of the area and teachers. The committee would discuss the ongoing situation of education in the area and take necessary measures.

“After the Trinamool Congress came to power, that VEC was dissolved. There is no discussion on education issues of the area even in the education standing committee at the block level. Only one meeting is held a year, that too related to school annual sports,” said Patra.

Rupak Mondal, district secretary of ABPTA, Jhargram district, along with several male and female teachers from Bankura, Purulia and Jhargram, confirmed that the two years of school closure during the Covid pandemic was still having a major impact. In families, where children did not attend school after it re-opened in 2022, the younger brothers and sisters have been following suit.  Many of them have left government schools and have enrolled in private ones. That trend is continuing.

It is a fact there is severe shortage of teachers as well as of officials in the education department, who are responsible to monitor the condition of schools. In this situation, several teachers have been visiting the homes of villagers and are trying to bring their children back to school.

“We go to different houses in the village and look for expectant mothers. We tell them in advance that when the child is born, he/she should be admitted to our government school. We observed that if a child takes admission in a private school his/her brother and sister will follow that path. But the fact is that in many families, the youth are not getting married because they don’t have jobs. As a result, the number of child births is decreasing” said Amit Goswami, headmaster of Kenjakura Primary school. Bankura.

“There is reluctance among parents to admit their children to government schools. The shortage of teachers is a big reason. Child birth is also decreasing in remote areas. We have asked the government to think deeply about this issue and take proper needful measures”, said Tuhin Banerjee, a primary teacher in Dubraji village of Bankura and district leader of Trinamool’s Shikhsha cell.

The District Information System of Education (DISE), which records all information regarding a school, according to the RTE Act, regarding meeting of specific criteria or if an educational institute is not given the DISE code number. During the Left Front regime, private schools did not get that code. Now it is being given to private schools in large numbers. As a result, the number of private schools is increasing.

Despite struggling to support their families, many low-income people are sending their kids to private schools, which has turned into a status symbol, said several teachers and guardians. Many parents also complained that the syllabus of government schools was not “good” and “up to date”. Also, there are fewer teachers in government schools.

On the other hand, private schools offer opportunities to study many subjects, including computers. Several parents feel this is one the key reasons for low enrolment in government schools.

Significantly, many government school teachers also are admitting their children to private schools. This is also having an impact on the people’s mind. As a result, students from financially backward families study in private schools till the primary level, but when they enter high school, they face problems in adapting to the environment. Not all families are able to afford the high cost of private education. Hence, many are forced to drop out midway.

Situation in Upper Primary Schools

Upper primary schools were built during the Left Front regime considering the geographical location of the area so that children do not have to go to high schools located far away to study from Class 5. They could study in the local area up to Class 8. After reaching Class 9, the boys and girls could travel to a distant high school.

“The Madhyamik Shiksha Kendra (MSK) that are built for grades five to eight are provided with adequate teachers”, said Fatik Goswami, former headmaster of Radhamadhab Madhyamik Shiksha Kendra of Kumidya village in Bankura. After TMC came to power, new teachers were not appointed in upper primary schools. As a result, the number of students kept decreasing.

Six MSKs have already been closed in Ranibandh of Bankura district. On January 7 this year, the Bankura district administration issued an order for shutdown of seven more MSKs. This includes Kumidya Radhamadhab MSK School.

“Had the government appointed adequate teachers in this school, students would have continued their education”, lamented Mrityunjoy Banerjee, headmaster of the school. He and a  teacher, Ramsankar Patra, appealed for saving the school at any cost.

“There have been no adequate teachers for years. How can we send our children to a school that lacks educators? Many have already dropped out,” said Bulu Dasmohonto of Kumidya village.

The newly established upper primary schools, which are called new set-ups, do not have the necessary number of teachers. Therefore, the number of student admissions is low, said a teacher in-charge of a newly set up a girls school in Indpur block.

Several guardians said after studying there were no job opportunities here. Several boys who studied in upper primary are already realising this and have dropped out of school to try other jobs. Several are already registered as migrant labourers.

Number of Students Taking Mid-Day-Meals

To meet the nutritional needs of students, the Left Front government in West Bengal was among the first to introduce mid-day meals in the country in primary and upper primary levels. Later, it was introduced across the country.  In this context, the number of students receiving mid-day meals has become a definitive indicator of enrolment.  During Left Front rule, in the 2010-11 academic year, 72,40,341 students received mid-day meals. After 14 years under the TMC regime, only 46,83,053 students are receiving mid-day meals.  This indicates a decline of 26,57,288 students in primary education — a 35% decrease compared with 2010-11.

The number of students has dramatically decreased at Shibarampur Primary School in Bankura .

The situation is even worse at the upper primary level. In the last academic year, 40,41,666 students were admitted to upper primary in the state. As per state government figures, 23,66,232 students are receiving mid-day meals in upper primary schools. This means enrolment at the upper primary level has decreased by 42%.

When asked, Jagabandhu Banerjee, the District Inspector of School, admitted that the number of students admitted to primary schools had decreased. A section of people was moving to urban areas, he said, adding that therefore, the number of students in villages was decreasing. Efforts are being made to solve this crisis, he added.

The writer covers the Jangalmahal region for ‘Ganashakti’ newspaper in West Bengal.

(All pictures by Madhu Sudan Chatterjee)

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post Bengal: Is Govt-Aided School Education Heading For Privatisation? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It has been more than 75 years since the founding fathers (and mothers) of the Constitution took this bold stand when they were shaping the guidelines around which the newly independent country would move forward. A cursory glance at the constitutional debates makes it abundantly clear that a majority of the members – despite their own religious inclination – were clearly of the opinion that schools, whose basic purpose was to open minds of children and not make them a dumping ground of useless information, should never be opened up for any type of religious instruction.

What was important was that they were seeing the perils of poisoning of minds by religious frenzy in this part of the sub-continent, and were keen that the future of independent India should be secured on secular grounds only.

Perhaps it needs emphasising that Article 28 of the Constitution makes it more explicit and does not leave any ambiguity as far its implementation is concerned.

“No person attending any educational institution recognised by the state or receiving aid out of state funds shall be required to take part in any religious instruction that may be imparted in such institution or to attend any religious worship that may be conducted in such institution or in any premises attached thereto unless such person or, if such person is a minor, his guardian has given his consent thereto cultural and educational rights.”

What Does One Mean by Religious Instruction?

The expression religious instruction here has a restricted meaning. It conveys that teaching of customs, ways of worships, practices or rituals cannot be allowed in educational institutions wholly maintained out of State funds.

Much water has flown down the Ganges, the Jamuna and all rivers of the country and it appears that slowly, but not so silently, attempts are on to water down the provisions of this Article and facilitating religious instruction in government schools through the back door.

The manner in which Yogi Adityanath-led Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government in Uttar Pradesh has suddenly decided to hold summer workshops on the Ramayana and the Vedas in government schools across the state, without any broader consultation with the stakeholders involved in this endeavour, is symptomatic of the brazen attitude of the government. We are told that these workshops will be organised under the aegis of the International Ramayana and Vedic Research Institute, Ayodhya, and will include activities, like Ramlila, Ramcharitmanas recitation, Vedic chanting, painting, and mask-making.

As expected, this retrograde move by the Yogi government has generated anger among the broad masses as well as concerned citizens, who have demanded that this move be immediately rescinded.

Broadly they have three big objections:

– One, it clearly goes against the provisions of Article 28 of the Constitution and thus is a violation of constitutional principles and values.

– Two, in a state where people of different faiths have been living together for centuries together – giving primacy to the religion of the majority – will be an act of overt discrimination against all religious minorities, including those handful of students who are atheists.

– Three, such workshops will reinforce the deep-rooted gender and caste discrimination in these scriptures.

The resistance to this move has taken two forms. On the one hand, concerned citizens or political leaders have condemned these attempts as a violation of the Constitution. Leaders like Chandrashekhar ‘Ravan’ of the Bhim Army, also a Lok Sabha MP, has even suggested that if at all the government wants to organise workshops, they should be focused on the Constitution.

Secondly, courts have been approached at various levels with pleas that they condemn such moves and help strengthen the struggle for constitutional values and principles.

One such petition is not only aimed at “[s]afeguarding constitutional values but also at ensuring that our education system remains inclusive, secular, and scientific”. It demands quashing of the orders dated May 5 and May 8, 2025, and seeks following relief.

• Directing authorities to refrain from promoting specific religious texts in schools.

• Ensuring that education remains inclusive, secular, and scientific.

• Stop this act of overt discrimination which sanctifies and legitimises gender and caste discrimination.

The petition also explains why this order of the Yogi government is unconstitutional and harmful to society for the following reasons:

One, such an order violates secularism. Everybody knows that the Constitution recognises secularism as a fundamental feature (S.R. Bommai vs. Union of India, 1994). Mandating Ramcharitmanas and Vedas, which are Hindu religious texts, in public schools promotes a specific religion. This violates Article 28(1) of the Constitution, which prohibits religious instruction in State-run schools.

In Aruna Roy vs.Union of India (2002), the Supreme Court clarified that while comparative study of religions in a secular context is permissible, promoting a single religion’s text is unconstitutional.

Two, such orders promote caste and gender discrimination:

Certain verses in Ramcharitmanas, such as “Dhol, gawar, shudra, pashu, nari, ye sab tadan ke adhikari” (Sunderkand, 58.3) and “Nari swatantra na bhave, pati bina dukh pave” (Ayodhyakand,

60), demean Shudras and women. These verses contradict Article 14 (equality before the law), Article 15 (prohibition of discrimination), and Article 17 (abolition of untouchability) of the Constitution. Promoting such texts in schools not only violates the rights of Scheduled Castes and women but also undermines social equality.

Three, it facilitates attacks on scientific temper: Article 51A(h) of the Constitution imposes a duty on every citizen to promote scientific temper, humanism, and the spirit of inquiry and reform. Prioritising religious and mythological texts, such as the Ramayana and the Vedas weakens rational thinking and scientific inquiry.

In Santosh Kumar vs. Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development (1994), the Supreme Court stated that education must promote a scientific and rational outlook, not religious superstition.

Four, promote violation of minority rights: Articles 29 and 30 grant minorities the right to preserve their culture and educational autonomy. Mandating Ramcharitmanas imposes a Hindu-centric culture on students from Muslim, Christian, Sikh, and other minority communities, violating their cultural and religious rights (St. Xavier’s College v. State of Gujarat, 1974).

Five, administrative impropriety. This impropriety can be understood in the way an institute under the culture department issued orders directly to officials of the education department, which is a violation of administrative protocols.

The way the Supreme Court emphasised in the U.P Gangadharan vs. State of Kerala (2006)case that administrative actions must follow established protocols. Since the said order has been issued without consultation with the education department, it is illegal and arbitrary.

It is also no small matter that the move facilitates misuse of public funds. Article 27 prohibits the use of taxpayer money to promote any particular religion. The use of public funds for these workshops, such as for teacher training and materials, promotes Hindu religious values, which is against the ruling in Prafull Goradia vs. Union of India (2011) and also displays lack of constitutional morality. We should not forget that in the case of Indian Young Lawyers Association vs. State of Kerala (2018), the Supreme Court defined constitutional morality as adherence to principles of equality, liberty, and justice. Promoting caste and gender hierarchies of Ramcharitmanas contradicts these values.

There is nothing surprising about this move by the Yogi government which, as the petition well explains, is a clear “violation of Constitution”. Remember, with the ascent of BJP at the Centre (in 2014), many states opened up various ways and means in which a particular religion — namely Hindu religion — is overtly or covertly promoted.

Take this news item where neighbouring Madhya Pradesh has already introduced Hindu religious texts as part of the curriculum of State government schools. A few years ago, the then BJP government in Rajasthan had come under the scanner of civil liberty activists and educationists for its controversial move to bring Saints-Mahatmas in government schools. It is now history how the Haryana government had decided to include the Bhagwad Gita in the school curriculum, merely a year after Prime Minister Narendra Modi brought his party, the BJP, to power at the Centre.

Such moves, which seem to violate constitutional principles and values, are, in fact, a reinforcement of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh or RSS-BJP’s tremendous discomfort with the Constitution itself. It is now history when the Constituent Assembly adopted the draft of the Constitution in November 1949, within three days after its adoption, an editorial in the Organiser (RSS mouthpiece) criticised it in no uncertain terms and praised Manusmriti: [Excerpts from an Editorial on Constitution, Organiser, November 30, 1949). The Hindutva Supremacist movement was praising Manusmriti and counterposing it with the newly adopted Constitution. Another stalwart of the Hindutva movement, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, similarly lambasted the draft of the Constitution and emphasised that Manusmriti should have been made the basis of Indian laws.

What is worth emphasising here is that there are various judgements/interventions of the courts at the highest level itself which have been categorical in cautioning the executive about bringing in religious instructions in schools.

Take the case of a petition filed by a lawyer Vinayak Shah from Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, in the Supreme Court. It has challenged the recitation of Sanskrit prayers in Kendriya Vidyalayas. According to him, doing so effectively amounts to “religious instructions for schools funded by the government”. This, Shah has argued, violates Article 28(3) of the Constitution, which says that nobody attending educational institutions recognised by the State or those which receive aid out of State funds, shall be required to take part in any religious instruction or religious worship in institutions or premises attached to them—unless they are minors and their guardian has consented to it.

This petition revolves around three issues:

One, it is not right to compel children of all religions, including those from families that are atheist and agnostic, to sing Hindu prayers.

Two, considering the constitutional prohibition on students being made to take religious instruction in government-funded schools, the 1,100 Kendriya Vidyalayas must not insist on holding such prayer meetings every day.

Three, prayer songs obstruct the development of a scientific temper in students, which in turn Violates Article 51A(h) of the Constitution that says that it shall be the duty of every citizen to develop a scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform.

Considering the seminal importance of this issue, a bench led by Justice Rohinton Nariman and Justice Vineet Saran have referred the matter to the Chief Justice of India to be examined by a Constitutional Bench comprising at least five judges.

One can also look at a case from Maharashtra where Sanjay Salve, a teacher at a Nashik school had waged a lonely struggle against the management of a school that had refused to give him a raise for he had refused to fold hands during school prayers. Salve approached the courts asking that his right to freedom of expression be protected. He said that he cannot be forced to stand with folded hands during prayers and that singing of prayers amounts to imparting religious education, not permissible under Article 28(1) of the Constitution.

A two-member bench of the Bombay High Court had ruled in his favour, saying that “forcing a teacher to do so [fold hands during prayers] will be a violation of the fundamental rights.

One can also refer to how the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT), tasked to assist and advise Central and state governments over school education, shared a manual on sensitising schools to the needs of minority students.

A point worth contemplation in view of the Yogi government’s order is that whether educational institutions can compel students to have religious instruction under the name of moral education, as many such orders are couched in the language of teaching “value” to the students.

Perhaps the draft committee of the Constitution, chaired by B R Ambedkar, was aware of this possibility and had made it explicit that any such act would be a violation of Article 19, which gives the right to freedom of expression to every citizen and its violation would be, in fact, a violation of Article 25(1). It says:

“Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice and propagate religion.”

Looking back, one can see the progressive nature of these various articles in the Constitution, instituted by a draft committee — majority of whom were believers and hardly a few who were declared atheists — who were keen that no matter what it takes, schools administered by State funds should never be allowed to give religious instruction in any form. May be after witnessing the Partition of the country, where religion was used as a basis of nationhood by a significant section of the population and which witnessed tremendous bloodletting, they could foresee the importance of keeping religion restricted to one’s private domain.

Whether Yogi government will be allowed to have its way and thus further facilitate dilution of Constitutional principles – with its controversial order of organising Ramayana and Vedic workshops in government schools of UP — is the key question before us today!

Either way, the battle to save the Constitution will continue unabated.

The writer is a senior independent journalist. The views are personal.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post UP: Ramayana, Vedic Workshops in Govt Schools Challenged appeared first on SabrangIndia.

All references to Delhi Sultanate and Mughal rulers have been deleted from the S^tandard VII text book. In addition, in all other text books –wherever there are references to Muslim rule—has been deleted. What also stands deleted is the reference to Post-Mumbai (92-93 violence), post-Gujarat violence (2002), the references to Nathuram Godse being a trained pracharak of RSS, the ban on RSS in the aftermath of Gandhi murder (January 30, 1948),  among others. While the Kumbh Mela finds a place, deaths by stampede and other related tragedies like the Delhi station stampede have no place.

All this began during the Covid period when the pretext offered was reducing the burden on the students and followed by ‘rationalization’ which meant deletion of these portions which caused discomfort to the Hindu Nationalist ideology.

For the political purpose of demonisation of Muslims and spreading hate against them, Mughals have been presented as the  major villains in our history. Some earlier kings like Allauddin Khilji have also been on the hammer for the Hindutva narrative. Until now, the demonisation of Muslims was structured around the selective narrative of ‘temple destruction by Muslim kings’, propaganda which has been contested by rational historians. The spread of Islam by Muslims Kings using the sword was another part of this. This version is totally off the mark as conversions to Islam took place a century earlier, due to social interactions with Muslim Arab traders to begin with. In later years, many from the depressed castes embraced Islam to escape the tyranny of the caste system.

The ideology of Hindutva has gone to the extent of presenting this period as a dark period when a ‘Holocaust against Hindus’ took place. No doubt the era of Kingdoms is full of war for political reasons. Kings always wanted to expand their regime and in the process many people were killed. To call it holocaust is totally off the mark. Their (Hindutva) narrative actually takes off from the Communal Historiography introduced by the British to pursue the policy of ‘divide and rule’. In this; all the motives of Kings are related to religion and kings are presented as the symbol of the entire religious community.

Hindu communal historiography has taken this several steps further, by claiming that Muslims and Christians were ‘foreigners’ who have tormented Hindus. Muslim communal historiography presented the other side of the coin where Muslims are portrayed as perpetual rulers and Hindus as subjugated subjects. This presents Muslims as the logical rulers of this land.

The later trajectory of this logic did assist the British to divide our composite land into India and Pakistan. Savarkar articulated that there are two nations in this country, and Jinnah went on to demand a separate country for Muslims, Pakistan. Pakistan fell into the trap of Muslim communalism right from the word go and as far its textbooks are concerned they presented the beginning of Pakistan with Mohammad bin Kasim, only in the eighth century. Today their history books have totally deleted any reference to Hindu rulers. The hate which the Muslim communalism spread against the Hindus peaked with their school texts removing all the references to Hindu Kings and culture.

In a way India; during the last three decades has been walking on the footprints of Pakistan. The mirror image of Pakistan’s trajectory is being copied, down to the last comma. This point was highlighted by Pakistan’s poet Fahmida Riyaz. In the aftermath of Babri demolition she wrote “Arre Tum bhi Ham Jaise Nikale, Ab Tak Kahan Chhupe the bhai’ (Ohh! you have also turned out like us, where were you hiding so far).

Prior to Hindutva ideology coming to total control of Indian education, the RSS shakhas were spreading the communal version of society through multiple mechanisms like its Shakha bauddhis, Ekal Vidyalays, Shishu Mandirs. In due course mainstream media and social media also came to its service.

As such culture is a continuously evolving process. During the period of History under the hammer of Hindutva, serious social changes took place. Apart from the architecture, the food habits, dress and literature, the synthesis in the field of religion, the noble traditions of Bhakti and Sufi tradition developed. It was during this period that Sikhism came and flourished.

Now this political ideology may have to change the track. With Muslim rulers out of the way how will they demonise the Muslims now? Newer techniques may be on the way to substitute Aurangzeb or Babar; as now they will be defunct!

History is very central to the concept of Nationalism. Erich Fromm points out that ‘History is to Nationalism what poppy is to the opium addict’. Since BJP came to power as NDA in 1998, the major thing they did was what is called “saffronization of education”. Here history has been presented the narrative of glorious and brave Hindu Kings versus evil and aggressive Muslim kings. The charge has been that so far History has been written by Left Historians, who focused on Delhi rulers and who were pro Muslim. The point is that text books did present the details of particular dynasties depending on the historical length of their rule.

The history books in the decades of 1980s had a good deal of presentation of Hindu as well as Muslim kings. The narration was not revolving just around religion but the holistic view of communities was presented: trade, culture, literature among others.

Still it is true that ruler, ‘King centric history’ is not what we need to build our future. We need to focus on diverse sections of society, Dalits, women, adivasis and artisans who do not find much place in such narratives.

Related:

2025 NCERT Textbooks: Mughals, Delhi Sultanate out; ‘sacred geography’, Maha Kumbh in

Mughals Won’t Disappear From History Just Because Sangh Wishes so: Irfan Habib

The post Mughals deleted from curriculum: history as political tool appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It was Krishna Kumar, the well-known educationist, who I believe first introduced me to the name — Gijubhai Badheka (1885–1939). Hailing from Bhavnagar, known as the cultural capital of the Saurashtra region of Gujarat, Gijubhai, Kumar told me during my student days, made significant contributions to the field of pedagogy — something that hasn’t received much attention from India’s education mandarins. At that time, Kumar was my tutorial teacher at Kirorimal College, Delhi University.

When Kumar — who is said to have been the main mind behind Prof Yashpal’s seminal report “Learning Without Burden” — mentioned Gijubhai, I vaguely recalled my father, Jagubhai Shah, also referring to him as a great Gandhian educationist. As often happens in youth, I didn’t pay much attention to what my father said about him. I vaguely remember my father telling me he had been associated as an art teacher at Ghar Shala, or perhaps Dakshinamurti Balmandir, both founded by Gijubhai for his educational experiments.

My recent interest in Gijubhai, also known as “Mucchadi Maa” (mother with moustaches), stems from a contact I received from someone in Pune — of Mamata Pandya, my school classmate. I was told she is Gijubhai’s granddaughter and had created a site: https://gijubhaibadheka.in. After leaving school in 1970, I met her sometime in the early 1990s after I joined The Times of India, Ahmedabad, as assistant editor. It was at the Centre for Environment Education (CEE), where I had been invited to speak on media and the environment. I was told she had spent around 35 years at CEE.

This prompted me to recall two contrasting viewpoints on Gijubhai that exist in Gujarat today. One, a critical perspective, is from top Dalit rights leader Martin Macwan, who had written a critique of Gijubhai objecting to his views on Dalits several years ago.

During a recent interaction with Macwan, I asked him specifically about his objections. He said that while Gijubhai’s contributions to pedagogy were unparalleled (“he used the Montessori method of teaching in Indian circumstances”), he suffered from the same casteist attitudes that plagued most Gandhians of his time.

“My article was published in the journal Naya Marg (now defunct), edited by the late Indubhai Jani,” he said, and went on to describe a story written by Gijubhai for children. “The story is about a princess who falls in love with what Gijubhai calls a bhangi. The term itself is derogatory. The boy wants to marry the princess.”

Macwan continued, “Her brother, the prince, lays down a condition: she can marry the boy if he wins a gambling game. The prince loses, and the princess marries the boy, who lives in a low-lying area inhabited by so-called untouchables. She is unhappy with the place. Seeing her distress, the king attacks the locality, destroys it, and ‘frees’ the princess. The story ends with the ruler’s family living happily ever after.”

“What message does this give, especially to young minds?” Macwan asked, adding, “Such views can be found in other stories by Gijubhai as well. I read many to understand his perspective.” A similar view, he said, is shared by Joseph Macwan, a well-known Gujarati litterateur, “who has also written critically about Gijubhai.”

Martin Macwan, Sukhdev Patel

 

He added, “And to those who say Gijubhai should be seen in the context of his times, I
want to remind them that the couple Jyotiba and Savitribai Phule, also educationists and living a generation earlier (in the 19th century), strongly opposed untouchability and passionately advocated for Dalit and women’s rights in Maharashtra.”

The other viewpoint comes from Gujarat’s well-known child rights leader Sukhdev Patel, who once told me that branding Gijubhai as casteist “overlooks” his immense contribution to pedagogy. A look at Gijubhai’s work suggests that while he opposed social discrimination and advocated inclusive education, there are no direct quotes in which he explicitly denounces caste discrimination.

At the institutions he established in Bhavnagar, it is said that Gijubhai promoted the inclusion of marginalized groups, encouraged Dalits to join in, and facilitated education for all, regardless of caste. His educational philosophy was centred on child-centric learning, freedom, and respect — challenging the rigid and discriminatory norms of his time.

However, the farthest he went was to say things like: “Every child has the right to a quality education, regardless of their background or circumstances,” “Education is not a privilege; it’s a fundamental human right,” or “Children are not vessels to be filled with knowledge but lamps to be lit.”

Gijubhai also said, emphasizing the need for schools to adapt to children’s diverse needs: “It is not that they are unfit for the school. Rather, the school is unfit for them. The school is unable to teach them what they have the aptitude for.” He was, his defenders point out, critical of the conventional, exam-driven schooling system that treated children as passive recipients, and instead advocated activity-based learning, storytelling, music, and hands-on experiences — something Prof Yashpal’s report “Learning Without Burden” also emphasized.

It is precisely for this reason, it is pointed out, that Krishna Kumar, in a paper titled What is Worth Teaching?, laments: “We have failed to give Gijubhai the place he deserves in the national narrative of educational thought. His experiments in Bhavnagar were a far more radical challenge to colonial schooling than many better-known reform efforts.”

Courtesy: CounterView

The post Revisiting Gijubhai: Pioneer of child-centric education and the caste debate appeared first on SabrangIndia.

According to the results announced by the Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union (JNUSU) election commission early on Monday, April 28, Nitish Kumar of the All India Students’ Association (AISA) secured 1,702 votes to win the post of president. Next was Shikha Swaraj of the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), his closest competitor who secured 1,430 votes while the Students’ Federation of India (SFI)-supported Tayabba Ahmed polled 918 votes.

Manisha of the Democratic Students’ Federation (DSF) won the post of vice-president by securing 1,150 votes, ahead of the ABVP’s Nittu Goutham who polled 1,116 votes. The DSF also bagged the general secretary’s post, with Munteha Fatima polling 1,520 votes, ahead of the ABVP’s Kunal Rai who secured 1,406 votes.

What has drawn much comment, analysis and criticism is the ABVP’s clinching the post of joint secretary, with Vaibhav Meena polling 1,518 votes, ahead of AISA’s Naresh Kumar (1,433 votes) and Progressive Students’ Association (PSA) candidate Nigam Kumari (1,256 votes).

This year’s election saw a contentious split in the Left alliance, with the AISA and the DSF contesting as one bloc while the SFI and the All India Students’ Federation (AISF) formed a coalition with the Birsa Ambedkar Phule Students’ Association (BAPSA) and the PSA.

In the midst of this the majoritarian saffron outfit to whom much violence has been attributed on campus ABVP struck gold. Meena’s win marked the first time the ABVP has bagged a central panel post since Saurav Sharma’s victory on the same post in 2015-16. Before that it was in 2000-01 that ABVP’s Sandeep Mahapatra had emerged victorious as president. The ABVP contested the election independently in 2025.

In the March 2024 polls, held after a four-year gap following the outbreak of Covid, the United Left won three of the four central panel posts while BAPSA — which had contested independently — secured one. In that sense, losing a critical post to the ABVP is a matter of concern.

While welcoming and celebrating the victory of its alliance on three central panel posts, AISA also raised concerns over the ABVP’s narrow win for the post of joint secretary and called it a challenge to the Left’s dominance on campus.

Given the low margin of just 85 votes that took the ABVP to victory winning the post of joint secretary, clearly this absence of unity made an impact. Over the past decade and more there has been a serious structural assault on the institution and allegations of corruption in the admission process to ensure BJP loyalists make it to faculty positions and this then, acts as a foothold for the ruling regime on campus. Given that, the fact that the Left has returned to its leadership position in the JNUSU is significant said the AISA said in a statement.

AISA also termed this as the alliance’s victory a mandate against the government’s New Education Policy which, it said, undermined public-funded education and discriminated against marginalised groups.

On the contrary, the ABVP called its victory “a historic shift in JNU’s political landscape” and said it broke the Left’s “so-called red fortress”.

“This victory in JNU is not only proof of the ABVP’s proactive hard work and students’ faith and commitment to nationalist thinking but it is also a victory for all students who consider education as the foundation for nation-rebuilding. This is a democratic revolution against the so-called ideological tyranny established by the Left for years in JNU,” the ABVP said in a statement.

Meena, the newly-elected joint secretary, said, “I am not at all considering this victory as my personal achievement or gain but it’s a massive and fascinating victory of tribal consciousness and the nationalist ideology, which has been suppressed by the Left for years.” “This success is an embodiment of students who want to advance in education by wholeheartedly upholding cultural identity and the spirit of nation re-building,” he added.

The polls, held on April 25, witnessed about 5,500 of the 7,906 eligible students casting their votes. While the turnout was slightly lower than the 73 per cent recorded in 2023, it was among the highest since 2012.

Twenty-nine candidates were in the fray for the four central panel posts and 200 for the 44 councillor seats.

A former student activist from JNU, Banojyotsana Lahiri put it aptly: “JNU elections unlike popular perception are never easy. The administration has systematically closed down every democratic space, they have altered the character of JNU, introduced courses like Management and Engineering, changed the process of selection. Since 2016, after the movement, JNU students had forged a broader unity to fight the ABVP-Admin-RSS nexus. While that was the need of hour at that point, it gave ABVP the whole opposition space to occupy. After 2016, for the first time, the broader left alliance broke this time. AISA-DSF fought separately, SFI-BAPSA-PSA fought separately. Other Left organisations put up candidates too. There was quite a bit of confusion among students. Votes obviously split. And after bitter and resolute struggle finally, AISA and DSF alliance WON three major Central Panel posts and most councillors. ABVP only managed to make dent in Joint Secretary, because of sharp vote splitting between the left forces.” In her opinion now SFI will occupy the opposition space.

There has however been speculation of whether the SFI’s decision not to unite with the wider left has anything to do with a tempered and confused central party line that is not prepared to unite against the RSS-BJP centrally and unequivocally. 

Satarupra, a CPI-M member and former SFI elected leader of JNUSU opined, “Whatever ABVP gained in this election must be analysed thoroughly. Those of us who worked in a JNUSU with similar composition in the central panel posts, and the students, teachers of JNU who survived one of the most notorious attacks of the Sangh Parivaar, exactly 10 years back, knows it well what they are capable of. From the lessons of that time, it is a must to keep a close watch on them as well as to not allow any room to them to attack the university and its students, teachers and staff. In 2015, the Left contested separately and had a fragmented mandate in the union. Despite that, after the election results were declared, instead of a ‘Victory March’, we had a ‘Unity March’. The exemplary unity with #StandwithJNU movement followed later. However, the sheer fact of ABVP won one post in the central panel was enough for the progressive forces to forge a unity from the very beginning. I hope that tradition will continue in the days ahead in spirit and actions. Lastly, what happened in this election needs a deep analysis and the entire Left needs to introspect and be accountable for what unfolded, rather than putting the burden on one organization and singling it out.”

Kavitra Krishnan formerly with the CPIML has singled out the SFI for its failure to forge unity against fascist forces. As have other academics previously from JNU. 

Either way one looks at it, the JNUSU polls are closely watched and do signal a weathercock for how the left works and strategies, nationally. With both the West Bengal and Kerala elections due in 2026, this could mean a different reality from what has been expected under the rather fragile, almost non-existent INDIA alliance.

Related   

“We have come to save public education, shoot us if you will,” feisty JNUSU president Dhananjay challenges Delhi police

When and why JNUSU President Sai Balaji wrote an open letter to PM Modi

Standing Up For JNU

What Exactly Happened in JNU ?

The post Left maintains JNUSU foothold, absence of alliance gives ABVP a chance appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The 2025, new textbooks released this week have, according to media reports, been designed in accordance with the National Education Policy (NEP) and the National Curriculum Framework for School Education (NCFSE) 2023, which emphasise the ‘integration of Indian traditions, philosophies, knowledge systems and local context into school education.’ Both the NEP, 2020 and the NCFSE 2023 have been widely critiqued on issues related to pedagogy, content and structure.

The newly published NCERT Social Science textbook ‘Exploring Society: India and Beyond’ reportedly has new chapters on ancient Indian dynasties like the Magadha, Mauryas, Shungas and Satavahanas with a focus on “Indian ethos”. With a government in power that is ideologically geared towards shaping (or manipulation of) of young minds with a particular, majoritarian and sectarian view of the past, the definition of “Indian ethos’ itself as defined by it has come into sharp question.

Such a cut and paste attitude of the present union government has been evident since its first term when inclusive and rational history found the current regime’s displeasure. This government went further in 2022 and removed all mention of religious or caste discrimination from social science NCERT texts.

Coming back to 2025, another new edition in the book (NCERT Social Science textbook ‘Exploring Society: India and Beyond’) is a chapter called “How the Land Becomes Sacred” that focuses on places considered sacred and pilgrimages across India and outside for religions like Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Hinduism, Buddhism and Sikhism.

The book has no mention of the Mughals or the Delhi Sultanate.

NCERT officials said that this is only the first part of the book, with the second part expected in the coming months reported DH. However, they are tight-lipped on whether the removed portions would be included in the second part.

The book introduces the concept of “sacred geography”, detailing networks of revered sites such as the 12 Jyotirlingas, the Char Dham Yatra, and the Shakti Pithas. The chapter also explores sacred locations like river confluences, mountains and forests. The textbook claims that while the ‘varna-jati’ initially originally contributed to societal stability, it later became rigid, especially under British rule, resulting in inequalities. This attribution of caste inequity, humiliation and discrimination only to colonial rule while ignoring gross societal practices before (like for instance during Peshwa rule in Maharashtra) is an integral part of the majoritarian right wing narrative!

The Maha Kumbh Mela held in Prayagraj earlier this year is mentioned in the book, claiming that 660 million people participated in the event! The book also includes a chapter on the Constitution of India, noting that there was a time when people were not permitted to fly the national flag at their homes.

Litany of deletions post 2014

In 2022, as reported by Sabrangindia here, the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), in 2022, as the school system recovered from the traumas of the online system during the Covid-19 pandemic, the CBSE dropped more topics including ‘democracy and diversity, Mughal courts,’ as well as poems of Faiz Ahmed Faiz from the syllabus. According to a report in India Today at the time, the dropped chapters taught the “Non-Alignment Movement, the Cold War era, the rise of Islamic empires in Afro-Asian territories, chronicles of Mughal courts, and the industrial revolution.” These were a part of the CBSE’s Class 11 and 12 political science syllabus.

Similarly, the group deleted a paragraph from the “Diversity and Discrimination” chapter in the same book that talked about how cleaners, washers, rag-pickers and barbers are considered dirty or “impure”. The paragraph was about how caste rules kept the discriminated castes from taking on work outside of their caste category.

For example, those assigned with picking up garbage or clearing carcasses as per caste rules were not allowed to enter houses of Brahmins or enter temples. The paragraph also talked about how people are kept from drawing water from common wells and how Dalit children are separated from other children even in schools.

Another casualty in the same book is the chapter “Key elements of a democratic government” that covered popular participation, conflict resolution, equality and justice.

In the Our Pasts-I book for Class 6, the chapter on Emperor Ashoka carried a box on Ashoka’ message, from which a reference to Nehru has been erased. The deleted line said, “Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India, wrote: ‘His edicts (instructions) still speak to us in a language we can understand and we can still learn much from them’.”

Further, a few paragraphs on Prophet Mohammed were deleted from the New empire and kingdoms chapter in the same book. One of the deleted sentences read: “Like Christianity, Islam was a religion that laid stress on the equality and unity of all before Allah.”

Meanwhile, the Social and Political Life-II book for Class 7, lost characters such as domestic help Kanta, Dalit writer Omprakash Valmiki, and the Ansari family who experienced discrimination over poverty, caste and religion, respectively. Certain introductory content on the Mughal emperors Babur, Humayun, Akbar, Jahangir, Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb were also dropped from the Our Pasts-II book.

In the Social and Political Life-III book for Class 8, a box was removed from the “Confronting marginalisation” chapter that read, “The term Dalit which means ‘broken’ is used deliberately and actively by groups to highlight the centuries of discrimination they have experienced within the caste system.”

The chapter Weavers, iron smelters and factory owners, on crafts and industries under British rule, has been dropped from the book Our Pasts-III for Class VIII.

“Weavers often belonged to communities that specialised in weaving. Their skills were passed on from one generation to the next. The tanti weavers of Bengal, the julahas or momin weavers of north India, sale and kaikollar and devangs of South India are some of the communities famous for weaving,” a paragraph in the chapter reportedly said.

When these changes were introduced in 2022, academicians and experts such as NCERT’s Textbook Development Committee for Primary Education Chairperson Anita Rampal and National Confederation of Dalit and Adivasi Organisations Chairperson Ashok Bharti, had expressed the opinion that the deletions were made along ideological lines rather than for academic integrity. Speaking to the media, Rampal had even pointed out that the content was changed without consulting the original advisers and writers. On the other hand, Bharti accused the NCERT’s “expert committee” of trying to hide historical facts out of guilt. Both demanded that the group members reveal their identity.

The All India Peoples’ Science Network (AIPSN) too had, in 2022, in a press statement voiced concern about the various changes made “without any academic considerations or academic logic”. It argued, “No consultation with the SCERTs and the education departments of the state governments, school teachers, and the wider academic community, having been done before deletions and revisions in the content of social sciences textbooks used at the school level.”

The AIPSN argued that all changes were done in a hasty manner, shortly after academics, teachers and the Peoples’ Science Movements voiced concern about the National Education Policy (NEP), 2020.

In the same year, 2022, the CBSE, according to a report in India Today, dropped chapters taught the “Non-Alignment Movement, the Cold War era, the rise of Islamic empires in Afro-Asian territories, chronicles of Mughal courts, and the industrial revolution.” These were a part of the CBSE’s Class 11 and 12 political science syllabus.

Earlier in the year, the Financial Express also reported how the NCERT deleted chapters on climate change and monsoon to reduce the load on students. In fact, the Teachers Against the Climate Crisis (TACC) claimed that around 30 percent of the syllabus was reduced for this academic session.

An entire chapter on greenhouse effect for Class 11, a chapter on weather, climate, and water for Class 7 and information about the monsoon for Class 9 was removed. They argued that while the NCERT is reasonable in trying to reduce workload on children, it cannot remove fundamental issues such as climate change science. They demanded a reinstatement of all these chapters.

Expressing a different point of view at the time, former NCERT Director during the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government J.S. Rajput had then told The Telegraph that social science content in textbooks had for decades reflected ideological bias. He accused Left intellectuals of starting this trend with help from Congress-led governments. He criticised the previous history textbooks of dwelling on Mughals while containing little on the histories of north-eastern states or south India.

Even before, in 2020 the Board had ‘edited’ the Class 12 history syllabus. It had dropped the chapter ‘The Mughal Court: Reconstructing Histories through Chronicles’. The act was hotly debated. However, soon after that the Covid-19 pandemic devastation hit, and the controversy ebbed. Though even in the middle of the Covid-19 pandemic lockdown, the Union Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) decided that high-school students no longer need to learn about “federalism, citizenship, nationalism, and secularism”. Those chapters were deleted from the political science curriculum of Class 11. Chapters on demonetization, were also removed from CBSE syllabus ostensibly ‘to reduce burden on students’. However, the ‘deleted’ topics were then restored in the 2021-22 academic session and still remained a part of the CBSE syllabus, reported the India Today.

Related:

Now NCERT removes passages about caste and religious discrimination from social science books

Are citizenship and secularism ‘disposable’ subjects for Indian students?

The post 2025 NCERT Textbooks: Mughals, Delhi Sultanate out; ‘sacred geography’, Maha Kumbh in appeared first on SabrangIndia.

At the core of academic freedom lies the unquestionable right of universities and their respective governments to shape their educational destiny. Yet today, under the carefully worded guise of “reform,” the Central government appears not to be strengthening this principle, but rather systematically dismantling it. We are witnessing progress, but a calculated centralisation of control, where autonomy is sacrificed at the altar of uniformity.

The recent Lok Sabha reply by the Ministry of Education to Unstarred Question No. 2698 (March 17, 2025), raised by Member of Parliament Praniti Sushilkumar Shinde, exposes this trend in no uncertain terms. The answer, couched in bureaucratic niceties and vague affirmations, is a glaring reflection of the Centre’s unwillingness to respect the federal structure and its growing appetite for centralised control over higher education.

The issue is not only about who appoints Vice-Chancellors or how new regulations are drafted; it concerns who gets to determine the future of Indian academia and, more importantly, who does not.

Diluting Federalism in the Name of Reform

The University Grants Commission (UGC) was envisioned as a neutral, academic body focused on ensuring standards in higher education. Over the decades, it has slowly evolved into a tool for enforcing Central directives, while the government claims in its reply that the draft of UGC Regulations 2025 “reinforces India’s federal structure.”

But actions speak louder than words. The proposed changes, particularly the mechanism for the appointment of Vice-Chancellors, strip away the powers of state governments and universities, handing them over to Centrally dominated statutory bodies. By proposing that Vice-Chancellors be selected by a “Search-cum-Selection Committee” constituted by so-called “impartial statutory bodies,” the Centre has found a backdoor to insert its preferences into university leadership.

This is a direct attack on the constitutional mandate that education is a subject on the Concurrent List, where both the Centre and States must have a say. No clear explanation is given on who nominates these statutory bodies, how they are formed, or how “impartiality” is ensured. This intentional ambiguity raises serious concerns about political appointments disguised as administrative reforms.

In practice, this allows the Union Government to bypass state government recommendations, ignore the needs of regional academic ecosystems, and plant ideologically aligned individuals at the helm of universities. What is being presented as reform is, in reality, a clear case of regulatory capture.

Through the back door, this proposal to allow non-academics to become Vice-Chancellors is a case in point. The government claims this will bring “diverse expertise” and “leadership excellence.” Unfortunately, in reality, this opens the gates for bureaucrats, ex-police officers, retired IAS officers, and politically affiliated persons to take charge of academic institutions, many of whom may have little understanding of research, and academic freedom.

Apart from the protest of noted academicians against the Draft UGC Regulations, the government’s narrative also ignores the fears raised by state governments and teachers’ associations, who have warned that this regulation will stifle dissent, curtail diversity in academic thought, and weaken institutional independence.

Moreover, the claim that “more than 15,000 suggestions” have been received is a convenient shield. The government has offered no transparency on which suggestions were accepted, which were discarded, and what changes were made as a result. This is consultation in name only, not in spirit.

The 2025 draft regulations make this transformation disturbingly complete, even though the Lok Sabha reply praises the regulations for prioritising research and aligning with “global standards,” nowhere does it address the central issue that the UGC is no longer functioning as an independent academic regulator but as an extension of the political establishment. Then how can it ensure the praised “global standard”?

Far-Right Agenda Behind the Draft Regulations

The larger picture is deeply alarming. This is not merely another regulatory tweak but a calculated move in a broader, systematic campaign to weaponise education, transforming universities into factories of ideological conformity and reducing state governments to mute spectators in a domain where they once held constitutional authority.

The UGC’s draft regulations are draped in the technocratic jargon of “excellence” and “global standards,” but their real objective is unmistakable: to tighten the Centre’s grip on academic autonomy, erode federalism, and stealthily impose a Far-Right cultural vision on India’s education system.

This centralising move blatantly contradicts the National Education Policy 2020, which promised decentralisation and institutional flexibility. Instead of empowering universities, the government is exploiting the NEP’s rhetoric to mask its agenda, replacing scholarly independence with political loyalty, and pluralism with a homogenised, majoritarian narrative. From saffronised textbooks to the suppression of dissent on campuses, the pattern is clear, that education is being repurposed as a tool to manufacture a regressive, hyper-nationalist worldview.

India’s universities were meant to be laboratories of critical thought, not propaganda hubs for the ruling establishment. The relentless centralisation of power, from the politically orchestrated appointments of Vice-Chancellors to the sidelining of state voices, threatens to suffocate intellectual diversity.

If the government genuinely aspires to build world-class institutions, it must: Restore federal balance by respecting the state government’s role in higher education, depoliticise the UGC, and shield academic governance from ideological interference, ensure VCs are chosen for their scholarship, not their proximity to power, and publicly disclose stakeholder feedback and revisions to expose the drafting process to sunlight.

The stakes extend beyond education, this is about India’s civilisational character. By turning campuses into battlegrounds for ideological conquest, the Centre isn’t just undermining universities; it’s sabotaging the nation’s intellectual future.

Federalism isn’t a bureaucratic hurdle, it’s the bedrock of a pluralistic democracy. And academia must remain a sanctuary for free thought, not a playground for far-right social engineering. The choice is stark: Will the country’s education system uphold prolificness or obedience? The answer will define the soul of the nation.

The writer is Parliamentary Secretary to a Lok Sabha MP and an alumnus of the Faculty of Law, University of Delhi. The views expressed are personal.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post Higher Education: How Centre is Undermining State Autonomy & Politicising UGC appeared first on SabrangIndia.