The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 has triggered a political and cultural dispute between Tamil Nadu and the Centre over the three-language formula. Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin accused the Centre of trying to impose Hindi on non-Hindi-speaking states through the policy. The central government has denied these claims.
The conflict escalated when Tamil Nadu’s refusal to implement the NEP allegedly led to the Centre withholding funds under the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan — a key school education programme. This dispute highlights the ongoing tension between state and central authority over language and education.
Background of the Language Dispute
The NEP 2020 was introduced in July 2020 to reform India’s education system. One of its key recommendations is the adoption of a three-language formula in schools.
- Students must learn three languages, with at least two being native to India.
- The NEP allows flexibility in language choices and states that no language will be imposed on any state.
- Tamil Nadu follows a two-language policy — Tamil and English — and has resisted adding Hindi to its educational system.
Tamil Nadu’s Opposition
Tamil Nadu’s government, led by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), strongly opposes the three-language policy. The state argues that the policy is a backdoor attempt to impose Hindi on non-Hindi-speaking states.
- Stalin stated that introducing Hindi would undermine Tamil Nadu’s linguistic identity.
- He highlighted that Tamil Nadu’s schools have performed well under the two-language system.
- The DMK maintains that Tamil and English are sufficient for both local and global opportunities.
Political and Financial Implications
The conflict intensified when the Centre allegedly withheld funds under the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan because Tamil Nadu refused to adopt the NEP.
- The Centre asked Tamil Nadu to sign a memorandum of understanding (MoU) agreeing to implement the NEP to receive funding.
- In February 2025, Stalin wrote to Prime Minister Narendra Modi demanding the release of ₹21.5 billion (approximately $247 million) in withheld funds.
- The DMK claims that the Centre is using funding as political pressure.
Centre’s Response
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan denied that the NEP imposes Hindi or penalizes Tamil Nadu for rejecting it.
- Pradhan stated that the NEP encourages education in the mother tongue or local language.
- He accused the DMK of politicizing the language issue.
- Pradhan emphasized that the NEP allows states to choose which languages to include.
Historical Context of the Language Dispute
Tamil Nadu has a long history of opposing the imposition of Hindi:
- In 1965, protests against Hindi as a mandatory language led to violent clashes in Tamil Nadu, forcing the Centre to allow the continued use of English as an official language.
- The 1968 Education Policy introduced the three-language formula, which Tamil Nadu rejected.
- Tamil Nadu has consistently resisted central efforts to promote Hindi as a national language.
Why Language is Sensitive in Tamil Nadu
Language holds deep political and cultural significance in Tamil Nadu:
- Tamil is one of the oldest surviving languages in the world.
- The Tamil Nadu government argues that focusing on Tamil and English equips students with both local and global opportunities.
- Political parties in Tamil Nadu have built their platforms on protecting the Tamil language.
Impact on Education Policy
The conflict over the NEP could have long-term effects on India’s education system:
- Tamil Nadu’s refusal to adopt the three-language formula could set a precedent for other non-Hindi-speaking states.
- The Centre’s attempt to link funding with policy adoption raises concerns about federal overreach.
- If the dispute continues, it could disrupt the implementation of the NEP nationwide.
Conclusion
The clash over the three-language policy in NEP 2020 reflects political and cultural tensions between Tamil Nadu and the Centre. While the Centre insists the policy promotes multilingualism, Tamil Nadu views it as a threat to its linguistic identity and autonomy. The outcome of this conflict could shape the future of India’s education system and the relationship between the federal government and the states.
