The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 continues to fuel political tensions, with Tamil Nadu opposing the Centre’s push for the three-language policy. Tamil Nadu’s Finance Minister Palanivel Thiagarajan has criticized the policy as unrealistic due to the lack of funding and infrastructure. Meanwhile, BJP Tamil Nadu President K Annamalai has defended the policy, arguing that it will expand educational opportunities for government school students.
Minister Thiagarajan’s Objections to NEP 2020
Tamil Nadu Finance Minister Palanivel Thiagarajan (PTR) has strongly opposed NEP 2020, calling it impractical and poorly designed. Speaking to reporters on March 13, 2025, Thiagarajan stated that the education policy is unworkable due to the state’s lack of resources and infrastructure.
“NEP 2020 is like teaching an LKG student and a higher education student in the same way. Implementing the new education policy is impossible today as there is no funding or infrastructure to support it,” Thiagarajan said.
Past Failures of Language Policy
Thiagarajan pointed out that similar attempts to introduce a three-language formula in Hindi-speaking states failed due to a shortage of qualified teachers. He highlighted that the recommendation to learn South Indian languages, introduced in the 1968 education policy, was abandoned within 20 years due to poor execution and resource limitations.
Concerns Over PM-SHRI Funding
Thiagarajan also criticized the Centre for withholding PM-SHRI (PM-Schools for Rising India) funds as leverage to enforce NEP 2020. Tamil Nadu’s refusal to implement the three-language policy and align with NEP objectives has resulted in the Centre withholding funds under the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA).
“They have stopped PM-SHRI funding and continue to speak aggressively, like rowdies,” Thiagarajan remarked.
BJP’s Response: Defending NEP and Three-Language Policy
BJP Tamil Nadu President K Annamalai responded to Thiagarajan’s remarks, accusing the DMK of double standards. Annamalai pointed out that Thiagarajan’s own sons were educated under a bilingual policy that included foreign languages like French or Spanish, while the state government opposes introducing a third Indian language for government school students.
“The two languages his sons learned were English and French/Spanish. Is this your bilingual policy?” Annamalai questioned.
Equal Opportunity for Students
Annamalai defended the three-language policy, arguing that it would provide government school students with the opportunity to learn a third Indian language or a foreign language at the higher education level.
“We are asking for a national education policy that will provide our government school students with the opportunity to learn a third Indian language, along with Tamil and English, or a foreign language at the higher levels,” he added.
Allegations of Political Motive
Annamalai accused the DMK of politicizing the language issue to cover up governance failures. He claimed that Tamil Nadu’s opposition to NEP is not about protecting Tamil culture but about gaining political mileage.
“Raking the language issue as a diversionary tactic will not shield DMK’s governance failures,” Annamalai said.
Chief Minister MK Stalin’s Position on NEP 2020
Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin has maintained a firm stance against NEP 2020, labeling it a “saffronized policy” aimed at promoting Hindi rather than improving the quality of education.
Threat to Tamil Nadu’s Education Model
Stalin warned that the three-language policy would disrupt Tamil Nadu’s long-standing two-language education model, which teaches only Tamil and English. He argued that introducing a third language would create confusion among students and burden the state’s education infrastructure.
Preserving Tamil Identity
Stalin framed the opposition as a cultural issue, arguing that forcing Hindi into Tamil Nadu’s education system would undermine the state’s linguistic and cultural identity.
“The NEP will destroy Tamil Nadu’s progress in education. It threatens our successful model of education and seeks to impose Hindi under the guise of national unity,” Stalin said.
Union Government’s Response
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan has defended NEP 2020, denying allegations of Hindi imposition. He maintained that NEP offers flexibility in language selection and respects the linguistic diversity of the states.
“There is absolutely no imposition of any language on any state or community. NEP 2020 upholds linguistic freedom, ensuring students have the autonomy to learn in the language of their choice,” Pradhan stated.
Consent Letter from Tamil Nadu
Pradhan released a consent letter from the Tamil Nadu government, dated March 15, 2024, in which the state expressed willingness to implement the PM-SHRI scheme and align with NEP objectives. He claimed that Tamil Nadu’s sudden opposition is politically motivated.
“DMK MPs and Hon’ble CM can stack lies as high as they want, but the truth does not bother knocking when it comes crashing down,” Pradhan posted on X.
Political and Educational Impact
1. Withholding of SSA and PM-SHRI Funds
The Centre has withheld funds amounting to ₹2,400 crore under SSA after Tamil Nadu’s refusal to implement NEP 2020. Tamil Nadu and Kerala view this as an attempt to force compliance with the education policy.
2. Impact on Tamil Nadu’s Education Model
- Tamil Nadu follows a two-language model (Tamil and English), which has been in place since 1968.
- The introduction of a third language would require changes in the curriculum and additional training for teachers.
- Tamil Nadu has refused to align with NEP’s guidelines, arguing that it would increase the financial burden on the state.
3. Cultural and Political Tensions
- Tamil Nadu’s opposition to NEP reflects broader political and cultural tensions over federalism and linguistic identity.
- The Centre’s insistence on implementing NEP is viewed as an attempt to centralize education policies and undermine state autonomy.
Conclusion
The conflict over NEP 2020 highlights the long-standing political and cultural divide between Tamil Nadu and the Centre over language and education policies. While the Union government views the policy as a tool to promote multilingualism and improve educational outcomes, Tamil Nadu sees it as a threat to its linguistic identity and educational model. The ongoing standoff underscores the broader challenge of balancing national unity with state autonomy in India’s education system.
