The Tamil Nadu government has moved the Supreme Court accusing the Centre of unlawfully withholding over ₹2,000 crore in central grants under the Samagra Shiksha Scheme after the state refused to implement the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
In a petition filed before the apex court, the DMK-led government has sought the release of the funds with interest, challenging the legality of the Union government's action. The state contended that withholding funds for non-compliance with the NEP was “unconstitutional, illegal, arbitrary and unreasonable”.
The state has urged the court to declare that the NEP, 2020, and the PM SHRI Schools Scheme are not binding on Tamil Nadu. The petition also requests that the Union government be directed to fulfil its statutory obligations under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.
The plea demands that the Centre pay its 60 per cent share of expenditure on school education within a stipulated timeframe before the beginning of each academic year.
Also read: Supreme Court rejects PIL on NEP in Tamil Nadu
The state’s petition asserts that the Centre has used funding as leverage to impose the NEP, which Tamil Nadu has consistently rejected. “Despite the state's longstanding opposition, the Centre is trying to push Hindi ‘sideways’ through the NEP,” the state government claimed, reiterating its concerns over the three-language formula and alleged imposition of Hindi.
Earlier this year, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M K Stalin had publicly announced that the state would approach the Supreme Court to challenge the Centre’s denial of funds.
Meanwhile, in a separate matter, the Supreme Court had dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking enforcement of the three-language formula in Tamil Nadu, Kerala and West Bengal.
A Bench headed by Justice J B Pardiwala declined to entertain the plea, saying: “It (court) cannot directly compel a state to adopt a policy like the National Education Policy 2020. The court may, however, intervene if a state's action or inaction related to the National Education Policy violates any fundamental rights.”
The court further observed: “We do not propose to examine this issue in this writ petition. We believe that the petitioner has nothing to do with the cause he proposes to espouse. Although he may be from the state of Tamil Nadu, yet on his own admission, he is residing in New Delhi. In such circumstances, this petition stands dismissed.”
Tamil Nadu remains among the few states vocally opposed to the NEP, citing its potential to dilute the state’s distinct linguistic and educational ethos.
Follow us
