Supreme Court questions introduction of third language in Class 9, says it adds stress before board exams

The Supreme Court on July 16 questioned the timing of introducing a compulsory third language from Class 9 under the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) curriculum, with Justice B.V. Nagarathna observing that doing so places unnecessary academic pressure on students preparing for board examinations.

The observations came during the hearing of the Tamil Nadu government's appeal against a Madras High Court judgment directing the establishment of Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas (JNVs) in every district of the state.

Tamil Nadu has consistently opposed the setting up of JNVs, arguing that the schools follow a three-language policy that is at odds with the state's long-standing two-language policy.

'Ninth standard is stressful'

During the proceedings, counsel for Tamil Nadu submitted that the state's objection centred on the three-language policy. Responding to the submission that the third language becomes compulsory only from Class 9, Justice Nagarathna remarked:

"No, that is very bad. Ninth standard is stressful. Why do you introduce a new language in 9th? You introduce it in 6th."

The judge also urged the Union government to reconsider the timing of the policy.

Addressing the Centre, she said students begin preparing for board examinations well before Class 10 and introducing a new language in Class 9 only adds to that burden. She suggested that if a third language is to be taught, it should begin in middle school—around Class 6—when students are more receptive to language learning.

Drawing from her own schooling, Justice Nagarathna recalled that students in her school began learning a third language during middle school, observing that “the earlier, the better.”

During the hearing, Justice Nagarathna also noted that the three-language framework does not require Hindi to be taught as the third language.

"The State language has to be taught, English has to be taught and any third language. It doesn't say Hindi," she observed. Counsel appearing for the respondent also pointed out that the National Education Policy states that no language should be imposed on any state.

When Tamil Nadu reiterated its objections, Justice Nagarathna asked whether the state's concern would persist if the third language were Sanskrit instead of Hindi.

The Bench, comprising Justices B.V. Nagarathna and R. Mahadevan, noted that discussions between the Union government and the Tamil Nadu government regarding the establishment of Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas are still underway.

The court observed that it would examine the merits of the dispute only if those consultations fail. The matter has been posted for further hearing on August 11.

Background of the case

The proceedings arise from Tamil Nadu's challenge to a Madras High Court judgment directing the state to facilitate the establishment of a Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya in every district.

The High Court had held that refusing to establish the schools curtailed students' right to choose educational institutions and directed the state to provide temporary accommodation for students.

The Supreme Court stayed those directions in 2017. In December 2025, it asked the Union and Tamil Nadu governments to hold consultations on the issue and place the outcome before the court. A consultation meeting was subsequently held in January 2026.

In its affidavit, the Union government stated that Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas have been sanctioned in hundreds of districts across the country but none has been established in Tamil Nadu because the state has not accepted the scheme.

It also submitted that establishing a JNV requires the state government to provide around 30 acres of land free of cost along with temporary infrastructure.

Tamil Nadu, meanwhile, has maintained that the JNV scheme is incompatible with its statutory two-language policy, which mandates Tamil and English as compulsory languages while permitting a third language only as an optional subject.

The state has also argued that it already operates its own network of model residential schools serving similar educational objectives.

Notably, the validity of the CBSE's three-language policy itself was not directly under consideration in this case. The policy is separately under challenge before another Bench of the Supreme Court headed by the Chief Justice of India, which has declined to stay its implementation and is scheduled to hear the matter separately.