Why NEP’s three-language formula has sparked a Centre-TN clash

A fresh political clash has erupted between Union education minister Dharmendra Pradhan and Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin over the language provisions in the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. While Tamil Nadu has accused the Centre of attempting “Hindi imposition,” the government insists the policy is flexible and designed to promote multilingual learning.

The dispute has intensified with confusion around the CBSE’s three-language framework, particularly over whether English is being treated as a “foreign language.” The CBSE has clarified that students must study three languages—R1, R2, and R3—with at least two being Indian languages. From 2026–27, the third language will be compulsory from Class VI, sparking fears in non-Hindi-speaking states that Hindi could be covertly pushed as a mandatory option.

Here is a ready reckoner on the row:

What's the current controversy about?

The National Education Policy proposes a three-language formula requiring students to learn three languages—R1, R2, and R3. CBSE has stated that “two out of these three languages must be languages native to India”.

“In continuation of the Board’s phased implementation of multilingual education, R3 (third language) shall be made compulsory from Class VI with effect from academic session 2026–27, ensuring that every learner studies at least two Indian languages,” the CBSE curriculum states.

Also read: 3-language formula: 1.42 lakh Class 10 Karnataka students fail in Hindi this year

This has led to the belief that English—not “native” to India—would be treated as a foreign language. However, some CBSE school principals say the controversy is misplaced.

“It's not like that… there is no source which says English is a foreign language,” said Sudha Acharya, principal, ITL Public School in Delhi.

Since two native languages are compulsory, there is also a belief among some that the Centre will covertly try to push Hindi as the second language – a claim made by Stalin as well. However, here too, the opinion is divided. CBSE sources said there was “no plan” to push Hindi as one of the two Indian languages.

Tamil Nadu has a long history of resisting Hindi. How does that shape the current response led by Stalin?

Tamil Nadu’s opposition is rooted in its history of anti-Hindi agitations, where language became a symbol of identity and resistance to centralisation. The state’s two-language policy—Tamil and English—reflects this legacy.

Also read: This is no mere Hindi row or North-South differences; fault lines run much deeper

For the MK Stalin-led government, the current debate is not just about curriculum design but about preserving linguistic autonomy.

“The NEP document very clearly says that all the Indian languages are developed because of Sanskrit. Sanskrit has contributed to the growth of all Indian languages. It is totally false… NEP doesn't have any idea what a language is, what a language group is. They want to establish a Sanskritised cultural nation. It’s not about education at all,” said Gajendra Babu, a Chennai-based educationist, who questioned the framework itself.

Centre argues the policy promotes multi-lingualism. Is there a gap between what the policy says and how it is perceived or implemented?

Meanwhile, the Centre, including Union education minister Dharmendra Pradhan, has framed the NEP as a push toward multilingualism and cognitive development. But the debate reveals a fundamental disagreement over what multilingualism itself means.

For Babu, the policy misunderstands the concept entirely. “Nobody is talking about multilingualism. You are only talking about how many languages a child should learn. Multilingualism means giving space for all children to talk in their language…so that every child will feel dignity,” he said, emphasising classroom inclusion rather than the number of languages taught.

Also read: Why does TN oppose 3-language formula? Udhayanidhi has an answer

Acharya, on the other hand, stressed that current teaching practices already reflect this reality. “Up to class 5, teaching-learning practices are bilingual… students understand subjects better,” she explained, pointing out that classrooms often function in multiple languages informally.

The gap, therefore, lies not just in implementation but in competing definitions of multilingual education.

How NEP’s language provisions affect students and schools, especially in non-Hindi-speaking regions?

The impact will depend largely on how schools operationalise the framework. Under CBSE’s model, R1 is the primary language or medium of instruction, R2 is a second language, and R3 is an additional language with flexible options.

Acharya explains that this does not fundamentally alter existing systems. “R1 is the main language and medium of instruction,” she said, adding that English-medium schools will continue as such. She also notes that the third language carries less academic burden: “There is no board exam on R3; it’s only an internal grade.”

Acharya also said that southern states could opt for non-Hindi Indian languages, and that the CBSE did not impede that decision.

Meanwhile, another school principal, however, raised concerns about how the Indian languages will play out, and whether non-Hindi-speaking states will be pushed to adopt the language. “There is some concern and doubts in our minds over this. We will ask the CBSE for clarification,” she said.

Ultimately, as critics like Babu say, this is as much a question of federalism as of education.