chapter three language policy of india_10_chapter 3

Chapter Three: Language Policy of India

76

Language is a means of communication. Defining it so simply will not be

justifiable on its part. Language can be understood better in terms of its

functions and role in the society. Functions of language can be studied

under two headings, micro and macro. Micro functions of language work

at individual level and the macro covers the whole society. Some of the

important functions of language are Physiological function (releasing

physical and nervous energy), Phatic function (for sociability),

Identifying function, Pleasure functions, Reasoning function (instrument

of thought), Communicating function, etc. Language is the most

important link between an individual and the society. Currently

approximately 6000 languages are being spoken all over the world, out of

which many are on the verge of extinction. Many factors affect the

growth and decline of languages. And a language policy can either

exacerbate or mitigate the growth or existence of a language. Every

language works under certain policy. So it cannot be said, that society or

community does not have a language policy. Some kind of language

policy is always working in every society; at some places it is written or

made prominent via Constitution and at some it is only in practice.

Language policy has active role in domains like home, school, religion,

work place, supra-national groupings. Before going into the details of

complexities of a language policy, one must be clear regarding what is a

language policy?

3.1 What is a Language Policy?

Any decision or principle of action adopted with regard to the usage of

language or languages by an organization or individual is known as a


77

language policy. Language polices are basically designed to promote one

or more languages and also it specify the usage of language in different

domains, like education, administration, media, etc. So we can say that

language policy is a cover term for all the linguistic behaviours,

assumptions, cultural forms, folk believes, attitude towards a language

etc. A language policy is multidimensional. Language policy has been an

area of interest for many scholars. Eminent work on language policy has

been done by Charles Ferguson, Haugen, Heinz Kloss, Joan Rubin, and

Richard Baldauf. People like Schiffman 1996; Spolsky 2004; Ricento

2006; MCarty 2002 has also done a lot in the area of language policy.

Ruth Wodak viewed language policy

As every public influence on the communication radius of languages;

the sum of those “top-down” and “bottom-up” political initiatives

through which a particular language or languages is/are supported in

their public validity, their functionality, and their dissemination.

(Wodak, 2006:170)

There are certain factors which affect the framing of language policy i.e.

socio-linguistic settings, attitude of the language speakers, the strength of

the political set up, etc. If the speaker of a language develops a positive

attitude towards his/her own language s/he can change or modify the

existing language policy of that society. According to Fasold (1984),

language policies are constructs, and they change over time. (Schiffman

1996:40)

Language policy can either be a written clause in the Constitution of a

country or a language law, or a cabinet document or on administrative

regulation. 125 of the world‟s Constitution express some policy about


78

language. (Spolsky 2004:11-12). But this doesn‟t mean others don‟t have

any language policy. One cannot say no to a language policy. Whether it

is implicit or explicit it is present everywhere. Good language policies are

always needed for the effective working of a nation and language policy

cannot be studied without knowing about language planning. The need

for a language policy is there at different levels. Like:

For official use of language (e.g. Administration, law, etc.)

Use of language at regional level

Language for wider communication (mass media)

Language for International communication

Use of languages at specific domains like education, etc.

For all these purposes we need to choose a language and sometimes the

need is to develop that language. For an effective language policy, good

language planning is equally important.

Planning involves a choice that is made on the basis of a conscious

effort to predict the consequences of the proposed alternatives.

(Chaklader, 1990:151)

In the process of language planning various academies and committees

are involved. The goals of language planning differ from one nation to

other and from one organization to other. Sometimes language planning

is done for assimilating the languages i.e. the dominant language of the

society is forced on native speakers of other languages. So they are

assimilationist in nature. Some are done for maintaining linguistic

pluralism i.e. multilingualism is recognized and supported. Other goals of

language planning are standardization, language revitalization, language

reform, language maintenance, etc. Planning can be either seen as a


79

management of language or manipulation of language. Most of the time

language planning is governed by power and politics. According to

cooper (1989:45) language planning is a “deliberate effort to influence

the behaviour of others with respect to acquisition, structure or functional

allocation of their language codes.” Various sociolinguists divided the

process of language planning into various steps. The general sub-division

is of: policy formation, codification, elaboration and implementation. To

these sub-processes Eastman added two more namely language choice

and evaluation. The process of language choice is never neutral. Choice

inevitably means selection and selection is always at the cost of rejection.

On the background of various questions language choice can be

understood. For example, who is choosing whom under what

circumstances? This shows the power dynamics working in the selection.

The question of choice, covertly takes note of who is being eliminated

and with whom, is the pressure group. In the selection process various

economic, political, sociological considerations work. So planning should

be so that most of the languages get benefit from it.

3.2 Types of Language Planning:

Corpus Planning: Corpus planning basically takes into account the

development, modernization and standardization of languages which

involve coining of new terms, adopting new script, etc. All the languages

in the world are not fully developed, for example some languages of the

world do not have a written form and some do not have literary tradition,

etc. So languages which are inadequate to perform in different domains

need to be expanded in terms of lexicon, style, etc. In broader term corpus


80

planning can be divided into three categories: graphization,

modernization and standardization

In the process of graphization, languages which have oral tradition are

made to adopt or create a new orthographic system or script. So that it

can be used in formal education, literacy programs and in the

development of literary traditions. The corpus planners either use an

existing writing system or create a new one.

Modernization on the other hand is the expansion of the resources of a

language, like its lexicon, style, etc. Modernization of a language

generally occurs when there is a change in the status of a language or also

we can say it is vice- versa. Every day new inventions and concepts are

coming so up gradation of the languages on account of these changes is

necessary.

Standardization is a process where preference is given to on variety or

dialect of a language over others. Also it can be termed as a common

language acceptable to the people of an area over other dialectical

variations. The choice of a language as a standard language is generally

power oriented. By making one language variety as a standard language

we are depriving others to gain position in various domains (like

education). By this one section of the society is having privileged and rest

are deprived.

Status Planning: It refers to the choice of a language for various

functional domains within a society. It involves the selection of a

language for official purposes, for education, for mass media or for wider

communication. It allocates status to the chosen language. According to


81

Rubin (1977:36) status planning encompasses governmental policy

decisions concerning which language should be assigned or recognized

for which purpose within a country or region, as well as the various

implementation steps taken to support the policy that has been adopted.

The distinction of dialect and language is an area of status planning.

3.3 Typologies of Language Policy:

Language policies may be categorized into different types. Schiffman in

his book Linguistic Culture and Language Policy has reviewed the

typologies of language policies given by Kloss (1966a).

Language policy can be categorized as:

Covert and Overt language policy:

Covert policies do not name any language in any legal document or

anywhere. In a covert language policy the agenda is hidden. Its use

is implicit. Overt policies on the other hand are open-ended and

clearly define the role of a language in a polity. The domains of

usage, its status, everything is explicitly stated.

De facto and De jure language policies:

De jure policy may promote any language in any domain but the de

facto policy is the usage of any other language, i.e. by law a certain

language was made to be used but in reality some other language is

being widely used.

Promotive and Tolerance policies:

A promotive policy explicitly or non-explicitly promotes or

encourages the use of a language(s) by Constitution and has legal

guarantees like Hindi in India. In a tolerance policy a language is


82

allowed but not as such guarantee is provided and no domains are

reserved.

Egalitarian and Restricted policies:

Policy which keeps all the languages on the same platform i.e.

giving equal footing to all the languages present in that society is

egalitarian policy, for example, Lenin‟s language policy in the

Soviet Union. On the other hand restricted policies are made to

tolerate certain languages only in restricted domains or functions.

The rights to use certain languages are restricted.

These are some of the typologies given by Kloss and Schiffman.

Haugen (1966b) classified language policy into four headings- „selection

of norm‟, „codification of its written or spoken form‟, „implementation‟

and „elaboration‟. The same concept of selection was termed „status

planning‟ and codification as „corpus planning‟ by Kloss in 1969.

(Spolsky 2004:6)

Language policy can best be understood in terms of number of

language(s) recognized as national or official language(s). It is not that

only multilingual polities or societies require language policy for the

smooth governance but the monolingual equally need one. Lambart

(1999) has categorized countries into three groups and so the language

policy based on that.

Monolingual Countries: Many countries claim to be monolingual

in defining its policy. But if the polity is monolingual it doesn‟t

mean it‟s people or individual are too monolingual. Around 78

countries claim to be monolingual out of which 32 provide special


83

clause for protecting the minorities. Countries like Armenia, Iran,

Iraq, Singapore, Nepal, etc claim to be monolingual but also

protect the minority rights. Also there are countries that

marginalize the rights of the minorities and hegimonically impose

one language and claim to be ethno-linguistically homogeneous.

Countries like China, Japan, United States, etc falls under this

category.

Dyadic/Triadic Countries: Countries claiming two or three

languages as official or national languages have dyadic and triadic

language policy. Both the linguistic groups are relatively equal in

number and share equal power. So these polities make a dyadic

policy. Countries like Switzerland, Canada, Belgium, Afghanistan,

etc recognizes two or three languages.

Mosaic/Multilingual Countries: There are many countries which

give recognition to more than two languages either as the national

or official language. In multilingual countries the debate is usually

directed towards language choice. Countries like India, South

Africa, Republic of Congo, etc recognizes more than four

languages.(as cited in Spolsky 2004: 58-59)

Countries having one language as the National/Official language are

more complex in nature. Thinking that their language policy is simple and

the language policy of a multilingual country is complex is nothing more

than a disguise. The mental pressures on the people of monolingual

countries are no less as compared to multilingual because monolingual

countries are not monolingual in the real sense. With the advent of

globalization and spread of other languages the chances of resentment are


84

more there. Problems are everywhere whether it is a monolingual polity

or a multilingual. Spolsky (2004:159) states:

While there may have been a time when it seemed for a nation state to

announce its recognition of a single national and official language,

analyzing actual cases reveals that countries monolingual in both

practice and management are quite rare.

a) External forces b) Internal conflict

No community lives in isolation. In the world of globalization all

countries are in direct contact with each other. Also labour mobility or

migration of people is very common among countries. Due to mass media

and information technology most of the people in the world have become

multilingual. So the countries who claim to be monolingual are not

monolingual in the real sense. The ground reality is something different.

So in a monolingual country it is not necessary that the individuals are

also monolingual. But in a multilingual country apart from the internal

Multilingual

countries

Monolingual

countries


85

conflicts all other external factors like globalization can be easily handled

as the polity and individuals are accustomed to linguistic diversity.

3.5 Language Policy of India:

India‟s linguistic, cultural, ethnic, religious diversity is very strong and

wide spread. Heterogeneity and multilingualism is not a recent product. It

goes back to the time when Aryans came to India with Sanskrit and

thereafter many came, invaded and settled in India and with them was

their languages. Since that time India is managing its diversity and

multilingualism very beautifully and ardently. At that time also

multilingualism in India never created problem in the smooth functioning

of the government. Different languages were assigned different roles in

different domains but there was no conflicting situation. Even at the time

of British rule, the British promoted the Indian vernaculars as well as

English too. It isn‟t that the making of a language policy in India was

thought after independence but it was there much before that. Even at the

time of Mughal empires this policy existed. Language policy is about

language choice or the usage of languages in different domains.

But a very strong face of policy was seen at the time of Macaulay‟s

minute. Macaulay insisted on providing English education to the Indians.

Macaulay said,

We must at present do our best to form a class who may be interpreters

between us and the millions whom we govern; a class of persons,

Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals,

and in intellect.

(Thirumalai, 2003)


86

Before this the British government was not very keen on promoting

English language as it was seen as the tool of governance in their hand.

On March 7, 1835 Governor General Bentinck issued an order in favour

of Macaulay and agreed to spend funds for the purpose of education to be

employed for English education alone, but with that guaranteed not to

abolish any College or School of native learning. On the other hand the

Orientalists wanted to promote the indigenous languages and were

against English education. The conflict between the Anglicist and

Orientalist led to the „polarization‟ of language policy.

The Indian language policy took a U-turn when the Indian National

Congress started supporting and promoting Hindi language written in

Devanagri. The nationalists wanted to compete with the British by their

own language. But Gandhiji was not supportive of this view because he

knew that if Hindi with Sanskritized words will be chosen then the

Muslims having Urdu will be marginalized. This will create a great cleft

between them and will be a threat to the unity of the country. So he went

for a mid-way introducing „Hindustani‟ as the common language for pan

India.

Then in 1947 India got its independence and thus formulated the

Constitution. That was a great turning point in the history of this country.

The essence of being independent led every heart grow with its own

desire. At that time the most important task was to administer the newly

independent country. For proper administration, the areas important were

that of law and order, education, etc. A language was needed to convey

the ideas to its people. But India being a vast polity with lots of


87

diversities led a big question in front of the leaders of the country. The

leaders wanted an India where the government passing a law in a

language should be understood to all, anyone can easily communicate to

others via a common language. One of the motives behind this thought

was the eradication of English language. The imposition of a common

language was nothing but was a determination to eradicate all the

memories of colonial rule, so that India can have its own voice. But the

mark of colonial history was so deep that the government of India was

unable to remove English.

At that time many had little idea of the issues at stake. There was a need

to make a language policy for India. For effective administration, a

language commission was appointed to meet the need of having a

language policy. The commission was formed to have a thorough study of

the language policies of the multilingual countries across the world. After

looking into all the reports and policies of different polities the

commissioners came to the conclusion of adopting „the Soviet Model‟ of

language policy. A report regarding the adoption of „the soviet model‟

was given by secretary of the commission, S. G. Barve (1957) who

warned against the borrowing of any model without adapting it, saying,

Obviously no two cases in a field like this are exactly or even broadly

similar; therefore any lessons to be had from the experiences of like

circumstances in other countries must be drawn with great care.

(Schiffman, 1996:162)


88

3.6 Soviet Language Policy:

In the 20th

century it was the Soviet Union which had its language policy

for the minorities. It was Lenin who tried for the notion of „self-

determination of all nations‟. At that time the Soviet language policy was

to make all the ethnic languages grow and led them stand on one

platform. As stated by Spolsky,(2004:116),“Martin (2002) judged this the

most ambitious affirmative action program that any state had so far tried

to implement.”

But Stalin revised the Leninist policy in 1930s and followed the

continuation of Czarist Russification, but the Constitution kept its clauses

for minority languages rights. The policy was not supportive of diversity

as its prior goal was of Russification. The native language instruction was

not obligatory but was made optional. The bilingualism was

unidirectional i.e. many left their mother tongue by learning Russian. By

the 1970s, Russian had become the primary and in many instances the

sole language of instruction in education.

3.6.1 Importation of Soviet Language Policy:

The effort to import the soviet language policy on India has been

considered a „fatal error‟ by Schiffman. He further argued that,

The 1950 policy was without any doubt a clone of the Soviet model

developed and implemented by Lenin in the USSR in the 1920s, with

the role occupied by Russian in that policy tailored for Hindi in India‟s

policy.

(Schiffman 1996:150)

Russia and India undoubtly are multilingual polities but the role and

status of the languages working in different domains in these two


89

countries are totally different. Russian was and is the majority or

dominant language i.e. more than all the minorities in Russia. This

position is there since the Czarist rule but in India, Hindi is not a

dominant language. Hindi is a major language (39%) but still the

percentage is not even 50%. Also the regional languages of India are very

strong as compared to the indigenous languages of Russia.

Table 3.1: Speakers of Hindi and the State Dominant Languages in

each State

State Dominant

Language of

the state

No. of Hindi

Speakers

No. of

Dominant

Language

Speakers

%age of

Hindi

speakers

%age of

Dominant

Language

Speakers

Andhra

Pradesh

Telugu 2,464,194 63,924,954 03.25 84.41

Arunachal

Pradesh

Nepali 81,186 94,919 7.39 8.70

Assam Assamese 1,569,662 13,010,478 5.89 48.84

Bihar Hindi 60,635,284 60,635,284 73.06 -

Chhattisgarh Hindi 17,210,481 17,210,481 82.61 -

Delhi Hindi 11,210,843 11,210,843 80.94 -

Gujarat Gujarati 2,388,814 42,768,386 4.71 84.53

Haryana Hindi 18,460,843 18,460,843 87.31 -

Himachal

Pradesh

Hindi 5,409,758 5,409,758 89.01 -

Jammu &

Kashmir

Kashmiri 1,870,264 5,425,733 18.44 53.88

Jharkhand Hindi 15,510,587 15,510,587 57.56 -

Karnataka Kannada 1,344,877 34,838,035 02.54 66.06

Kerala Malayalam 26,386 30,803,747 0.08 96.75

Madhya

Pradesh

Hindi 52,658,687 52,658,687 87.26 -


90

Maharashtra Marathi 10,681,641 66,643,942 11.03 68.88

Manipur Manipuri 24,720 1,266,098 01.14 53.01

Meghalaya Khasi and

Garo

50,055 1,091,087

990,000

02.16 47.31

Mizoram Mizo 10,530 674756 01.19 75.73

Nagaland *Nagamese 56,981 30000 02.86 -

Orissa Oriya 1,043,243 30,563,507 02.83 83.26

Punjab Punjabi 1,851,128 22,334,369 07.60 91.95

Rajasthan Hindi 51,407,216 51,407,216 90.97 -

Sikkim Nepali 36,072 338,606 06.67 62.65

Tamil Nadu Tamil 189,474 59,377,942 0.30 95.60

Tripura Bengali 53,691 2,147,994 01.68 67.31

Uttar

Pradesh

Hindi 151,770,131 151,770,131 91.32 -

Uttaranchal Hindi 7,466,413 7,466,413 87.95 -

West Bengal Bengali 5,747,099 68,369,255 07.17 85.23

*In Nagaland English is the official language but people of Nagaland

speak 60 dialects of Sino-Tibetan family. No one language is dominant

here but the wide spoken among them is nagamese which is a Creole.

From the above table we can see that in all the states Hindi is not the

dominant language. Out of twenty eight states Hindi is dominant in ten

states which is not even half of the total states. In almost sixteen states the

percentage of Hindi speakers is even less than 10%. By seeing the bar

diagram it is clear that Hindi is dominant mostly in the northern states. In

the southern and north-eastern states Hindi speakers occupy less space.

Therefore Hindi cannot be said the dominant language of India and so the

importation of the soviet language policy is not justified in Indian

context.


91

Figure 3.1: Bar Diagram showing Distribution of Hindi and Dominant

Language Speakers of each State.

One more distinction is that Hindi consists of 49 dialects in itself and then

it makes up the 39% and the speakers of these languages do not agree

they speak Hindi. Hindi is spoken in the Northern belt but Russian

occupies a wider territory. So we can see that like Russian, Hindi do not

have a strong background and platform. The selection of a language

policy without looking into the historical, social, cultural, educational and

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Andhra Pradesh

Arunachal Pradesh

Assam

Bihar

Chhattisgarh

Delhi

Gujarat

Haryana

Himachal Pradesh

Jammu & Kashmir

Jharkhand

Karnataka

Kerala

Madhya Pradesh

Maharashtra

Manipur

Meghalaya

Mizoram

Nagaland

Orissa

Punjab

Rajasthan

Sikkim

Tamil Nadu

Tripura

Uttar Pradesh

Uttaranchal

West Bengal

Percentage

State Dominant Language Speakers

Hindi speakers


92

religious history will land up the nation in utter confusions. The kind of

promotion being given to Hindi is leading India towards Stalin‟s model of

language policy i.e. hegemony of Hindi over all. The Government of

India for three consecutive years i.e. 1963-64, 1964-65 and 1965-66, has

spent Rs 4, 65, 00,000 for the propagation and development of Hindi.

for all other languages put together- Tamil, Malayalam,

Telugu........have spent a meagre amount for Rs 21,79,000. For Hindi

alone.........about Rs 4,65,00,000......for Hindi alone, they have spent

twenty times more than the amount spent for all the other languages

put together.”

(CAD April 7, 1967:3632-33)

The idea of National flag, National Anthem, National bird, etc had

occupied the minds of the leaders but they were unaware of the

resentments being aroused by the idea of National language. So

Schiffman rightly said that, ”The biggest mistake of post-Independence

language policy in India was not that planners sought a policy that would

remove English and better suit Indian circumstances, but that they chose

another foreign model for their language policy, one that on the surface

seemed egalitarian and multilingual but was otherwise ill-equipped for

Indian circumstances”.(Schiffman, 1996:165)

3.7 Hindi: From National to Official Language:

Hindi is our National Language, this is what most of the Indians know, in

fact more than half of India‟s population is under the same impression.

They are ignorant of the fact that Hindi is only our official language and

there is no one national language in India. So it is very important to know

what is a national language, what is the difference between a national


93

language and an official language. A language which serves the whole

country is a national language or a language which is spoken by the

majorities or a language which binds the society with effective

communication. According to V. V. Vinogradov national language, is the

presence of a single standardized literary language, formed on a popular

basis, common for the whole nation and covering all the spheres of

communication. (Kluyev,1981:4)

For monolingual countries this term can be used successfully but for a

multilingual nation like India, this term is a bit abstract one, because it is

not possible to have an effective communication across the country from

Kashmir to Kanyakumari and from Gujarat to extreme east in one

language. A language which integrates the people of a nation and serves

the function of nationalism is known as a national language and „when

employed to achieve the end of nationalism is designated as official

language‟. (Srivastava,1984:111)

At the time of gaining Independence every one‟s primary attention was

on removing English by one language and that will be the national

language of India. Before Independence it was Hindustani which was

proposed as the national language of India. Gandhi, Nehru and others

thought that to represent a multi-ethnic nation like India it is important to

have a neutral language as the national language, so that the controversy

of Hindi-Urdu can be avoided.

According to Gandhi (1956:3) the criteria of a language for becoming the

national language were:

1. It should be easy to learn for Government officials.


94

2. It should be capable of serving all the domains, religion, politics,

etc.

3. It should be the majority language.

4. It should be easy enough to learn for everyone.

5. No temporary or passing interest should be considered while

choosing this language.

Gandhi while his Presidential address at the Second Gujarat Educational

Conference, Broach, Oct.20, 1917 gave these criteria. In his speech he

said that English can‟t fulfil all the criteria but Hindi can. So he very

strongly said,

Hindi has already established itself as the national language of India.

We have been using it as such for a long time. The birth of Urdu is due

to this fact.

(Gandhi, 1956:6)

Gandhi fully supported Hindustani because he knew that the Hindi-Urdu

controversy can become a hindrance in the path of development. So in

any case he wanted a common language i.e., ‟Hindustani‟. His mind was

preoccupied with the fact of replacing English. He was more afraid of the

English encroachment than the Hindi-Urdu controversy. So his ideal

language of integration was „Hindustani‟. But in doing so he forgot that

the language he was considering as a common language was made up of

Hindi-Urdu, which has nothing to do with the whole of South India. A

common language cannot be produced synthetically but the use and

development of a language by its user, flourishes a language into a pan

language.


95

In the “making of a „common‟ that is, national language, it is necessary to

take into account that in the relationship between language and society

there are present not two, but three elements: language, society and

communication.”(Kluyev,1981:5)

The basic function of a language is communication and in a multilingual

country where there are more than hundred languages spoken,

communication will seize with the use of a single language, which is not

even spoken by half of the population. The people of South India had

more fear of dominance of Hindi than of English. In the essays written by

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru, it has been mentioned that: “we must have two

scripts: the composite Devanagri-Bengali-Guajarati-Marathi; and the

Urdu-Sindhi; and if necessary, a script for the Southern languages, unless

this can be approximated to the first.” (Gandhi, 1956:192)

While saying „we‟ was he referring the whole India and if so then why he

used this „if necessary‟ for scripts used in the south. Script is also one of

the important factors in determining a language as a standard language

and sometimes it plays even a bigger role as in Hindi-Urdu case.

Gandhi knew that to make Hindustani the pan India language it is

important to have the conscience of the South. So Gandhi in his

Presidential address at the second meeting of the All India Sahitya

Parishad in Madras (1937) said that:

Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam, Kannada must be there and will be there.

But why not teach the illiterate in these parts these languages through

Devanagri script? In the interest of the national unity we desire to

achieve, the adoption of Devanagri: as a common script is so essential.

(Gandhi, 1956:46)


96

But Gandhi failed to popularize Hindustani Prachar Sabha in north India

because of some hard core orthodox movements like „Shudhi‟ and

„Sangathan‟ movements in favour of Hindi by Shraddhananda and Madan

Mohan Malaviya. Not only Gandhi tried to promote Hindustani but there

were others too working in favour of Hindustani. Like Hindustani

academy founded in 1927 by Raja Rajeshwar Bali, Hindustani culture

society in 1945 by Bhagwan Das, Tara Chand etc tried to promote

Hindustani so that in future it can be easily made the national language

without entering into any controversy. Some other important leaders who

supported Hindustani to become the national language are Dr. Rajendra

Prasad, Maulvi Abdul Haq, Mian Bashir Ahmad, Dr. Zakir Husain, Kaka

Kalelkar, Maulana Sulaiman Nadvi, Mr. Asaf Ali, Prof. Amaranath Jha,

and Mr. Rajagopalachariar etc. But there were others who considered

Hindustani as an abstract notion and thus not fit for becoming the national

language. Also there were some who were of the thought that Hindustani

is nothing but a simpler form of Urdu. So they strongly backed up Hindi

with Sanskritized form. People like Purushottamdas Tandon, K.M.

Munshi, Govind Das, Dr. Dhirendra Verma were of this view. There were

some like Sumittranandan pant, Mohammad Din Taseer who said there is

no need of a common language at this point and let Hindustani grow and

get accepted by all. Before partition people agreed for Hindustani but

after July 1947 the orthodox Hindi leaders dislodged Hindustani and

demanded that Hindi alone, written in the Devanagri script, be made the

national language but latter agreed on the term official instead of national

(Das Gupta, 1970:131). Despite the support of many important leaders

like Mahatma, Nehru, etc Hindustani failed to achieve its position. As


97

soon as it happened many from the south started showing their

disagreement on behalf of Hindi. Even in the proceedings of the

Constitution assembly, the southern representatives regardless of their

mother tongue (Tamil, Telugu, Kannada and Malayalam) were showing

their resistance against Hindi as the sole national language.

So after that Hindi along with English with a term of fifteen years was

termed as an associate official language. But still there was a strong

resentment against Hindi, because in the name of Hindustani, Hindi was

given the status of official language. “The drafting Constitution which

appeared in 1948 changed Hindustani to Hindi even without the

official sanction of the assembly.” (Chaklader, 1990:63). So it was

wrong on part of some leaders and scholars to use Hindustani and Hindi

interchangeably. The form of Hindi which became the official language

was never the Hindustani spoken at that time. So we can say that they are

two different forms, one being neutral and other being charged with

communal feelings. Mr. R. V. Dulekar in the Constituent Assembly on

13th Sep. 1949, while speaking on the question of the official language,

said:

I say, it is…..

-„it‟ means Hindi-

…….the official language and it is a national language. You may

demure it; you may belong to another nation. But I belong to Indian

nation, „the Hindi nation‟, „the Hindustani nation‟, „the Hindu nation‟.

(CAD,1967:3630)


98

Is Hindi fit to be called the „national language or official language‟? It

was an important question which needed a strong answer. S. V.

Krishnamoorthy Rao of Karnataka “argued that it was unfair to declare a

language that was not even understood by one third of the country and

still not standardized as an official language.” (Agnihotri, 2007:192)

In 1961 only 30% of the population returned Hindi as their mother tongue

and is still being spoken only by 41.03% (2001 census), i.e., not even by

half of the population despite being promoted with a higher degree. As

we know Hindi in itself is an amalgamation of many dialects (as many as

49). There are many languages grouped under Hindi which are as

competent to be known as a language. Languages like Bhojpuri, Maithili,

Rajasthani etc are to be considered a dialect or language. The

representatives of these major regional languages are trying hard to get

them affiliation in the Eighth Schedule. Maithili has got and may be in

future others to will get. The growth of these dialects into languages will

ultimately affect the Hindi speaking claimants in future. Likewise there

are many contradicting situations which bring Hindi under question. With

the growing consciousness among the speakers of other languages and

dialects and with the growing popularity of English, where will Hindi

stand.

English is more popular as a second language than Hindi, 8% speak

English as their second language, 3.15% as a third language, whereas

just 6.15% of Indians, not having Hindi as their mother tongue choose

Hindi as second and 2.16% as third languages.

(Benedikter, 2009:170)


99

Not only Hindi was opposed by the Southern people but also by the

supporters of Bengali and Sanskrit. So Hindi faces conflicts at various

levels:

1. As a language of national communication it comes into conflict

with English, which is recognized as an associate official language

of the union.

2. As a developed (inter-) regional language at the state level it comes

into conflict with Tamil, Bengali, etc.

3. As a lingua franca for its own dialects, it comes into conflict with

Maithili, Bhojpuri, etc.

4. As an alternate literary variant it comes into conflict with Urdu.

5. As an interethnic link language, it comes into conflict with

Santhali, Khasi, etc. (Sridhar, 1996)

Any coercive method of homogenization under the popular banner of

„national integration‟ or „assimilation of cultures‟ will give rise or can be

said has given rise to agitation and revolt.

3.8 The Official Language Act, 1993:

After facing lots of resentment and controversies on the issue of making

Hindi as the national language, the Constitution dropped this term

national and adopted official which was acceptable to all. The

forthcoming crisis was of making Hindi the sole official language of

India. The non-Hindi people wanted English also as one of the associate

official language. They were not ready to accept Hindi as the sole official

language. So a special committee was formed to bring out a

compromising position. The committee consisted of members like


100

Ayyangar, Krishnamachari, Munshi, Ayyar, Ambedkar, Sadulla, Rao,

Azad, Tandon, Pant, Sharma, Mookherjee and Santhanam. The

committee suggested English would be the sole official language for ten

years and for five more if Parliament agreed by two-thirds majority.

Somehow the formula did not have acceptance. Then a new formula was

suggested by Munshi-Ayyanagar which got popularized as the ‟Munshi-

Ayyanagar formula‟, which got the largest support. The Munshi-

Ayyanagar formula was considered as the building blocks of the language

provisions of the constitution. Further with some modification this

formula got its place in the part XVII of the Constitution. (Chaklader,

1990:67)

Thus on Sept. 14th,

1949, the Constituent Assembly passed the

Constitutional provision regarding the Official Languages. Hindi was

made an official language instead of national language. So the

Constitution nowhere mentions or describes the term „national‟. With

Hindi, the Constitution permitted the use of English for fifteen years from

the date of promulgation of the Constitution. It was after the death of

Nehru in 1964 that Gulzarilal Nanda the then Home Minister once again

tried to impose Hindi on others. This attempt of dropping English as the

official language led to a very strong protest from the Southern part of

India. As the people of the South had the fear of getting less job

opportunities as compared to the people of North. There insecurity

regarding Hindi led to a massive protest in the South and in June 1965 a

meeting of all the Chief Ministers held in Delhi in which it was decided

to retain English.


101

The Non-Hindi states were assured that Hindi would never be imposed

upon them, that English will be retained as an associate additional

official language as long as even a single non-Hindi state desired it.

This was the Official Language Amendment Act 1967.

(Brass,1994:166)

This forced the Government to retain English and thus led to amendment

in the official language act. Thus Section – 3 of the Official Languages

Act, 1963 passed by the Parliament provides for the continued use of

English along with Hindi even after 1965.

The Chapter XVII (Article 343 to 351) of the Constitution gives detailed

information about the official languages of the Union and the State. (see

Appendix B). Also The Official Language Policy of the Union has been

thoroughly described under Article 120 (Part 5), Article 210 (Part 6),

Articles 343, 344 and from Article 348 to 357 of the Constitution. Like

article 343 discusses the languages used for the official purposes of the

Union, article 345 deals with the languages that are to be used for the

official purpose of each State and Union Territory, article 346 gives an

account for the language that are to be used for communication between

the Union and State inter se.

The provisions of the official language of India may be divided into nine

parts:

1. Official language of the Union.

2. Official languages of the State.

3. Language of inter-communication.

4. Language of the Supreme Court.

5. Formation of a language commission.


102

6. Language to be used in Union Parliament and State legislatures.

7. Safeguards for Linguistic Minorities.

8. Miscellaneous provisions for the promotion, development and use

of Hindi language.

9. Specification of some important languages as the national

languages.

(Chaklader, 1990:67-68)

There are very few states in India which recognizes only one language as

the official language. Each state has some clause to protect its linguistic

minorities. Also Hindi is not the pan India language.

Table 3.2: Official/Officially Recognized Languages (2001)

No. State Official Language Other Officially

Recognized Languages

1. Andhra Pradesh Telugu (1964) Urdu, Oriya

2. Arunachal Pradesh English -

3. Assam Assamese (1960) Bengali, Bodo

4. Bihar Hindi Urdu (1980)

5. Chhattisgarh Hindi -

6. Goa Konkani Marathi, Kannada

7. Gujarat Guajarati, Hindi

(1960)

-

8. Haryana Hindi Punjabi

9. Himachal Pradesh Hindi Punjabi

10. Jammu & Kashmir Urdu -

11. Jharkhand Hindi -

12. Karnataka Kannada (1963) Malayalam, Tamil, Urdu,

Telugu


103

13. Kerala Malayalam (1969) English, Tamil, Kannada

14. Madhya Pradesh Hindi (1957) -

15. Maharashtra Marathi (1964)

16. Manipur Meitei/Manipuri -

17. Meghalaya English Khasi, Garo

18. Mizoram English Mizo

19. Nagaland English -

20. Orissa Oriya (1954) -

21. Punjab Punjabi -

22. Rajasthan Hindi (1956) -

23. Sikkim English Nepali, Lepcha, Bhotia

24. Tamil Nadu Tamil (1956) -

25. Tripura English Bengali, Kokborok

26. Uttarakhand Hindi, English Urdu

27. Uttar Pradesh Hindi Urdu (1982)

28. West Bengal Bengali (1961) Nepali (1973)

Union territory

1. Andaman &

Nicobar islands

Hindi, English Tamil, Telugu, Bengali

2. Chandigarh Punjabi, Hindi,

English

-

3. Dadar and Nagar

Haveli

Marathi, Guajarati -

4. Daman and Diu Guajarati, English Marathi

5. Delhi Hindi, English Urdu, Punjabi

6. Lakshadweep Malayalam -

7. Puducherry Tamil, English &

French

Malayalam, Telugu


104

Out of 28 states, 18 States do not have Hindi as their official language.

They are as follows:- Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Goa,

Jammu & Kashmir, Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, Manipur,

Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Orissa, Punjab, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu,

Tripura and West Bengal.

To promote the use of Hindi for the official purposes of the Union, the

Department of Official Language was set up in June, 1975 as an

independent Department of the Ministry of Home Affairs. The

Department of Official Language prepares an Annual Programme in

which targets are fixed for different items of work for the progress of

Hindi. Also Committees have been set up at different levels to promote

use of Hindi for official purposes of the Union. They include, Committee

of Parliament on Official Language, Kendriya Hindi Samiti, Hindi

Salahkar Samitis, Central Official Language Implementation Committee

and Town Official Language Implementation Committees. The

Government is spending lots of money for the promotion of Hindi.

In the years (2000-01,2001-02 and 2002-03) in all a sum of Rs. 1050-

00 lakhs under the Plan Programmes and Rs. 3681.00 lakhs under the

Non-Plan Programmes respectively, have been allotted to Department

of Official Language for the development of Official Language Hindi.

(http://www.rajbhasha.gov.in/parlquesteng.htm, Question No 2129, Lok Sabha)

The continuous effort to make Hindi the sole official language is going on

but in that the Government should not forget the other languages of India

they are equally important. It is these languages which makes India

different from any other nation and makes it a multilingual mosaic.

So to maintain this multilingual essence of India the Government has

given recognition to 22 scheduled languages in the Constitution. Starting


105

from 14 it has reached 22 and still languages are growing and finding

place in the Eighth Scheduled.

3.9 The Eighth Scheduled:

India has 114 languages in its Census records. Out of those only 22

languages have got place in the Eighth Schedule. It is not possible to

recognize all the languages. But what was the need of having a Eighth

Schedule in the Constitution. The Eighth Schedule was originally

Schedule VII-A in the draft Constitution. At the time of Independence

everyone was busy dealing the issue of „National language‟. But it was

evident that a nation with such a vast linguistic diversity cannot be

governed only by implementing one language. So in order to maintain the

multilingual ethos of India the Constitution gave place to fourteen

languages when the Constitution was adopted by the Constituent

Assembly on 26th

Nov, 1949. This Schedule has emerged as the most

important language policy statement. For the sake of national integration

many stated these fourteen languages as the „national languages‟. Like

Nehru in 1963 while addressing the Indian Parliament said that, “all the

thirteen or fourteen” languages in the eighth Schedule are “national

languages” (Nehru‟s speech, 4:65). The report of the official language

commission refers to the languages in the eighth schedule as „regional

languages‟, while “the official report of the Committee on Emotional

Integration refers to all the fourteen languages listed in the original

Eighth Schedule as having the status of national languages”. (as cited in

Das, 1970:38-39)

The first question which needs to be addressed is why there was a need to

have a Eighth Schedule in the Constitution. Was the Government keen to


106

give importance to some languages to maintain national integration or

there was some other political or linguistic reasons. The Schedule‟s

original purpose was stated in the Article 351 and 344. First was the

corpus planning of Hindi as stated in Article 351 of the Constitution- “It

shall be the duty of the union to promote the spread of the Hindi

language, to develop it so that it may serve as a medium of expression for

all the elements of the composite culture of India and to secure its

enrichment by assimilating without interfering with its genius, the forms,

style and expressions used in Hindustani and in the other languages of

India specified in the Eighth Schedule and secondarily on other

languages.” (Benidikter, 2009:25). The second Article 344-(1) states

“Commission and Committee of Parliament on Official language-The

President shall, at the expiration of five years from the commencement of

this Constitution and thereafter at the expiration of ten years from such

commencement, by order constitute a Commission which shall consist of

a Chairman and such other members representing the different languages

specified in the Eighth Schedule as the President may appoint, and the

order shall define the procedure to be followed by the Commission”.

As stated by Mr. Moturi Satyanaranana, a member of the Drafting

Committee on the Language Resolution States that after a discussion on

the fluidity of languages in India, Pandit Nehru asked him to prepare a list

of languages. He gave a list of twelve languages and after seeing that he

added one more and that was Urdu. (Viswanatham, 2001:303). But still it

is not clear that how he arrived at these twelve languages. The criteria of

selection of these languages were never clear. It was rather on political

preferences more. “The Part XIV-A of the Draft Constitution in the


107

Constituent Assembly on 12th

Sep, 1949 has Schedule VII-A consisting

of thirteen languages. They are Assamese, Bengali, Canarese, Gujarati,

Hindi, Kashmiri, Malayalam, Marathi, Oriya, Punjabi, Tamil, Telugu, and

Urdu.” (Viswanatham, 2001)

In 1950 the number became fourteen by adding some and replacing

others. For example the name of the language „Canarese‟ was substituted

by the name „Kannada‟ through an amendment moved by S. V.

Krishnamoorthy. (CAD, p. 1486). So after that the fourteen languages

were Assamese, Bengali, Gujarati, Hindi, Kannada, Kashmiri,

Malayalam, Marathi, Oriya, Punjabi, Sanskrit, Tamil, Telugu, and Urdu.

Later on Sindhi was added in 1967 through the 21st amendment. Then

Nepali, Manipuri, Konkani in 1992 through 71st amendment and finally in

2003 Maithili, Dogri, Santali, Bodo got its place in the Eighth Schedule

through the 92nd

amendment. Now the number has risen to twenty-two.

Table 3.3: List of Scheduled Languages and their Year of Recognition.

Languages Language

Family

Yr. of

Recognition

Areas Spoken in.

Assamese Indo-Aryan 1950 Assam

Bengali Indo-Aryan 1950 West Bengal, Assam,

Jharkhand, Tripura

Bodo Tibeto-

Burman

2003 Assam

Dogri Indo-Aryan 2003 Jammu and Kashmir

Gujrati Indo-Aryan 1950 Gujarat,

Hindi Indo-Aryan 1950 Most of Northern India

Kannada Dravidian 1950 Karnataka

Kashmiri Dardic 1950 Jammu and Kashmiri

Konkani Indo-Aryan 1992 Goa, Karnataka, Kerala,

Maharashtra

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bengal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jharkhand

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripura

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gujarat

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karnataka


108

Maithili Indo-Aryan 2003 Bihar

Malayalam Dravidian 1950 Kerala,

Manipuri Tibeto-

Burman

1992 Manipur

Marathi Indo-Aryan 1950 Maharashtra

Nepali Indo-Aryan 1992 Sikkim, West Bengal,

Assam

Oriya Indo-Aryan 1950 Orissa

Punjabi Indo-Aryan 1950 Punjab, Chandigarh,

Haryana

Sanskrit Indo-Aryan 1950 Mattur

Santali Austro-

Asiatic

2003 Jharkhand

Sindhi Indo-Aryan 1967 Gujarat, Maharashtra,

Madhya Pradesh

Tamil Dravidian 1950 Tamil Nadu

Telugu Dravidian 1950 Andhra Pradesh

Urdu Indo-Aryan 1950 Jammu and Kashmir,

Andhra Pradesh, Uttar

Pradesh, Bihar, Delhi

Still the inclusion does not stop here. 38 languages are still on the waiting

list for getting recognition. They are Angika (Bihar), Banjara, Bajika

(Bihar), Bhojpuri (Bihar & Uttar Pradesh), Bhoti, Bhotia, Bundelkhandi,

Chhattisgarhi, Dhatki, English, Garhwali (Pahari), Gondi, Gujjar or

Gujjari, Ho, Kaachachhi, Kamtapuri, Karbi, Khasi, Kodava (Coorg), Kok

Barak, Kumaoni (Pahari), Kurak, Lepcha, Limbu, Mizo (Lushai), Magahi

(Bihar), Mundari, Nagpuri, Nicobarese, Pahari (Himachali), Pali,

Rajasthani, Sambalpuri or Kosali, Shaurseni (Prakrit), Siraiki, Tenyidi

and Tulu.

In India there are five language families and out of 22 Schedule

languages, 14 are of Indo-Aryan, 4 of Dravidian, 2 are of Tibeto-Burman

and 1 of Austro-Asiatic group. Out of 114 languages present in India, 88


109

languages are tribal languages. (Benedikter, 2009:58). Still the number of

tribal languages recognized under the Eighth Schedule is so meagre. The

two entire language families the Tibeto-Burman and the Austro-Asiatic

have been neglected. The development of the Schedule languages will

lead India to a greater cleavage between the major and minor languages.

This „Reductionist policy‟ of the government will hamper the

multilingual ethos of the country. The big fishes will swallow the smaller

one (those not listed in the Eighth Schedule). (Abbi, 2004). Abbi has

pointed out several negative consequences of the Eighth Schedule. One is

the marginalization and stigmatization of several languages. The Eighth

Schedule has created discord and tension by creating a list of prestigious

and privileged languages. The benefits the speakers of these languages

are availing are being eligible candidate for employment, having the

medium of instruction and examination, translation facility, being

language of mass media, thus creating a hierarchy of conflict. But if taken

positively this Eighth Schedule has made the speakers of other languages

think of developing their language in order to have place in the Eighth

Schedule. That‟s why the number has risen from fourteen to twenty-two

and many more are trying hard to develop their language. Scholars like

Pattanayak, Abbi, U.N. Singh are strongly against the enlisting of

languages in the eighth Schedule. As stated by Pattanayak, “the Eighth

Schedule instead of maintain and promoting multilingualism in the

country props up dominant monolingualism. By not recognizing diversity

it indirectly supports language imperialism at the national as well as

regional levels.” (Pattnayak, 1995:55)


110

As stated by U. N. Singh (1995: 46-47) there are three views regarding

the Eighth Scheduled:

1. Some view it as the end- the ultimate goal.(like by language

activists)

2. Some view the Schedule as a port that lies in the mid course- as a

milestone for direction or as an instrument of change.

3. Some view the Schedule as a beginning- a preamble with expected

political overtones and an avowed policy of language engineering.

Table 3.4: Languages in the Eighth Schedule with their speakers’

strength. (Census 2001)

No. Languages Number of

speakers

Percentage of total

population

1 Hindi 42,20,48,642 41.02

2 Bengali 8,33,69,769 8.1

3 Telugu 7,40,02,856 7.1

4 Marathi 7,19,36,894 6.9

5 Tamil 6,07,93,814 5.9

6 Urdu 5,15,36,111 5.0

7 Gujarati 4,60,91,617 4.4

8 Kannada 3,79,24,011 3.6

9 Malayalam 3,30,66,392 3.2

10 Oriya 3,30,17,446 3.2

11 Punjabi 2,91,02,477 2.8

12 Assamese 1,31,68,484 1.2

13 Maithili 1,21,79,122 1.1

14 Santali 64,69,600 0.6

15 Kashmiri 55,27,698 0.5

16 Sindhi 25,35,485 0.2

17 Nepali 28,71,749 0.2

18 Konkani 24,89,015 0.2

19 Dogri 22,82,589 0.2

20 Manipuri 14,66,705 0.1

21 Bodo 13,50,478 0.1

22. Sanskrit 14,135 N


111

However it is clear that the selection of these languages was not only on

the basis of number of speakers because there are languages added in the

Schedule which has lesser less number of speakers like Sindhi, Manipuri,

Kashmiri, etc. And there are languages whose population are more than

one million yet have not found any place in the Eighth Schedule.

Table 3.5: Non-Schedule Languages (spoken by more than one million

each) (2001 Census)

Languages No. of speakers States spoken in

Bhili 9,582,957 Madhya Pradesh,

Rajasthan, Maharashtra

Gondi 2,713,790 Andhra Pradesh, Madhya

Pradesh, Maharashtra,

Orissa

Khandeshi 2,075,258 Maharashtra

Kurux 1,751,489 Jharkhand, Madhya

Pradesh, Orissa

Tulu 1,722,768 Karnataka, Kerala

Mundari 1,061,352 Jharkhand

Some of the criteria for the inclusion of languages in the Eighth Schedule

can be:

1. Literary traditions and scripts of their own.

2. Spoken by the largest number of people in large contiguous

geographical zones as dominant languages of certain regions.

3. Political concessions. (Sindhi, Nepali)

4. Being recognized as official languages in newly formed states.

(Konkani, Manipuri)


112

5. Being a classical language of culture and heritage and also a

resource language in modernizing the major literary

languages.(Sanskrit)

6. Being spoken by a large population, geographically distributed and

dispersed, but with its own script and literature. (Urdu)

(Krishnamurthi, 1995:15)

But these criteria are not enough to justify the inclusion of certain

languages and the non-inclusion of certain others. There are languages

whose speaker strength is strong or have enough literature to be included

in the Eighth Scheduled; also many have their own script, etc. So one can

see that the choice of languages in the Eighth Schedule is not really based

on these criteria. Only some got position are evident of the fact that many

have got entry due to political dominance.

3.10 The Linguistic State Reorganization:

The division of India on the basis of languages started under the British

rule which dates back to 1858. The movements for reorganization were

for the unification of territories having one language, thus making the

regional languages strong. India during the British rule was divided into

three presidencies, i.e. Bengal, Madras and Bombay. Later for ease in

administration there were more provinces made. In 1836 the North-

Western Provinces were made and in the 1861 the Central Provinces were

created. Bengal presidency went through numerous changes. In 1905

Lord Curzon divided Bengal into two parts. One province consisted of

Western part of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa and the other province

consisted of East Bengal and Assam. But in 1912 Bengal was reunified


113

under pressure of the national movement of the Bengalis. Later on in

1935, Sindh was made a separate province and Bihar and Orissa were

divided into two. Then in 1986, Mahesh Narayan of Bihar began a

movement for the removal of Hindi speaking regions from Bengal. With

the separation of Bengal by Lord Curzon in 1905 the leaders of the

nationalist movement began to give importance to the organization of

states on language basis. The linguistic reorganization gave a base for the

development of languages individually. Gandhi, Nehru, Tilak and other

Congress men supported this reorganization of the country‟s

administrative division on a linguistic basis.

In November 1921 the congress working committee was emphatically

of the opinion that all provincial proceedings should be conducted and

provincial publications should be printed in the vernaculars of the

respective provinces.

(Kluyev, 1981:122)

It started before independence and was carried up to then. They were

unaware of the complicacies that can come due to the reorganization of

the states in India. After Independence a Commission (1948) was set to

enquire about the establishment of linguistic provinces. It was being

presided by S. K. Dar so was named Dar Commission. According to the

Dar‟ Commission “the formation of provinces on exclusively or even

mainly linguistic considerations is not in the large interests of the Indian

nation and should not be taken in hand.” (i.bid, p123)

The Government intended to postpone the Reorganization. But the

Linguistic Reorganization got mass support and thus the All India

Congress Committee at Jaipur supervised by Nehru, Patel and Pattabhi


114

Sitaramaiah started a fresh move to enquire about the conditions of

reorganization. After the death of Potti Sreeramulu and the subsequent

riots in Andhra Pradesh, the congress government was forced to create

Andhra Pradesh in 1953. So in 1953 the Government was forced to

appoint a new committee to provide recommendations on reorganization.

Based on the report of the Committee, the Government of India passed

the Act on the Reorganization of States on the Linguistic Basis.

In December 1953 Pandit Nehru appointed State Reorganization

Commission. This was headed by Justice Fazal Ali and the commission

itself was also known as the Fazal Ali Commission. The efforts of this

commission were overseen by Govind Ballabh Pant, who served as Home

Minister from December 1954. The commission created a report in 1955

recommending the reorganisation of India's states. The state

reorganization Commission on 30-09-1955 gave report on the linguistic

reorganization of the states, in the report it was stated:

1. Not all the language groups are so placed that they can be grouped

into separate states;

2. There are large numbers of bilingual belts between different

linguistic areas;

3. There exist areas with a mixed population even within

monolingual areas.

As stated by Benedikter, (2009:37-38), The Commissions main aim was

to ensure India‟s unity, linguistic and cultural homogeneity and to foster

administrative convenience. Before the linguistic state reorganization the

India was divided into part A, part B and part C.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fazal_Ali

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fazal_Ali_Commission

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Govind_Ballabh_Pant

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Minister




115

Figure 3.2: Indian Provinces and Princely States before 14 August

1947

www.ncert.nic.in/book_publishing/class8/our_past-II/12.pdf

retrieved on 28/10/09


116

This Act of Reorganization of State was a very important language

policy. The first step towards the formation of Linguistic State was the

making of Andhra Pradesh on 1st October 1953. Very intense protests

followed by Hartal and Bandhs were made by the Telugu speakers for the

formation of Andhra. This was the result of promises made by the Indian

National Congress before Independence of giving each major linguistic

group their own provinces. After this others too started demanding their

own linguistic states and thus the States Reorganization Commission was

set up in 1953.

The act of reorganization of state led to the redrawing of the map of

India by creating linguistically homogeneous states. It erased the

distinction between Part A, Band C of the states and reduced the number

of states from 27 to 14 excluding the 6 Union Territories. Keeping in

mind the linguistic multiplicity of the country, the State Reorganization

Commission took many factors in consideration for the Reorganization.

1. Cost of change (paragraphs 92-106)

2. Unity and security of India (paragraphs 107-116)

3. Language and culture (paragraphs 117-169)

4. Financial viability (paragraphs 170-184)

5. Requirements of national development plans (paragraphs 185-196)

6. Regional planning and a balanced economy (paragraphs 197-210)

7. Smaller vs. larger states (paragraphs 211-220)

8. Wishes of the people (paragraphs 221-228)

9. The facts of the existing situation are more important than the

historical arguments. (paragraphs 229-231)

10. Geographical contiguity. (paragraphs 232-233)


117

11. No proposals for reorganization should be determined by a single

test. (paragraphs 235)

(Report, SRC,1955 )

According to the report of State Reorganization Commission, 1955, it

was decided to have sixteen constituent units, to be called States, and

three administered territories.

States:

1. Madras: the state was reduced to its present boundaries by the

transfer of Malabar District to the new state of Kerala. Later on the

state was renamed Tamil Nadu in 1969. Also the five taluks of

Agastheeswaram, Thovala, Kalkulam, Vilavancode and Shencotta

were to be transferred to the state of Madras.

2. Kerala: should consist of the state of Travancore-Cochin minus the

five taluks given to Madras, the Malabar district, the Kasaragod

taluk and the Amindive islands.

3. Karnataka: will consist of the present state of Mysore, the four

Kannada speaking districts of Bombay namely Dharwar, Bijapur,

North Kanara and Belgaum, the districts of Raichur and Gulbarga

from Hyderabad, the South Kanara district of Madras, the Kollegal

taluk and Coorg.

4. Hyderabad: it will consist of of the Telugu speaking districts of the

present state of Hyderabad, namely, Mahbubnagar, Nalgonda,

Warangal, Karimnagar, Adilabad, Nizamabad, Hyderabad and

Medak, along with Bidar district and the Munagala enclave of

Andhra. It was also decided that after the general elections likely to

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malabar_District

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Nadu


118

be held in or about 1961, the residuary state of Hyderabad might

unite with Andhra, if gets a two-third majority support.

5. Andhra: the taluks of Siruguppa, Bellary and Hospet and a portion

of the Mallapuram should be transferred.

6. Bombay: will include the Bombay state, the Marathi speaking

districts of Hyderabad, namely, Osmanabad, Bhir, Aurangabad,

Parbhani and Nanded; Saurashtra and Kutch.

7. Vidarbha: should be consisting of Marathi speaking districts of

Madhya Pradesh, namely, Buldana. Akola, Amravati, Yeotmal,

Wardha, Nagpur, Bhandara and Chanda.

8. Madhya Pradesh: after the separation of Vidarbha a new state

known as Madhya Pradesh should be created consisting of 14

districts of the residuary Madhya Pradesh; Bhopal and Vindhya

Pradesh; Madhya Bharat except Mandsaur district and the Sironj

sub-dividion of the Kotah district.

9. Rajasthan: it will consist of Ajmer and the Abu Road taluk of the

Banaskantha district of Bombay and the Loharu sub-tehsil of the

Hissar district of Punjab.

10. The Punjab: there is no case of dividing the present Punjab state.

PEPSU and the Himachal Pradesh should, however, be merged in

the Punjab.

11. Uttar Pradesh: will continue in its existing form.

12. Bihar: Seraikella and Kharsawan should continue to be a part of

bihar and no further changes required.

13. West Bengal: a portion of the Purnea district east of river

Mahananda and the Purulia sub-district of the Manbhum district


119

minus the Chas thana should be transferred from Bihar to West

Bengal.

14. Assam: Tripura should be merged in Assam and the present

arrangements with regard to the north east frontier agency should

continue.

15. Orissa: no changes required.

16. Jammu and Kashmir: no recommendations are made.

Territories:

1. Delhi

2. Manipur

3. Andaman and Nicobar islands

(SRC, pp-256-60)

Finally in 1956 the Central Government agreed to create Linguistic

States. And the whole of India was divided into 13 major states on

linguistic lines.

Table 3.6: List of the Linguistic States formed on 1st November 1956.

States Region included

Andhra Pradesh Included Telangana region of Hyderabad state

Assam

Bihar

Bombay state Included Saurashtra and Kutch, some part of

Nagpur division, Marathawada region of

Hyderabad.(in 1960 it split into Maharashtra and

Gujarat)

Jammu&

Kashmir

Kerala Included Malabar District

Madhya Pradesh Included Madhya Bharat, Vindhya Pradesh and

Bhopal

Mysore state Renamed Karnataka in 1973


120

Orissa Included all the 28 princely state

Punjab Included Patiala and east Punjab states union

Rajasthan Included Ajmer-Merwara state (earlier it was

Rajputana)

Uttar Pradesh

West Bengal

Union territories

Andaman and Nicobar islands

Delhi

Himachal Pradesh

Lakshadweep

Pondicherry(now puduchery)

Tripura

Manipur

(Wikipedia retrieved on 27/11/09)

So on, on November 1, 1956 the division of the states were as such:

1. Andhra Pradesh: it was enlarged by adding Telangana state and

Hyderabad state.

2. Assam

3. Bihar

4. Bombay state: Saurashtra and Kutch, the Marathi-speaking

districts of Nagpur Division of Madhya Pradesh, and the

Marathwada region of Hyderabad were added to Bombay state.

The southernmost districts of Bombay were transferred to Mysore

State. Further in 1960, the state was split into the modern states of

Maharashtra and Gujarat.

5. Jammu and Kashmir

6. Kerala: it was formed by the merger of Travancore-Cochin state

with the Malabar District of Madras State.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagpur_Division

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marathwada

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maharashtra

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gujarat

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala



121

7. Madhya Pradesh: Madhya Bharat, Vindhya Pradesh, and Bhopal

were merged into Madhya Pradesh.

8. Madras State: the state was reduced to its present boundaries by

the transfer of Malabar District to the new state of Kerala. Later on

the state was renamed Tamil Nadu in 1969.

9. Mysore State: it was enlarged by the addition of Coorg state and

the Kannada speaking districts from southern Bombay state and

western Hyderabad state. Later on in 1973 the state was renamed

Karnataka.

10. Orissa: it was enlarged by the addition of 28 princely states

including two princely states of Saraikela and Kharsawan, but later

these two states merged with Bihar.

11. Punjab: the Patiala and East Punjab States Union (PEPSU) was

merged into Punjab.

12. Rajasthan: Rajputana was renamed Rajasthan, and enlarged by the

addition of Ajmer-Merwara state.

13. Uttar Pradesh

14. West Bengal

(Wikipedia retrieved on 27/11/09)

Now in the present scenario there are 28 states and seven union territories

and all are equally heterogeneous and support multilingualism. To

maintain the multilingual essence of the states the state reorganization

commission suggested some points;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhya_Pradesh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madras_State


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Nadu

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysore_State

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kannada

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyderabad_state

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karnataka

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orissa

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punjab_%28India%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajasthan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uttar_Pradesh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bengal


122

1. A state should be considered monolingual when about 70% or

more of the entire population of the state speaks the same

language.

2. A state should be considered as bilingual when about 30% or more

of the entire population of the state speaks a language other than

the language of the region.

3. The language of the minority should be used for conducting

official business in a district and not the official language of the

state if 70% or more of the population of the district speaks it.

4. In bilingual districts, municipal areas or in Taluks where minorities

contribute 15% to 20% documents like government notices,

electoral rolls, ration cards, etc. are to be reprinted in both the

languages.


123

Figure 3.3: Indian States after Linguistic Reorganization

(www.ncert.nic.in/book_publishing/class8/our_past-II/12.pdf)

retrieved on 28/10/09


124

Thus at the time of independence India‟s soul was divided not only in two

parts but in several smaller units. According to Khubchandani (1986:20),

“in spite of the linguistic reorganization of the India states in 1956 based

on the language identity of the dominant pressure groups, regions are not

necessarily homogeneous……….. every state, apart from the dominant

state language, has from one to six outside, or minority languages which

are spoken by more than 20 persons per 1000 population.”(as cited in

Pattanayak, 1990:57) Now fresh demands are being made for the creation

of Telangana, Vidharbha and Gorkha land, etc. In 2008, UPA demanded

the centre to set up the 2nd

State Reorganization Commission (SRC) for

creating new states. (Zee news, 2008) The creation of states at that time

on linguistic basis was done because of administrative reasons.

But now in the present scenario this division is creating more problems.

Now with so many states and still the demand is rising, the power of the

Centre is weakening and the states are calling up the tune. This is leading

the nation towards Linguistic chauvinism, which is resulting in ethnic

killing in many places in India (Kuki-Naga clash, etc.). Recently a ruckus

over language happened in the Maharashtra Assembly. On the first day of

the session of the Maharashtra Assembly on 9th, November 2009 over a

dozen Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) members stormed the

podium and attacked a Samajwadi Party member Abu Azmi who was

taking the oath of office in Hindi instead of Marathi. “The outrageous

incidents took place in the wake of the MNS president Raj Thackeray‟s

open letter to party legislators asking them to take the oath in Marathi,

and his veiled warning against using any other language.” (The Hindu, 10

Nov 2009). This is hampering the multilingual essence of the country. If


125

people of same community and same language will be segregated then

instances of multilingualism will decrease. Multilingualism results only

when there is interaction among people of different community or

different linguistic background.

3.11 Language Provisions in the Constitution:

Apart from the Eighth Scheduled, keeping in mind the multilingual

situation of India, the planners of the constitution have paid special

attention in specifying which language to be used for official purposes,

which for regional, educational and administrative. The language policy

of India is pluristic in approach. For managing multilingualism the whole

of part xvii of the constitution is devoted to language. Some of the articles

describing the use of language in different domains are:

Article 29: it enunciates the fundamental rights of any section of

citizens residing anywhere in India to conserve its distinct

language, script or culture.

Article 30: seeks to protect the rights of all minorities based on

religion or language-to establish and administer educational

institution of their choice.

Article 120: lays down the official language of Parliament. It says

business in Parliament may be transacted in English or in Hindi.

However Hon‟ble Speaker of the Lok Sabha may permit any

member to address the house in his/her mother tongue under

special circumstances.

Article 210: lays down the corresponding language provision for

State legislature.


126

Article 343: stipulates Hindi in Devanagri script as the official

language of the union.

Article 344: enables the President of India to constitute an official

language commission after five years and then to review the

progress made by Hindi.

Article 345: empowers the “legislature of a state to adopt one or

more languages in use in that State as the official language or

languages for the State.”

Article 346: “provides that the official language of the union

(Hindi or English) shall be the official language for communication

between the Union and a State and between the States inter se.”

Article 348: stipulates that the language of the Supreme Court and

High Court shall be English until the Parliament by law otherwise

provides. State may, in addition, use their official language(s) for

this purpose but the English text will be deemed authoritative.

Article 349: no change of article 348 can be contemplated for 15

years and after that period the President of India must be satisfied

of the need for a change.

Article 350A: inserted by the 7th Amendment provides for local

authorities in every state endeavouring to extent adequate facilities

for instruction in the mother tongue at the primary stage of

education to children belonging to linguistic minority groups and

for the President issuing necessary direction to any state.

An Article 394A (part 22): inserted by the 56th

Amendment act

provided for an authoritative text of the constitution in the Hindi

language.


127

This shows that the constitution is working in favour of multilingualism.

At the Union level various commissions and boards have been formed to

look after the language development programs. The Government of India

has set up the following prominent institutions and agencies under the

Union Government of India:

Parliamentary Committee

The Commission for Scientific and Technical Terminology

Central Institute of Indian Languages.

National Council for the Promotion of Urdu language.

Central Institute of Hindi or Kendriya Hindi Sansthan.

Central Hindi Directorate.

National Council for the Promotion of Sindhi Language.

Central Translation Bureau

National Council of Educational Research and Training

Sahitya Akademi

The main aim and objective of these institutions and agencies are the

development of Indian languages. Many textbooks, official documents,

etc are being translated in the regional languages. The Constitution does

favour multilingualism. However some social problems do come in the

way of success of these policies and laws of the Constitution.

So the Constitution of India has always kept provisions for the proper

working and development of the entire languages whether it is a major

language or a minor language. The Constitution of India is flexible

enough for maintaining the heterogeneous and multilingual essence of the

country. The language policy of India is pluralistic in nature. The


128

language policies of India are made keeping in mind the multiplicity of

languages and heterogeneity. The only problem which it faces is at the

level of implementation.

chapter three language policy of india_10_chapter 3

Documents