Case Brief: Santosh Kumar v Secretary, Ministry of HRD

CASE NAME	Santosh Kumar v Secretary, Ministry of HRD
CITATION	AIR 1995 SC 293
COURT	The Supreme Court of India
BENCH	Justice Kuldip Singh, Justice B.L. Hansaria
PETITIONERS	Santosh Kumar and Others.
RESPONDENTS	The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resources Development and Others
DECIDED ON	W.P No. 299 of 1989 decided 1303,1184 601 571 and 1041, decided on 04.10.1994

INTRODUCTION

A classical language from the Indo-Aryan branch of the Indo-European language family is Sanskrit. The sacred language of Hinduism, Sanskrit, is also the language of classical Hindu philosophy, ancient Buddhist and Jain literature, and historical Hindu texts. In ancient and medieval South Asia, it served as a bridge language. When Hindu and Buddhist culture spread to Southeast Asia, East Asia, and Central Asia in the early medieval period, it also became a language of high culture and the political elite in several of these countries. Thus, the languages of East, Southeast, and South Asia were influenced by Sanskrit for a long time, particularly in their formal and sophisticated vocabularies.

Many Old Indo-Aryan linguistic types are commonly associated with Sanskrit. Of them, the oldest is the Vedic Sanskrit contained in the Rigveda, a compilation of 1,028 hymns written between 1500 and 1200 BCE by Indo-Aryan tribes that migrated eastward from what is now Afghanistan, via northern Pakistan, and into northwest India.

FACTS 

Deeply immersed in his research in his clam chamber is a Cambridge University professor. As he and many others like him are battling Germans, an irate English soldier storms into the study session and accuses the professor of not understanding the horror of war. With composure, the professor asks the young soldier what cause he is fighting for. The response that it’s to defend the nation is given quickly. The lecturer says in a low voice that he is a part of that culture. The soldier kneels in reverence to the academics and promises to fight harder to protect his nation’s cultural legacy. According to legend, all Englishmen made some sort of personal contribution to England’s eventual victory in the Second World War, when the country was waging a near-final battle for survival. The aforementioned demonstrates the regard for culture that even Westerners have.

From “We, the people of India” perspective, the cultural legacy of our ancient land has always been highly valued. As we have stated before, studying Sanskrit is very essential to preserving this legacy. The Central Board of Secondary Education, also known as “the Board,” has presented the argument that discouraging the study of Sanskrit would dry up our culture. This argument is based on the implausible claim that if the Board did so, it would have to provide resources for learning Arabic and Persian, which are also considered classical languages. Addl. Solicitor General, Shri Tulsi, made this argument while representing the Board, arguing that the Board was unable to accept our initial position when these cases were brought before it on July 19, 1994.

It declared that Sanskrit, which is also an Eighth Schedule language, should be added by the Board to the list of elective topics in the curriculum alongside languages like Assamese, Bengali, and others that are listed in the Eighth Schedule of our Constitution. The argument that if Sanskrit is allowed in, the Board will also need to introduce languages like French and German, further supports the goal to keep Sanskrit out.

However, the Addl. Solicitor General argues that the Board considers that arrangements should be made for teaching even in Lepcha, a language that many Indians may not even be familiar with. Despite the fact that the position chosen by the Board, a responsible body charged with the difficult task of educating this nation’s youth—”in whose hands quiver the destinies of the future”—is completely untenable, we give it no credit at all. Understanding Indian philosophy, which forms the foundation of our culture and tradition, is impossible without knowledge of Sanskrit.

ISSUES

1. Does the inclusion of Sanskrit as an elective language call into question the principle of secularism mentioned in the constitution?

ARGUMENTS

It was contended that All Indo-Aryan languages, including the Vedas, Puranas, Upanishadas, and masterpieces like Kalidas, Bhavbuti, Banbhatta, and Dandi, have their roots in Sanskrit. Moreover, it serves as a vehicle for the teachings of Vallabhacharya, Madhwacharya, Nimbark, Shankracharya, and Ramanuj. The 1957 Sanskrit Commission study emphasises the language’s significance as one of the best in the world and a traditional language of Asia and India. As the older sister of Greek and Latin and the cousin of English, French, and Russian, the report also emphasises Sanskrit’s significant mental and spiritual ties. India’s first prime minister, Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru, highlighted the significance of Sanskrit in the country’s culture. The only criticism that is worth examining further is that Arabic and Persian would also need to be offered as elective subjects if Sanskrit were to be added. For obvious reasons, the two main objections—the addition of French and German to the syllabus and the use of a language like Lepcha—do not merit consideration.

JUDGMENT 

The court held that the learned judges in Bommai’s case have done a good job of handling the cases at hand, thus it is not essential to go into great detail about what the fundamentals of secularism are. Noteworthy remarks made by a few erudite judges on this subject would suffice for our purposes. According to Sawant, J., who one of us (Kuldip Singh, J.) concurred with, Shri M.C. Setalvad’s remarks on secularism. Remaswami, J. said that secularism symbolizes religions derived from the use of reason and that it makes it possible to recognize the essential conditions for cultural and social improvement, as well as for human survival in general, as well as for all forms of human progress.

It would be beneficial to point out that secularism, in the opinion of Justice H.R. Khanna, regards the pious, the aggressive, and the atheist equally and is neither pro- nor anti-God. From his perspective, religiosity and piety are not mutually exclusive. It is not his intention to perpetuate the myth that a pious Muslim or Hindu automatically loses their secular identity. Given that Vivekanand and Gandhiji were the greatest Hindus, their lives and teachings exemplified secularism (see his paper ‘The Spirit of Secularism’ published in ‘Secularism and India: Dilemmas and Challenges’ edited by Shri MM Sankhdhar), this can be demonstrated.

 We further suggest that you refer to the Sanskrit Commission’s remarks in Chapter IV of its report regarding “Sanskrit and National Solidarity”. First, in this regard, the Commission declared that Sanskrit is the “embodiment of Indian culture and civilization”. After that, it notes that Sanskrit, which has been called the greatest discovery, is seen by Indians as the language that unites the various ethnic groups in this vast nation. While on their tour, the Commission discovered that despite the nation’s citizens’ many differences, they were all happy to identify as part of a shared history, which is unquestionably Sanskrit’s. One of the witnesses before the Commission even went so far as to say that many of the recent arguments in our country’s existence could have been prevented if the Sanskrit Commission had come before the States Reorganization Commission. Given the foregoing, we have no reason to believe that teaching Sanskrit as an elective on its own is in any way opposed to secularism. Indeed, Article 351 of our Constitution, which addresses the Union’s obligation to encourage the spread of Hindi, stipulates that it shall draw, as needed or desired, primarily from Sanskrit for its vocabulary. This is why Sanskrit needs a boost. Sanskrit needs to be encouraged as well because it is one of the languages included on the Eighth Schedule. We therefore sum up by stating that, given the significance of Sanskrit for preserving our cultural legacy—a fact that has even been acknowledged by the official education policy—designating Sanskrit as the only elective subject—while maintaining the status of Arabic and/or Persian—would not in any way contradict the fundamental principles of secularism. Therefore, the Board’s initial objection is without merit. Based on the previously mentioned grounds, we instruct the Board to add Sanskrit to the current syllabus as an elective.

ANALYSIS

So, how is a language decided as an official language or national language? A variety of factors play a role in determining the answer to that question: 

Historical, cultural, political, and social considerations can impact the selection of a national language in a nation where multiple languages are spoken within its borders. A number of languages may be recognized as official in some nations, signifying their equal status. Some may designate a certain language as the official national language, frequently on the basis of historical significance, the language of government and administration, or the majority language spoken by the populace. A nation may, under certain circumstances, additionally establish language policies that support minority language use and preservation in addition to the official language. Selecting a national language can be a difficult process that involves legal frameworks, negotiating, and taking linguistic variety and inclusivity into account. One nation where many languages are spoken is Pakistan. Urdu is the official language of Pakistan. Pakistan is home to speakers of 74 different languages. 

About 40% of people speak Punjabi as their first language. Pashto is next, with 15%.  It’s also important to remember that Pakistan was divided into two wings when it was first formed in 1947. There was a West Pakistan (present-day Bangladesh) and an East Pakistan (present-day Pakistan). Bengali was the most widely spoken language at the time of independence. This accounted for around 50% of the entire population. Nevertheless, this is the case because East Pakistan (Bangladesh) spoke this language. In West Pakistan, it served little practical purpose. The fact that every major language in Pakistan is the mother tongue of that particular ethnic group presented a challenge to this decision. Selecting any of them would make the others think you’re being unjust. The Pashtun/Afghan people speak Pashto, while the Punjabi population speaks Punjabi. Thus, only a neutral language could be selected. One that everybody would agree was fair.

We have learnt from the above examples as to what is vital for a language to become a national or official one. But, apart from that there exist other languages which are falling under neither of these categories and subjects which are taught as elective. Now, it is not necessary that a language falls into the above two categories to fall become an elective. The case above has elaborated on the reasoning for the judgment taken and the judgment was taken with the help of historical case laws to substantiate further on the matter.