On Friday, the Supreme Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by petitioner G.S. Mani, which sought a directive compelling the State of Tamil Nadu to implement the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, including its three-language formula.
The bench, comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, ruled that under Article 32 of the Constitution, the Court cannot mandate a State to adopt a particular policy such as the NEP. The judges emphasized that while the Court can intervene to protect fundamental rights, it does not have the authority to compel a State to follow a central policy unless there is a direct violation of constitutional rights.
“Whether or not a State chooses to implement the NEP 2020 is a complex and policy-driven matter. The role of this Court under Article 32 is to safeguard fundamental rights—not to enforce policy decisions,” the bench stated. “We also find that the petitioner, though originally from Tamil Nadu, currently resides in New Delhi and appears to have no direct or personal stake in the matter. Therefore, we see no merit in continuing with this petition.”
During the proceedings, the bench questioned the locus standi of the petitioner, asking, “Who are you? How are you concerned with the National Education Policy?” The petitioner responded that he was unable to learn Hindi in school due to the Tamil Nadu education system and now faces challenges because of it. To this, Justice Pardiwala replied, “Then learn Hindi now in Delhi, na?”
The Court concluded that while it will not entertain the issue through this petition, it may consider the broader question of NEP implementation in a more appropriate proceeding in the future.
This judgment comes amid continued resistance from the Tamil Nadu government, with Chief Minister M.K. Stalin reaffirming the State’s decision not to implement NEP 2020, citing concerns over Hindi imposition through the three-language formula.
Case Title: G.S. Mani v. Government of Tamil Nadu & Others
Case No.: W.P.(C) No. 260/2025
