The court directed the government to submit why it had not implemented the measure since 2018 , when the law was passed to implement it progressively from Class 1
Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court was not inclined to issue interim orders in a PIL challenging the state government`s decision making Telugu mandatory to the second language in CBSE, ICSE, IB, Cambridge, and other national curriculum schools from the current academic year.
The court directed the government to submit why it had not implemented the measure since 2018 , when the law was passed to implement it progressively from Class 1.
A division bench of Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin was dealing with a PIL filed by Pramila Pathak, a Hindi teacher, seeking to declare the action of government memo dated December 7, 2024, and subsequent proceedings dated December 19, 2024, as unconstitutional. The petitioner argued that students from diverse linguistic backgrounds were being compelled to study Telugu without sufficient notice or preparation.
Senior counsel B. Chandrasen Reddy and B. Vamshidhar Reddy said the government had passed the Telangana (Compulsory Teaching and Learning of Telugu In Schools) Act, 2018 making impose Telugu a compulsory subject from 2018-19. Counsels said it had not so far had not been implemented due to the Covid-19 pandemic and a shortage of Telugu textbooks, among others.
Chandrasen Reddy submitted that the government had acknowledged that the Act could not be implemented and had issued a memo dated 28.12.2022, wherein the implementation of Telugu as a compulsory subject was exempted for the years 2022-23 and 2023-24 for students of Classes IX and X. On 07.12.2024, it was exempted for Classes IX and X for 2024-25 and students of Class X during 2025-26.
In the ongoing academic year, the students and their parents were informed by the schools that Telugu was a compulsory second language. This sudden mandate violated fundamental rights, particularly affecting children who have been studying Hindi, Sanskrit, French, or other languages as second or third languages since early school years, counsels said.
Highlighting Hyderabad’s cosmopolitan make-up, counsel noted that only 43.35 per cent of the city's population spoke Telugu as their mother tongue, according to the 2011 Census. Hence, he termed the blanket imposition of Telugu "unreasonable and exclusionary.”
Counsel argued that the government failed to follow the phased implementation and had not adequately informed or prepared students in earlier academic years. The move would lead to academic setbacks and discriminatory outcomes for non-Telugu-speaking students, especially those who migrated from other states.
Government pleader for the education department informed the court that single judge of the High Court had granted exemptions for students of Classes IX and X. He explained that the government had introduced two categories of Telugu — Regular and Simple — without implementing any grading system.
The bench observed that such a policy could not be implemented abruptly and must follow a phase-wise approach. The court granted two weeks for the government to submit the phase-wise implementation plan.
