Another Plea Before Supreme Court Challenges CBSE's Compulsory Three-Language Framework

Another Writ petition has been filed before the Supreme Court challenging the manner and timing of implementation of the CBSE's compulsory three-language framework (R1, R2 and R3), mandating at least two native Indian languages for students entering Class IX from Academic Session 2026–27.

The challenge by an organisation named Friends of People for Active Democracy is limited to the abrupt, inconsistent and constitutionally infirm implementation of a staged pedagogical framework upon an already existing Class IX cohort after commencement of the academic session and in acknowledged absence of adequate transition and institutional preparedness. The plea has been filed through Advocate Mamta Sharma.

Arguing that the Academic Session 2026–27 commenced in April 2026 and students entering Class IX had already begun secondary-stage education, academic planning and subject progression based upon the prevailing curricular framework and settled academic expectations, the plea states, "The impugned implementation suffers from internal inconsistency and manifest arbitrariness. Having itself adopted a phased pedagogical model and contemporaneously clarified deferred applicability at the Class IX stage, Respondent No. 2 abruptly altered the regulatory position within weeks and after commencement of the academic session, without any discernible rationale, transition framework or pedagogical continuity for the affected cohort."

It is the petitioner's case that while the impugned circular recognises shortage of qualified teachers and permits transitional implementation through teachers possessing “functional proficiency”, inter-school resource sharing, virtual arrangements and retired personnel, it itself records acknowledged institutional and pedagogical limitations while simultaneously mandating compulsory implementation upon lakhs of students.

"The impugned implementation has nationwide ramifications and is likely to affect approximately 24–25 lakh students constituting the present Class IX cohort across CBSE-affiliated schools, apart from parents, schools and educational infrastructure required to operationalise the revised framework," the plea submits arguing that reform affecting lakhs of students cannot be implemented in a manner lacking pedagogical continuity, reasonable transition and institutional preparedness, particularly where the affected cohort had already entered secondary education under materially different curricular expectations and had not undergone the foundational progression contemplated under the revised framework. 

On May 27, the Supreme Court had issued notice in a plea seeking to quash the Circular issued on May 15, 2026 by the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), which stipulates the study of three languages, R1, R2, and R3, shall be compulsory for all students in Class IX. As per the Circular, at least two of the three must be native Indian languages, whilst foreign languages are relegated to the position of R3 only where both R1 and R2 are native Indian languages, or alternatively as an additional fourth language. This has been challenged on the ground that it unconstitutional, arbitrary, and ultra vires Articles 14, 19, 21, and 21A of the Constitution of India.

A bench comprising CJI Surya Kant, Justice Bagchi and Justice Pancholi had issued notice in the plea seeking a response. "In the opening week we will hear this case first on one day and decide it. When you learn more languages it strengthens federal structure..," the CJI had observed. "There are Constitutional issues of federalism and of choices..language is a matter of choice.," Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal told the bench. Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi appeared for the petitioners. ASG Aishwarya Bhati was present for CBSE.

The Impugned Circular states that Class IX students shall use Class VI R3 textbooks as the primary pedagogical resource until dedicated secondary-stage textbooks are made available. It also provides that, in the absence of a qualified teaching staff proficient in the regional languages, the schools may, as an “interim arrangement,” engage teachers of other subjects possessing mere “functional proficiency” to teach R3 and that all R3 assessments shall be entirely school-based and internal, with no Board Examination required at this stage at the Class X level, though R3 performance shall be reflected in the CBSE certificate; and schools are directed to update R3 offerings on the OASIS portal by June 30, 2026.

Court has been told that the Impugned Circular further violates Article 21A of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to free and compulsory education as mandating a compulsory subject without textbooks, trained teachers, or an assessment framework does not amount to quality education. "Directing Class IX students to use Class VI textbooks, and permitting subject-matter teachers with mere “functional proficiency” to impart language instruction, are precisely the kinds of qualitative compromises that this Hon'ble Court held to be constitutionally impermissible in Devesh Sharma", the petition states.

Notably, Dr. Fauzia Khan, former Member of Parliament from Parbhani Constituency, Maharashtra and a former Minister of State in the Government of Maharashtra has moved Supreme Court of India to intervene in a pending Writ Petition challenging the CBSE Circular which mandates the compulsory study of three languages — R1, R2, and R3, in Class IX. Khan has submitted that she possesses unparalleled combination of legislative experience, experience in school education, institution-building in CBSE-affiliated schools, and grassroots engagement with minority communities positions her to assist the Court on the constitutional, educational, and policy dimensions of the present case. Her intervention is not motivated by any private, personal, or pecuniary interest but by the genuine and demonstrable public interest that she has served throughout her career.

Case Title: FRIENDS OF PEOPLE FOR ACTIVE DEMOCRACY vs UNION OF INDIA