Three Language Policy: Balancing Regional Identity with Educational Reform

Maharashtra’s decision to withdraw its three language policy for primary education offers valuable lessons for India’s evolving educational landscape.

The recent reversal of Maharashtra’s three language policy for primary education has sparked nationwide discussions about language education, federalism, and the implementation of national educational frameworks. This comprehensive analysis examines the policy’s journey from introduction to withdrawal and its broader implications for India’s educational landscape.

Understanding the Policy Framework

Maharashtra’s three language policy for primary education emerged as part of the state’s attempt to implement the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020’s multilingual framework. On April 16, 2025, the state government issued a Government Resolution (GR) mandating Hindi as a compulsory third language for Classes 1 to 5, alongside Marathi and English, affecting nearly 80 lakh primary students across state board schools.

The initial policy represented a significant shift from existing practices, where Hindi was typically introduced from Class 5 in Maharashtra’s educational system. This change was positioned as aligning with the vision of NEP 2020 for multilingual education and early language acquisition principles.

A subsequent amended GR on June 17, 2025, attempted to address growing concerns by making Hindi optional while maintaining it as the default choice. Alternative Indian languages could be selected if at least 20 students in a school opted for them, with provisions for arranging teachers or online instruction.

Policy Reversal

Maharashtra CM announced the cancellation of both controversial GRs on June 29, 2025, citing the need for broader consultation and expert guidance. The decision came on the eve of the state legislature’s monsoon session and amid preparations for significant protests scheduled for July 5.

Accompanying the rollback, the government established an expert committee led by economist and educationist Narendra Jadhav to reassess the implementation of NEP 2020’s three language formula within Maharashtra. The committee has been tasked with providing recommendations on the appropriate grade level for introducing the three language policy.

Educational and Developmental Considerations

The controversy highlighted important pedagogical debates about early childhood language education. Proponents of early introduction cited neuroscientific research suggesting optimal language acquisition occurs between ages 2-8, arguing that formal instruction from Class 1 would benefit students’ long-term linguistic development.

However, educational experts raised concerns about the distinction between natural language acquisition and formal classroom instruction. The National Curriculum Framework reportedly recommends introducing a third language at age 11 (Class 5), emphasising the importance of strong foundational skills in the mother tongue before adding additional languages.

Research consistently demonstrates that mother tongue instruction in early years enhances cognitive development, builds emotional confidence, and improves overall academic outcomes. Studies from states like Andhra Pradesh and Telangana show that students taught in their mother tongues outperform their peers in English-medium schools across various subjects.

Implementation Challenges Across India

Maharashtra’s experience reflects broader challenges in implementing the three language policy across Indian states. Teacher shortages represent a persistent obstacle, with states like West Bengal resorting to hiring retired teachers on minimal remuneration to fill gaps in Hindi instruction.

Resource constraints further complicate implementation. Maharashtra’s education department acknowledged it had not prepared new textbooks for the proposed early Hindi instruction, highlighting the gap between policy announcements and practical preparedness.

Similar challenges exist across states. Uttar Pradesh faces recruitment difficulties for Sanskrit and Urdu teachers, while Bihar struggles with attendance and engagement issues in third language classes. These systemic challenges suggest that successful implementation requires substantial investment in teacher training, curriculum development, and educational infrastructure.

Constitutional and Federal Perspectives

India’s constitutional framework provides strong protections for linguistic diversity in education. Article 350A mandates that states provide mother-tongue instruction at the primary level for linguistic minorities, while Article 29 protects citizens’ rights to conserve their distinct language and culture. Furthermore, Article 351 directs the Union government to promote the spread and development of the Hindi language. 

The controversy also illustrates the dynamics of India’s federal structure, where education falls under the concurrent list, allowing both central and state governments legislative authority. This shared jurisdiction often creates tensions when implementing centralised policies in diverse regional contexts.

NEP 2020 explicitly states that “no language will be imposed on any State,” emphasising flexibility in implementation. However, the Maharashtra episode demonstrates how this flexibility can be interpreted differently by various stakeholders, leading to conflicts between policy intent and perceived implementation.

Lessons for Language Policy Development

The Maharashtra experience offers several insights for effective language policy development in India’s diverse federal structure:

• Stakeholder Consultation: Successful policy implementation requires extensive consultation with educators, linguists, political leaders, and community representatives before announcement.
• Resource Planning: Policies must be accompanied by adequate investment in teacher training, curriculum development, and educational materials to ensure effective implementation.
• Flexibility in Implementation: While national frameworks provide direction, states need genuine autonomy to adapt policies to local contexts and needs.
• Mother Tongue Priority: Educational research consistently supports prioritising mother tongue instruction in early years, suggesting policies should build on this foundation rather than potentially undermining it.

Broader Context: India’s Linguistic Landscape

India’s linguistic diversity represents both a cultural asset and a policy challenge. With 22 official languages and hundreds of local dialects, creating educational policies that respect this diversity while promoting national integration requires careful balance.

The three language formula, first recommended by the Kothari Commission in 1968, aimed to address this challenge through structured multilingual education. However, implementation has varied significantly across states, with some like Tamil Nadu consistently following a two-language approach.

Recent debates extend beyond Maharashtra, with similar discussions occurring in Karnataka, West Bengal, and other non-Hindi-speaking states. These recurring tensions suggest that language policy remains a sensitive issue in India’s federal democracy.

Future Directions and the Jadhav Committee

The expert committee led by Narendra Jadhav faces the complex task of developing recommendations that balance multiple considerations: constitutional protections for linguistic minorities, NEP 2020’s flexibility principles, educational best practices, and regional sentiments.

The committee’s approach will likely influence not only Maharashtra’s future language policy but also serve as a reference for other states facing similar challenges. Key areas for consideration include:

• Optimal age for introducing additional languages
• Methods for ensuring genuine choice rather than default imposition
• Resource requirements for effective multilingual education
• Integration of technology in language learning
• Teacher training and curriculum development need

Conclusion: Navigating Diversity and Integration

Maharashtra’s three language policy reversal highlights the importance of evidence-based policy making, particularly regarding early childhood education and language acquisition. As the Jadhav Committee prepares its recommendations, the focus should be on creating frameworks that genuinely serve students’ educational interests while respecting cultural identity and constitutional principles.

For India’s educational future, the Maharashtra experience suggests that successful language policies must move beyond political rhetoric to embrace scientific understanding of child development, practical implementation realities, and the rich linguistic heritage that defines Indian civilisation.

The path forward requires nuanced approaches that celebrate India’s diversity while building bridges for national integration. This means creating educational frameworks that are flexible enough to accommodate regional variations yet coherent enough to achieve national educational goals.

The Maharashtra language policy analysis reveals critical insights about federalism and educational governance, representing one aspect of the evolving policy landscape that shapes modern Indian administration and democratic processes.

Master Contemporary Governance & Policy Analysis with VisionIAS Comprehensive Current Affairs →