Maharashtra's language politics and the idea of India

New Indian Express

10-07-2025

In recent weeks, Maharashtra has once again been swept up in a familiar controversy, this time over the state government's decision to make Hindi mandatory for Class I students in Marathi- and English-medium schools. The subsequent withdrawal of the Government Resolution (GR) following widespread protests has reignited long-standing debates about linguistic identity, constitutional rights, and the very idea of India.
At its heart, this is not merely a question of curriculum or classroom policy. It is a test of India's enduring federal compact, of whether unity must always be enforced from above, or if it can emerge organically from diversity below.
The crisis unfolds
In April 2025, the Maharashtra government issued a GR mandating Hindi as the third language under the three-language formula. The decision was met with resistance from various quarters, including opposition parties like the Shiv Sena (UBT), the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS), and several Marathi cultural organisations. Critics called it an attempt to impose Hindi on a non-Hindi-speaking state, a direct challenge to Maharashtra's linguistic and cultural autonomy.
Amid mounting pressure, including calls for mass protests by Raj Thackeray and Uddhav Thackeray, the state government announced a rollback of the decision in late June. A new committee under Dr Narendra Jadhav was tasked with reassessing the three-language policy. In his statement, Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis clarified that Marathi would remain the primary language of instruction and warned against the politicisation of language. Yet, the damage, symbolic and political, was already done.
Why this resistance in Maharashtra
Maharashtra's resistance to Hindi imposition is not new. In the 1960s and 70s, similar tensions surfaced when the Centre pushed for Hindi as the sole national language. Then, as now, the fear was clear: that such policies would gradually erode Marathi's prominence in public life.
Unlike Tamil Nadu, where anti-Hindi protests were tied to a broader Dravidian assertion, Maharashtra's resistance is more complex. This is the land of both Indian nationalism and Hindutva, movements that often draw cultural strength from the Hindi-speaking heartland. That the home of Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Vinayak Savarkar now voices concern over Hindi imposition underscores the inherent contradictions in India's federal structure.
What makes the present moment significant is its grassroots nature. It's no longer just a political dispute; it's a civil society movement. Teachers, artists, actors, and parents are speaking up, not against Hindi, but for the right to linguistic plurality and cultural self-respect.
The Constitutional lens
The Indian Constitution provides a robust framework for linguistic pluralism. Articles 343 to 351 and the Eighth Schedule recognise 22 official languages, including Marathi and Hindi, without privileging one over another. Article 29 guarantees cultural and linguistic rights to minorities. The three-language formula, introduced in the 1968 National Education Policy, was never intended as a centralising tool. It recommended, not mandated, the teaching of the regional language, Hindi (in non-Hindi states), and English.
Importantly, nowhere does the Constitution require any language to be compulsory at the primary level. The Supreme Court has consistently affirmed that linguistic freedom is integral to the rights to education and expression under Articles 19 and 21.
By making Hindi mandatory, the Maharashtra government disrupts this constitutional equilibrium. As Paul R Brass argues in the book 'Language, Religion and Politics in North India', language imposition often masks deeper power struggles. This moves risks undermining both federal trust and linguistic dignity.
What is at stake
The crisis is not about Hindi's value. The language is widely spoken in Maharashtra, but about the fear of displacement. When government policy seems to privilege one language, it risks fracturing India's multilingual fabric.
Marathi, spoken by over 80 million people, is not peripheral. Its legacy, from saints like Dnyaneshwar and Tukaram to modern icons like Pu La Deshpande and Vijay Tendulkar, is central to Indian cultural life. Imposing Hindi instruction as a corrective is both inaccurate and insensitive.
Language is more than communication; it's identity, memory, and belonging. For children, especially in early schooling, mother tongue instruction enhances comprehension, emotional security, and academic outcomes. Even the National Education Policy (2020) affirms this.
To undermine Marathi, or any regional language, is to ignore both constitutional values and pedagogical wisdom. What's at stake is not just policy, but the very idea of inclusive nationhood.
The politics of pride and protest
The current controversy is deeply tied to electoral politics. With civic polls approaching, both Raj and Uddhav Thackeray are vying for the same linguistic vote bank. Their rallies and protest calls reflect not just cultural assertion but strategic consolidation. Yet, beneath the politics lies a genuine public sentiment.
Social media is awash with videos of teachers, parents, and activists voicing concerns about Marathi's decline in public life. Complaints range from the absence of Marathi signage at stations to the dominance of Hindi in official communication. In Thane, a shopkeeper was attacked for not speaking Marathi, an incident rightly condemned by the Chief Minister.
Pride in language must not turn into coercion. While the state must safeguard Marathi's place, it must equally protect individuals from cultural policing. Language movements must inspire inclusion, not fear.
The way forward
Maharashtra has a chance to lead by example. The review committee must consult transparently and frame a language policy that respects the Constitution, upholding Marathi's primacy while treating Hindi and English as optional, not mandatory. Rather than imposing languages, the state should invest in strengthening Marathi-medium education, train teachers, support literary initiatives, and ensure public services are accessible in Marathi. Students should be encouraged, but not compelled, to learn other Indian languages, including Hindi.
The central government, for its part, must act with federal sensitivity. National language policy should avoid coercion, support all Scheduled Languages, and ensure equity in digital, educational, and cultural spaces.
Language cannot become a tool of uniformity. Both Centre and state must commit to the Indian idea, where many languages, identities, and cultures coexist not in conflict, but in conversation. That alone will make India stronger, more inclusive, and truly democratic.
Towards a more inclusive India
The Maharashtra language row is more than an educational policy dispute. It is a referendum on how we interpret the soul of the Indian republic. Will India's unity come through centralised mandates, or through federal trust and mutual respect?
If India is to remain a home for many languages, then no single language, however widely spoken, can be allowed to overshadow the others. Marathi, like every other Indian language, deserves not just preservation but pride of place.
The answer, then, lies not in imposition, but in empathy. And perhaps, in listening to the quiet voices of children in classrooms, trying to make sense of the world in their mother tongue.
(Ashutosh Kumar Thakur is a Bangalore-based management professional, columnist, literary critic, translator, and curator. He can be reached at [e-mail].)