Stalin slams centre, calls claim of no Hindi imposition plainly dishonest
Responding to the criticism, Pradhan dismissed Stalin’s claims, calling the narrative of “imposition” a tired attempt to mask political failures. On reciprocity, he said Tamil had been celebrated as a national treasure through initiatives such as the Kashi Tamil Sangamam and on global platforms.
He also rejected concerns over resources as a “façade”, alleging that the DMK government had stalled the establishment of PM SHRI schools and Navodaya Vidyalayas, thereby denying students access to improved infrastructure and opportunities.
In his rebuttal, Stalin said the claim that there was “no Hindi imposition” was “plainly dishonest”. “When a policy structurally corners non-Hindi-speaking states like TN into adopting a third language with little real choice, and when crucial education funding is tied to compliance, it ceases to be a matter of choice,” he said. He further alleged that the centre had withheld Rs 2,200 crore under the Samagra Shiksha scheme, effectively penalising TN for refusing to accept what he termed Hindi imposition. Stalin also challenged the union government to provide data on the implementation of non-Hindi languages in northern states and questioned the extent of investment in classical languages such as Tamil compared to Sanskrit.
Stalin also called on AIADMK general secretary Edappadi K Palaniswami, who is allied with the BJP, to clarify his stand, asking whether he stood with the people of TN or with the BJP-led centre.CHENNAI: Chief Minister M K Stalin and Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan locked horns on social media over the centre’s proposal to introduce a three-language policy in CBSE schools starting from Class 6. Stalin slammed the move as a “covert mechanism” to impose Hindi on non-Hindi speaking states, while Pradhan hit back, calling the CM’s criticism a “tired attempt” to distract from political failures by mislabelling an inclusive reform.
Citing a TNIE report, Stalin questioned the lack of “reciprocity” in the proposal, asking whether students in Hindi-speaking states would be mandated to learn southern languages such as Tamil, Telugu, Kannada or Malayalam. He further said the centre had failed to make Tamil a mandatory language in Kendriya Vidyalayas and had not appointed adequate Tamil teachers. Questioning whether the centre understood ground realities such as teacher availability, training capacity and infrastructure, Stalin described the policy as an ill-conceived move announced without proper planning, resources or accountability.
He added that the priority should be to equip students with skills in emerging sectors such as artificial intelligence and AVGC (Animation, Visual Effects, Gaming and Comics), while strengthening scientific temper and critical thinking. Imposing an additional language burden, he argued, could hinder students’ progress.
Stalin slams centre, calls claim of no Hindi imposition plainly dishonest
Responding to the criticism, Pradhan dismissed Stalin’s claims, calling the narrative of “imposition” a tired attempt to mask political failures. On reciprocity, he said Tamil had been celebrated as a national treasure through initiatives such as the Kashi Tamil Sangamam and on global platforms.
He also rejected concerns over resources as a “façade”, alleging that the DMK government had stalled the establishment of PM SHRI schools and Navodaya Vidyalayas, thereby denying students access to improved infrastructure and opportunities.
In his rebuttal, Stalin said the claim that there was “no Hindi imposition” was “plainly dishonest”. “When a policy structurally corners non-Hindi-speaking states like TN into adopting a third language with little real choice, and when crucial education funding is tied to compliance, it ceases to be a matter of choice,” he said. He further alleged that the centre had withheld Rs 2,200 crore under the Samagra Shiksha scheme, effectively penalising TN for refusing to accept what he termed Hindi imposition. Stalin also challenged the union government to provide data on the implementation of non-Hindi languages in northern states and questioned the extent of investment in classical languages such as Tamil compared to Sanskrit.
Stalin also called on AIADMK general secretary Edappadi K Palaniswami, who is allied with the BJP, to clarify his stand, asking whether he stood with the people of TN or with the BJP-led centre.