Tamil Nadu has opposed the three-language formula, claiming it facilitates a ‘back-door entry’ to teaching Hindi in the state
Team Clarion
LUCKNOW — The ongoing controversy surrounding the three-language formula under the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 took a fresh turn as the Rashtriya Lok Dal (RLD), an NDA ally, launched a scathing attack on the Samajwadi Party (SP) and Congress, accusing them of maintaining silence over what it termed as “insults” to Hindi.
The language war that has broken out between Tamil Nadu’s DMK and NDA at the Centre has taken a different turn in the Hindi heartland Uttar Pradesh. Tamil Nadu has opposed the three-language formula under the New Education Policy-2020, claiming it facilitates a ‘back-door entry’ to teaching Hindi in the state.
Targeting DMK’s continuous opposition to the Hindi language in Tamil Nadu, RLD MLAs staged a protest outside the UP Assembly in support of respect for the Hindi language and the NEP 2020 questioning “the silence” of the Samajwadi Party and the Congress on the recent comments made by DMK leaders.
Uttar Pradesh Cabinet minister Anil Kumar said, “SP’s best friend MK Stalin Sahab is openly opposing Hindi. Why are SP chief Akhilesh Yadav and Congress MP Rahul Gandhi silent on this issue?”
“Rashtriya Lok Dal raised its voice against Tamil Nadu (DMK) Chief Minister MK Stalin’s opposition to Hindi for implementing the National Education Policy! But why are India Alliance’s big partners Rahul Gandhi and Akhilesh Yadav silent, clarify your position. 24 crore people speak Hindi in the state. They need to know what the SP’s stance is on this matter,” NDTV quoted Anil Kumar as saying on Saturday.
RLD national spokesperson Anil Dubey also criticised the opposition parties for not taking a firm stand against “anti-Hindi rhetoric” amid growing debates over the implementation of NEP in Uttar Pradesh and other Hindi-speaking states. “The leaders of SP and Congress always claim to stand for social justice, yet they remain mute when Hindi — our identity and the language of millions — is being undermined. Their silence is nothing short of betrayal,” Dubey said in a statement on Saturday.
The controversy stems from concerns raised by regional parties, particularly in South India, over the perceived imposition of Hindi through NEP’s three-language policy. The Tamil Nadu government has strongly opposed any mandatory Hindi learning, calling it an attempt to dilute linguistic diversity. Similar objections have been voiced by leaders in Kerala, West Bengal, and Telangana.
The ruling DMK has been alleging that the Centre imposed Hindi through the 3-language formula as part of the NEP, a charge denied by the Union government.
“Hindi is just a mask, Sanskrit is the hidden face,” Stalin declared, alleging that the promotion of Hindi by the Union government was a strategic move to subtly push Sanskrit into mainstream education and administration. He accused the ruling BJP of using Hindi as a political tool to weaken regional languages, particularly Tamil, which has one of the oldest literary traditions in the world.
Language politics has been a sensitive subject in Tamil Nadu, and the DMK in the past has successfully led massive anti-Hindi agitation during which several pro-Tamil activists killed themselves, mostly by self-immolation, against the imposition of the language. Dravidian parties, including the AIADMK, have slammed the BJP on the issue.
While the BJP has consistently defended the NEP as a “balanced approach” to multilingual education, RLD has accused opposition parties of failing to defend Hindi’s rightful place. “SP and Congress are engaging in vote-bank politics instead of standing up for the linguistic pride of Hindi-speaking states. They must clarify their position,” Dubey added.
SP and Congress leaders, however, have so far avoided direct confrontation on the matter. A senior Congress leader, speaking on condition of anonymity, said, “This is not about being against Hindi but about ensuring linguistic inclusivity. The government should focus on strengthening education instead of forcing language mandates.”
