Answer

The Indian Constitution upholds the rights of linguistic minorities through Article 350A, mandating primary education in the mother tongue. However, Mysore-based Central Institute of Indian Languages (CIIL) said the country has lost over 220 languages in the last 50 years alone, with many indigenous languages lacking formal education support. The closure of Gondi-medium schools underscores this ongoing challenge in linguistic preservation.

Constitutional Provisions Related to Linguistic Minorities

• Article 29: Provides minorities the right to conserve their language, script, and culture, preventing forced assimilation and ensuring cultural diversity in education and governance.
  For example: The Supreme Court upheld linguistic minorities’ rights in the T.M.A. Pai Foundation case, reinforcing their autonomy in running educational institutions.
• Article 350A: Mandates states to facilitate primary education in children’s mother tongues, ensuring better learning outcomes for linguistic minorities.
  For example: NEP 2020 promotes multilingual education, recommending mother tongue-based learning for early childhood education.
• Eighth Schedule: Recognizes 22 languages, ensuring state support for linguistic development, yet major tribal languages like Gondi and Bhili remain excluded.
  For example: Sanskrit (spoken by ~25,000) is in the Eighth Schedule, but Gondi (spoken by ~29 lakh) is not, highlighting systemic exclusion.
• Fifth and Sixth Schedules: Provide autonomous governance and cultural preservation in tribal areas, including the power to regulate education and language policies.
  For example: Autonomous District Councils in the Northeast promote tribal languages, but similar protection is absent in central India.
• PESA Act, 1996: Recognizes tribal self-governance, allowing gram sabhas to make decisions on cultural and educational matters, reinforcing constitutional protection.
  For example: Mohgaon gram panchayat’s resolution for a Gondi-medium school aligns with PESA but was overruled by bureaucratic policies.

Challenges in Implementing Constitutional Provisions: Gondi-Medium School Closure

• Bureaucratic Non-Recognition: The school’s closure exposes rigid administrative procedures overriding tribal autonomy, leading to denial of mother-tongue education.
  For example: Right to Education (RTE) norms were cited to close the school, despite constitutional provisions allowing local governance.
• Normative State Bias: Adivasi languages face institutional neglect, unlike Sanskrit and Hindi, reflecting socio-political subordination.
  For example: No major funding for Gondi-medium textbooks, while Sanskrit receives significant state patronage.
• Lack of Eighth Schedule Recognition: Absence from the Eighth Schedule prevents state-mandated development, making Adivasi languages vulnerable to extinction.
  For example: NEP 2020 supports Sanskrit institutions, but tribal languages lack a similar structured framework.
• Market and Employment Disincentives: Tribal languages are not linked to formal employment, discouraging their preservation through education.
  For example: Job eligibility criteria favor Hindi or English, making tribal language education less attractive.
• Erosion of Oral Traditions: The closure threatens Adivasi identity, which relies on oral history and cultural transmission, leading to linguistic loss.
  For example: Urbanization and deforestation have already weakened tribal storytelling traditions, and school closures accelerate this decline.

Effectiveness of Constitutional Safeguards

• Limited Implementation of PESA: While PESA grants autonomy, local resolutions like Mohgaon’s school decision are often ignored, undermining grassroots governance.
  For example: Despite legal backing, tribal resolutions on language and education are overridden by district administration decisions.
• Ineffective Eighth Schedule Inclusion Process: The process of adding languages is politicized and slow, delaying necessary recognition for tribal languages.
  For example: Bodo was added in 2003 after prolonged activism, but Gondi remains excluded despite a larger speaker base.
• Judicial Interpretation is Inconsistent: Courts have upheld linguistic minority rights but failed to enforce tribal language preservation rigorously.
  For example: T.M.A. Pai’s case upheld minority rights in education, yet tribal language-based schools face neglect.

Effectiveness of Government Initiatives

• National Education Policy (NEP) 2020: Promotes multilingual education, but lacks strong implementation for tribal languages.
• TRIFED and Tribal Cultural Promotion: Programs to preserve tribal culture exist but are fragmented, failing to integrate education.
  For example: TRIFED promotes tribal crafts but has no language-preservation mandate, limiting holistic development.
• Digital and Radio Initiatives: Efforts like All India Radio (AIR) Gondi broadcasts exist, but lack widespread reach.
  For example: Gondi radio programs in Bastar promote language use, yet educational policy does not align with such initiatives.

Way Forward

• Eighth Schedule Inclusion: Recognizing Gondi and other major tribal languages in the Eighth Schedule will ensure policy-driven promotion should be considered.
• Tribal-Led Educational Policies: Strengthening local governance in education decisions will prevent bureaucratic overreach against initiatives like the Gondi-medium school.
• Mother-Tongue-Based Learning Expansion: Ensuring dedicated resources, teacher training, and digital tools for tribal language education will bridge learning gaps.

While constitutional safeguards and government initiatives provide a legal framework for protecting the linguistic and cultural heritage of tribal communities, implementation gaps, inadequate resources, and policy neglect often undermine their effectiveness. The closure of Gondi-medium schools reflects the urgent need for strengthened institutional support, community-driven initiatives, and improved educational infrastructure. 

DOWNLOAD PDF