The political battle over Tamil Nadu’s language policy has reignited the debate with the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)trading accusations over the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and the three-language formula. Chief Minister MK Stalin has accused the Union government of penalizing Tamil Nadu for rejecting NEP by diverting education funds, while BJP leaders, including state president K Annamalai, claim the DMK is misleading the public for political gain. The main contention of the BJP is that the DMK is using the language policy for political gains, while the DMK says the BJP is using the NEP to secretly impose Hindi on all states.
For a long time, the DMK government has been at loggerheads with the BJP-led Union government over several issues related to education, including the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) for medical education, and the implementation of the NEP 2020. As per the NEP 20202 policy, teaching three languages, two of which are native to India, is mandatory in schools. The fresh bout over NEP started recently, in relation to the comments made by Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan. Here is all that has happened so far and the main arguments posed by both the parties.
In 1968, after the Parliament adopted the official language resolution, paving way for a three-language formula, the DMK government rejected it and stood by the two-language policy of teaching only Tamil and English.
Comments and counter arguments
On February 10, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin accused the BJP-led Union government of diverting Rs 2,512 crore meant for the state as retaliation for rejecting NEP 2020 and the three-language policy. He called it an act of “coercion” that punished students for the state’s stance on education policy.
The BJP swiftly countered the claim, with state president K Annamalai dismissing it as a “lie”. He argued that Tamil Nadu had not implemented the PM SHRI scheme under NEP and questioned how funds could be released for a program the state refused to adopt. He also criticized the DMK government for allegedly politicising education while Tamil Nadu lagged in basic literacy and numeric skills.
Following this, on February 15, Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan urged Tamil Nadu to adopt the three-language policy for educational equality, accusing the DMK of politicising its opposition to NEP 2020. He had also said that Samagra Shiksha funds would not be released until the state fully accepted NEP, alleging Tamil Nadu had initially agreed but later withdrew. He also criticised the DMK for acting “above the Constitution.”
Dharmendra Pradhan said that the Tamil Nadu government had initially agreed to the Union government’s conditions but later withdrew. He said the Union did not release the funds because of non-cooperation by the state government. “They are politically motivated and not acting for the welfare of the people of Tamil Nadu,” he said.
In response, Chief Minister MK Stalin defended the state's rejection of NEP, arguing that the trilingual policy lacks constitutional backing. He said that education falls under the Concurrent List, meaning both the Union and state governments share control. Stalin condemned the Union government for "political blackmail" by threatening to withhold funds and reaffirmed Tamil Nadu’s right to autonomy. "Tamil people will not tolerate such audacity. To suggest that funds will be withheld unless Tamil Nadu accepts the trilingual policy is outright intimidation," he said.
State Education Minister Anbil Mahesh Poyyamozhi also echoed this stance, accusing the Union government of coercion and highlighting the financial burden on the state. He warned that such policies could spark another “language war.” On February 16, the DMK issued a statement condemning Pradhan’s remarks and accusing the Union government of using the Governor’s office and the UGC to undermine Tamil Nadu’s education system.
Narrative of private vs govt schools
BJP leaders, including state president K Annamalai, countered by questioning why private schools—some affiliated with DMK leaders—offer three languages while government schools do not. “If private schools, where the children and grandchildren of Tamil Nadu ministers, including the Chief Minister, study can teach three languages, why can’t government schools, where our children study, do the same?” Annamalai asked. The BJP leader asked whether Stalin was implying that learning multiple languages should be a privilege reserved only for those who can afford private education.
Other BJP leaders continued this argument, accusing the DMK of exploiting linguistic pride for political gain. They argued that the DMK’s stance denies government school students the same opportunities as their private school counterparts.
To this, deputy CM Udhayanidhi responded by saying: “How can you compare private and government schools? Are free food and free uniforms provided in private schools?”
Most recently, on February 28, BJP state vice-president Narayanan Thirupathi, during an NDTV debate, questioned why DMK leaders enroll their children in private schools that offer three languages while restricting government school students to only two. He challenged the DMK to ban the third language in private schools if they were truly against it. He also criticised Deputy CM Udhayanidhi Stalin’s response about free food and uniforms in government schools, calling it an excuse to deny students language options. He argued that the policy specifically affects government school students rather than all of Tamil Nadu.
BJP national spokesperson Tuhin A Sinha and state secretary SG Suryah, in an opinion piece in The Indian Express, accused the DMK of using linguistic pride for political gain. They called the resistance to the three-language policy “regressive” and “self-defeating,” arguing that it deepens the educational divide by denying government school students the same opportunities as those in private schools.
The BJP claims that rejecting the three-language policy harms students, particularly in government schools, that the NEP allows flexibility and should not be seen as imposition of Hindi. The DMK, on the other hand, insists that the Union government is overstepping its authority and that Tamil Nadu is simply defending its constitutional rights.
DMK’s response
Speaking to TNM, DMK spokesperson Saravanan Annadurai called the push for NEP a ruse to impose Hindi in Tamil Nadu. “Though they say students can learn any language, do we have the infrastructure for that? When we ask this, they will wash their hands off saying it is the state’s responsibility. But education is in the Concurrent List, and what has the Union government done to create the necessary infrastructure for students to learn a language of their choice?” he asked.
On the claim that government school students are being deprived of opportunities, he said, “They are creating an impression that learning Hindi equates to a privilege. Our argument is that it is burdening the students, and no child in India should be under pressure. If they want to learn a language, they can. But it should not be forced upon them.”
DMK MP and Senior Advocate P Wilson told TNM that Tamil Nadu is legally exempt from Hindi imposition under the Official Language (Use for Official Purposes of the Union) Rules, 1976. He questioned, “Do BJP leaders have any data to show that students who learn Hindi fare better than students in Tamil Nadu? We, on the other hand, have solid data proving that our students excel in education and even have strong international mobility.”
Wilson also pointed out that Tamil Nadu has its own education law, the Tamil Nadu Uniform System of School Education Act (2010), which ensures a standardised curriculum. “How can an education policy (NEP) override a law passed by the state government?” he asked.
He further called the Union government’s withholding of education funds “unconstitutional, illegal, and unlawful,” arguing that under the Right to Education Act, the Centre is obligated to share the financial burden of education. “But it is refusing to do so, thereby crippling the education system in the state and putting students through hardships,” he said.