1

2025 INSC 486 REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). OF 2025

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO(S). OF 2025

DIARY NO. 24812 OF 2024

MRS. VARSHATAI W/o. SH. SANJAY BAGADE

…APPELLANT

Versus

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH

ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LAW
AND JUDICIARY, MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI
AND ORS. ETC.

…RESPONDENTS

JUDGMENT

SUDHANSHU DHULIA, J.

‘When you learn a language, you don’t just learn to

speak and write a new language. You also learn to
be open-minded, liberal, tolerant, kind and
Signature Not Verified considerate towards all mankind.’
Digitally signed by

- Mouloud Benzadi
Nirmala Negi
Date: 2025.04.15
18:49:14 IST
Reason:

1. Leave granted.
 2

2. The appellant before this Court is apparently not pleased with

the use of Urdu on the signboard of the new building of the

Municipal Council, Patur (hereinafter referred to as ‘Municipal

Council’) in district Akola, Maharashtra. The board of the

Council displays "Municipal Council, Patur", in Marathi at the

top, with its translation below in Urdu language.

3. According to the appellant, who is a former member of the

Municipal Council, the work of the Municipal Council can only

be conducted in Marathi, and the use of Urdu in any manner

is impermissible, even though it may just be a writing on the

signboard of the Municipal Council.

4. The appellant first raised her objection before the Municipal

Council itself. The Council made its deliberations on the

question raised by the appellant and ultimately through its

resolution dated 14.02.2020, the Municipal Council rejected

the appellant’s objection by a majority, and it was resolved that

the use of Urdu in addition to Marathi on the signboard of the

Municipal Council is perfectly justified. At this stage, we may

mention that the signboard is mainly in Marathi, with Urdu

appearing below on the signboard, since a significant number

of Council members and residents within the Municipal

 3

Council area are familiar with Urdu language. This is not a

new practice and in fact, it was pleaded before the Collector

that this was displayed on the signboard since the existence of

the Municipal Council, from the year 1956.

5. The appellant, not satisfied with the resolution, however,

moved an application under Section 308 of the Maharashtra

Municipal Council, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial

Township Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as ‘1965 Act’)

before the Collector Akola, praying for setting aside of the

Municipal Council’s resolution. This application was allowed,

and the following order was passed on 15.12.2020:

“Application of applicant, under section

308 of Maharashtra Municipal Council, Nagar
Panchayati and Industrial Township Act, 1965
similarly, Maharashtra Municipal Council,
Nagar Panchayati and Industrial Township
Act, 1965 in respect of section 308 is allowed
as per the Government circular explanatory
instruction no. 4(b) it has been ordered to the
Municipal Council that Rajbhasha Marathi
shall be used 100% in the Government
proceedings.”

6. Some members of the Municipal Council challenged this order

before the Divisional Commissioner, Amravati in revision

under Section 318 of the 1965 Act. The Divisional

 4

Commissioner vide order dated 30.04.2021 set aside the order

of the Collector, against which Writ Petition No. 2219 of 2021

was filed by the appellant before the Bombay High Court

(Nagpur Bench).

7. The main ground of challenge by the appellant before the High

Court was that Marathi is the official language of the State and

all work conducted by government or government bodies,

including local bodies, must be done only in Marathi.

Therefore, according to the appellant, the use of Urdu in any

manner is wrong, and should not be permitted.

8. In their reply, the members of the Municipal Council, apart

from presenting their case on merits, raised a preliminary

objection that the appellant’s application before the Collector

under Section 308 of the 1965 Act, was not maintainable in

the first place. It was argued that there is a resolution of the

Municipal Council upholding its decision of displaying Urdu

on the signboard of the Council, and in terms of the plain

language of Section 308 of 1965 Act, any application, seeking

suspension of execution of a Municipal Council’s resolution,

can only be entertained by the Collector when moved by the

 5

Chief Officer of the Municipal Council; which was not the case

here.

9. Sub-section (1) of Section 308 was amended in the year 2018.

Prior to this amendment, if the Collector was of the opinion

that the execution of any order or resolution of a Council was

likely to cause injury or annoyance to the public and may lead

to a breach of peace, or was unlawful, he had the powers to

suspend its execution or prohibit its enforcement. The

Collector could even exercise such power suo motu in an

appropriate situation. All the same, subsequent to the

amendment in sub-section (1) of Section 308 in the year 2018,

it can be done only when such a resolution is sent by the Chief

Officer before the Collector.

10. Section 308(1) of 1965 Act before and after the amendment

reads as under:

Old New

“Section 308. Powers to “Section 308. Powers to

suspend execution of suspend execution of
orders and resolutions of orders and resolutions of
Council on certain Council on certain
grounds- grounds-
(1) If, in the opinion of the (1) If the Council or any
Collector, the execution of Committee resolves contrary
any order or resolution of a to provisions of this Act or any
 6

Council, or the doing of other law, or rules, bye-laws,

anything which is about to be or the Government directions,
done or is being done by or on then it shall be the
behalf of a Council, is responsibility of the Chief
causing or is likely to cause Officer to send it to the
injury or annoyance to the Collector for suspension of
public or is against public execution of such a resolution
interest or to lead a breach of or prohibition of doing thereof,
the peace or is unlawful, he within the period of three
may by order in writing days from the receipt of the
under his signature suspend said resolution. The Collector
the execution or prohibit the shall decide on such proposal
doing thereof.” within the period of thirty
days from the date of receipt
of such proposal …”
(Emphasis provided)

11. It is therefore clear that, after the amendment, the Collector

can exercise powers only when the Chief Officer of the

Municipal Council brings it to the Collector’s notice that the

Municipal Council has passed a resolution contrary to the

provision of the 1965 Act or any other law, rule or bye-laws. In

such a situation, the Chief Officer of the Municipal Council

alone has the responsibility to move an appropriate

application before the Collector in terms of Section 308(1) of

the 1965 Act and more importantly it is only on an application

moved before the Collector by the Chief Officer of the

Municipal Council that the powers can be exercised by the

Collector under the amended Section 308 of 1965 Act. In this

 7

case, the application was admittedly not made by the Chief

Officer of the Municipal Council but by the appellant, which

should not have been entertained in the first place.

12. The High Court accepted this argument of the members of the

Municipal Council, but nevertheless, the High Court also went

into the merits of the matter and ultimately did not consider it

a case calling for any interference. In its order dated

30.06.2021, while dismissing the petition it was said:

“16. Even on facts, this Court is not at all

impressed with the contentions sought to be
raised on behalf of the petitioner. It is obvious
that the Government Resolution / circulars
being executive instructions would not prevail
over statutory provisions. Even otherwise,
resolution of the Municipal Council was passed
by majority and it is still in force. The resolution
specifically states that the writing on the board
on the new building of Municipal Council would
be in Marathi at the top and below that in Urdu
language. There cannot be any dispute about
the fact that as per entry No.22 of the VIIIth
Schedule of the Constitution of India, Urdu is
very much included in the list of languages.
Thus, this Court sees no reason to entertain the
contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed.”

13. This order was challenged before this Court in SLP (Civil) No.

13820 of 2021. During arguments in this SLP, the appellant’s

contention was that now a new legislation i.e. the Maharashtra

 8

Local Authorities (Official Languages) Act, 2022 (hereinafter

‘2022 Act’) had been enacted during the pendency of the SLP,

in terms of which, the use of Urdu language on the signboard

of the Municipal Council is not permitted. Consequently, this

Court had passed the following order on 29.04.2022:

“The challenge in the present special

leave petition is to an order passed by the High
Court of Judicature at Bombay dated
30.06.2021 wherein challenge to the decision
of the Municipal Council to write the name of
Municipal Council on the sign Board in Urdu
language as well remained unsuccessful.
The learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned counsel for the State has pointed out
that a recent enactment by the State of
Maharashtra i.e. Maharashtra Act No.XXXI of
2022 (Maharashtra Local Authorities (Official
Languages) Act, 2022) which mandates that
‘all sign boards, name plates, notice boards
and other display matters pertaining to public
interface and public interest to the Local
Authority or any Department or office thereof’
shall be in Marathi.
Since the Act has come into force during
the pendency of the present proceedings, we
find that the order of the High Court on account
of subsequent development is not sustainable.
However, it shall be open to the aggrieved
person to seek recourse to the remedy as may
be available to him against the impugned Act
in accordance with law.
The special leave petition is disposed of
in above terms.
Pending application(s), if any, also stand
disposed of.”
 9

14. Under these circumstances, the matter was heard again by the

Division Bench of the Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench),

and an order was passed on 10.04.2024, which is presently

under challenge before this Court:

“5. Perusal of the Act of 2022, would

indicate that Marathi has been declared as
official language of all the Local Authorities in
the State of Maharashtra, to be used for all
official purposes as well as purposes related to
public interface and public interest in all offices
of the Local Authorities. Section 3 (1) (a) to (i) of
the Act of 2022 elucidates as to in which
communications, actions, forms, signboards
etc. the Marathi language is to be used.
6. We are herewith concerned with the
display of the name of the Municipal Council on
its building, which in addition to Marathi, has
also been written in Urdu script.
7. A perusal of the Act of 2022, would
indicate, that all that it does, is to ensure that
the business and affairs of the Council, are to
be conducted in Marathi language, including
Marathi script. Insofar as the erection of
signboard and display of the name of the
Municipal Council is concerned, it does not
prohibit use of an additional language, to
display the name, in addition to the name
being displayed in Marathi language. Till such
time, Marathi language continues to be the
official language of the Local Authorities, in
terms of the Act of 2022, in our considered
opinion, the use of an additional language to
display the name of Municipal Council on its
building would not indicate any violation of the
provisions of the Act of 2022. What is to be also
noted is that there is no prohibition in the Act
 10

of 2022 for any such use of a language, in

addition to the official language, in view of
which, insofar as Writ Petition No.2703/2023
is concerned, the impugned communication
dated 10/02/2023 by the Administrator,
cannot be sustained and the same is hereby
quashed and set aside. The writ petition is
accordingly allowed in the above terms. No
order as to costs.
8. Insofar as Writ Petition
No.1568/2023 is concerned, in view of what
has been said above, we do not see any reason
to interfere therein. The writ petition is
dismissed. No order as to costs.”

15. The High Court to our mind rightly concluded that the 2022

Act, on which the appellant placed significant reliance, does

not prohibit the use of an additional language, which is Urdu

in the present case, on the signboard of the Municipal Council

building. The argument before the High Court in the second

round of litigation by the present appellant was that Section

3(1) of the 2022 Act provides for Marathi to be the official

language of all local authorities in the State, except for the

purposes specified in sub-section (2) and the only exception

which was provided was the use of English in the specified

communications under sub-section (2). All the same, this

argument is incorrect. There is no prohibition on using any

other language, especially one included in the VIIIth Schedule

 11

of the Constitution of India. Sub-section (2) of Section 3 is an

enabling provision to use English in situations where the

communications, in which the subject matter of the

communication cannot be properly conveyed in Marathi or in

situations where the persons to whom such communications

are addressed cannot understand Marathi. This makes it more

than explicit that even the enactment recognizes that language

essentially is a tool of communication; which, according to us,

cannot be condemned, when this language is being used by a

community or group. We have to emphasize that Marathi and

Urdu occupy the same position under Schedule VIII of the

Constitution of India.

16. Before us is a fellow citizen who has taken great pains to take

this matter twice to the High Court and then twice again before

this Court. What the appellant thinks may also be the

thinking of many of our fellow citizens. These need to be

addressed.

17. Let our concepts be clear. Language is not religion. Language

does not even represent religion. Language belongs to a

community, to a region, to people; and not to a religion.

 12

18. Language is culture. Language is the yardstick to measure the

civilizational march of a community and its people. So is the

case of Urdu, which is the finest specimen of ganga-jamuni

tahzeeb, or the Hindustani tahzeeb, which is the composite

cultural ethos of the plains of northern and central India. But

before language became a tool for learning, its earliest and

primary purpose will always remain communication.

19. Coming back to our case, the purpose here for the use of Urdu

is merely communication. All the municipal council wanted to

do was to make an effective communication. This is the

primary purpose of a language, which the Bombay High Court

has laid emphasis on.

20. We must respect and rejoice in our diversity, including our

many languages. India has more than hundred major

languages. Then there are other languages known as dialects

or ‘Mother Tongues’ which also run into hundreds. According

to the 2001 Census, India had a total of 122 major languages

including the 22 scheduled languages, and a total of 234

mother tongues. Urdu was the sixth most spoken scheduled

language of India. In fact, it is spoken by at least a part of the

population in all States and Union Territories, except perhaps

 13

in our north-eastern States. In the 2011 Census, the number

of mother tongues increased to 270. However, it is to be noted

that this number was also arrived at by taking into

consideration only those mother tongues which had more than

ten thousand speakers. Thus, it would not be wrong to say

that the actual number of mother tongues in India would run

into thousands. Such is the immense linguistic diversity of

India!

21. The Constitution of India though mentions twenty-two Indian

languages in its VIIIth Schedule, which includes both Marathi

and Urdu, and significantly, ‘English’ is not a language

mentioned in the VIIIth Schedule as it is not an Indian

language. With this linguistic diversity, India is the most

multilingual country in the world. In such a country, what

should be the language for communication and use

throughout the country, and what should be the national

language became a vexed question during the debate in the

Constituent Assembly. We have to keep in mind that language

is not just a language, it is also representative of a culture.

That makes a discussion on language both sensitive and

delicate and this is where one of our principal Constitutional

 14

values of ‘tolerance’ must also come into play. We, the people

of India, have taken great pain in resolving the language issue

at the Centre, which is our unique achievement considering

the linguistic diversity of the nation as we have been

mentioning repeatedly. According to Granville Austin, the

Constituent Assembly had almost come to a breaking point

while resolving the question of language or what should be the

national language1. Finally, the members of the Constituent

Assembly agreed on ‘Hindi’ to be the “Rajbhasha” i.e. the

official language of the Union of India with English to be used

for a period of 15 years from commencement of the

Constitution, though Parliament was given the powers to

extend this period.

22. Part XVII of our Constitution is on the official language. Article

351 emphasizes on the spread of Hindi language and to

develop the language, inter alia, by assimilating the forms and

style and expressions used in “Hindustani” and other

languages of the VIIIth Schedule and wherever necessary or

1 See GRANVILLE AUSTIN, Language and the Constitution-the half-hearted compromise, THE
INDIAN CONSTITUTION: CORNERSTONE OF A NATION, Oxford University Press (2000) at pp. 265-
307.
 15

desirable, by drawing vocabulary, primarily from Sanskrit but

also secondarily from other languages.

23. We must now refer to Article 345 which relates to the Official

language of a State:

“345. Official language or languages of a

State:
Subject to the provisions of articles 346 and 347,
the Legislature of a State may by law adopt any
one or more of the languages in use in the State
or Hindi as the language or languages to be used
for all or any of the official purposes of that State:
Provided that, until the Legislature of the State
otherwise provides by law, the English language
shall continue to be used for those official
purposes within the State for which it was being
used immediately before the commencement of
this Constitution.”

This Article empowers State legislatures to adopt Hindi or any

other language in use in that State as the official language of

that State.

24. A five-judge Bench of this Court in Uttar Pradesh Hindi

Sahitya Sammelan v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2014) 9 SCC

716, had an occasion to consider the Constitutional provisions

relating to official languages of the State, when Urdu was

adopted as the second language in the State of Uttar Pradesh.

The Uttar Pradesh Official Languages Act was enacted in the

year 1951, and it made Hindi the official language in the State.
 16

In 1989, an amendment was introduced in the Act by which

Urdu was made the second official language “for such purposes

as may be notified by the State Government from time to time.”

In pursuance of powers conferred under the 1989 amendment

to the 1951 Act, the State government issued a notification on

07.10.1989 notifying the use of Urdu as a second language for

certain purposes. The Appellant therein challenged the

Constitutional validity of the 1989 amendment to the 1951 Act

before the Allahabad High Court. The Division Bench which

heard the matter delivered a split verdict. As a result, the

matter was referred to a third judge, who held that the 1989

Amendment to the 1951 Act did not suffer from any infirmity

and was not unconstitutional. The appellant then filed an SLP

before this Court, against the decision of the High Court,

where the matter was ultimately referred to a Constitution

Bench of Five Judges, which upheld the Constitutional validity

of the 1989 Amendment, and the addition of Urdu as a second

language was held to be valid.

25. According to the appellant therein, Article 345 gives two

options to the States: adoption of any one or more of the

languages in use in the State, or, adoption of Hindi as official

 17

language. Therefore, if the State of Uttar Pradesh has already

adopted Hindi as its official language by the 1951 Act, it

cannot adopt any other language as its official language. In

other words, once Hindi is adopted as an official language no

other language can be added as another official language. This

is how, according to the appellant, Article 345 ought to be

read. This Court did not accept this argument and held that

mere adoption of Hindi by the State as its official language

does not bar the State legislature from adopting other

languages as its official language under Article 345 of the

Constitution. It was thus observed:

“23. Part XVII of the Constitution as its

scheme suggests is accommodative. After all,
language policies are constructs and they
change over time.
24.The plain language of Article 345
which empowers the State Legislature to make
law for adoption of one or more of the
languages in use in the State leaves no manner
of doubt that such power may be exercised by
the State Legislature from time to time. A
different intention does not appear from the
plain language of Article 345. We do not find
any indication that the power can be exercised
by the State Legislature only once and that
power gets exhausted if the State Legislature
adopts Hindi as the official language of the
State. In our view, the State Legislature is at
liberty to exercise its discretion under Article
345 from time to time for specified purpose. It
does not appear to us that Hindi once adopted
 18

as official language of the State in exercise of

its power by the State Legislature under Article
345, the State Legislature ceases to have any
law-making power under Article 345…”

It was held that adoption of a particular language, say

Hindi, as the official language by a State legislature does not

bar that legislature from again invoking powers under Article

345 to designate yet another language(s) as the official

language(s) if it is required. The argument of the appellant was

that when more than one language is in use in a State, then

the legislature of that State can adopt one or more than one of

such languages or just Hindi as its language. All the same, this

Court did not accept this interpretation of Article 345.

26. Considering the practical necessity, various States have

responded to the demand for the inclusion of another language

as its official language. Following are the States and Union

Territories in India which have more than one official

language, or permit the use of more than language for certain

official purposes2:

2 Data taken from Official Languages Acts passed by State Legislatures as well as other
Government sources for some Union Territories. However, there might be subsequent
repeals/amendments in the above-mentioned legislations which might have been
inadvertently missed by the author of this judgment.
 19

S.No. State/Union Official Other official

Territory Language(s) language(s)/language(s)
permitted to be used
for official purposes
1. Andhra Telugu Urdu, English
Pradesh
2. Assam Assamese Bengali, Bodo, English
3. Bihar Hindi Urdu
4. Chhattisgarh Hindi Chattissgarhi
5. Goa Konkani Marathi, English
6. Gujarat Gujarati,
Hindi
7. Haryana Hindi Punjabi, English
8. Himachal Hindi Sanskrit
Pradesh
9. Jharkhand Hindi Magahi, Bhojpuri,
Maithili, Angika,
Bhumij, Urdu, Santhali,
Mundari, Ho, Khadiya,
Kurukh, Kurmali,
Khortha, Nagpuri,
Panchparganiya,
Bengali, Odia
10. Karnataka Kannada English
11. Kerala Malayalam English, Tamil, Kannada
12. Maharashtra Marathi English
13. Manipur Manipuri English
(Meiteilon)
14. Meghalaya English Khasi, Garo
15. Mizoram Mizo English
16. Odisha Odia English
17. Punjab Punjabi English
18. Rajasthan Hindi English
19. Sikkim English, Limbu, Sunuwar,
Nepali, Tamang, Bhujel, Newari,
Bhutia, Rai, Gurung, Mangar,
Lepcha Sherpa
20. Tamil Nadu Tamil English
21. Telangana Telugu Urdu, English
22. Tripura Bengali, English
Kokborok
 20

23. Uttar Pradesh Hindi Urdu

24. Uttarakhand Hindi Sanskrit
25. West Bengal Bengali Urdu, Hindi, Odia,
Punjabi, Santhali,
Nepali, Kurukh,
Kamtapuri, Rajbanshi,
Kurmali, Telugu,
English
26. Andaman and Hindi English
Nicobar Islands
27. Dadra and Hindi, Gujarati
Nagar Haveli English
and Daman
and Diu
28. Delhi Hindi Urdu, Punjabi, English
29. Jammu and Kashmiri,
Kashmir Dogri,
Hindi,
Urdu,
English
30. Ladakh Hindi English
31. Puducherry Tamil Telugu, Malayalam,
English

27. The prejudice against Urdu stems from the misconception that

Urdu is alien to India. This opinion, we are afraid, is incorrect

as Urdu, like Marathi and Hindi, is an Indo-Aryan language. It

is a language which was born in this land. Urdu developed and

flourished in India due to the need for people belonging to

different cultural milieus who wanted to exchange ideas and

communicate amongst themselves. Over the centuries, it

attained ever greater refinement and became the language of

choice for many acclaimed poets.

 21

28. The debate surrounding languages is not new. In fact, it

started even before independence, and the need for greater use

of Indian languages was also recognized during the

independence movement. It was accepted by a large number

of Indians that the language which is a product of

amalgamation of various Indian languages such as Hindi,

Urdu and Punjabi, is what is known as ‘Hindustani’, which a

large mass of this country speaks. In its Cocanada (Kakinada)

Session of 1923, the Indian National Congress recognized

amendments to its Constitution to the effect that the Congress

would use Hindustani, English or provincial languages in its

proceedings. The relevant portion of the resolution reads as

follows:

“Article XXXIII
The proceedings of the Congress shall be
conducted, as far as possible, in Hindustani,
English or the language of the province may
also be used.”3

29. In the same Session, it was recognized that the lack of

cooperation between different communities due to mutual

suspicion about each other’s aims and intentions is one of the

obstacles to attainment of Swaraj in India. To overcome these

3A.M ZAIDI, THE ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS-VOL-8: 1921-1924: INDIA AT THE
CROSS-ROADS at p. 635.
 22

difficulties, different communities, through their

representatives, signed the Indian National Pact resolving that

Swaraj is the aim of all the communities. This Pact recognized

Hindustani as the national language of India. The relevant

portion of the said Pact reads as under:

“(3) Hindustani shall be the national language

of India. It shall be permissible to write it in
either script, Urdu or Deonagari.”4

30. The Congress Constitution of 1934 contained a provision

which said that all proceedings of the Congress shall be in

Hindustani and much like the present Indian Constitution, the

Congress Constitution also carved out a proviso which

provided for the use of English or any provincial language, in

case a speaker is unable to speak in Hindustani or the

Congress President permits him/her to do so. Article XVII of

this Congress Constitution thus came to read as under:

“Article XVII LANGUAGE

(a) The proceedings of the Congress, the All-India
Congress Committee and the Working
Committee shall ordinarily be conducted in
Hindustani; the English language or any
provincial language may be used if the
speaker is unable to speak in Hindustani or
whenever permitted by the President.

4 THE INDIAN NATIONAL PACT, CLAUSE 3.

 23

(b) The proceedings of the Provincial Congress

Committees shall ordinarily be conducted in
the language of the province concerned.
Hindustani may also be used.”5

31. This resolve is also reflected in an essay authored by the first

Prime Minister of the country, Jawaharlal Nehru, where he

wrote as follows:

“Language is alleged to divide India into

innumerable compartments; we are told by the
census that there are 222 languages or
dialects in India. I suppose the census of the
United States mentions a very large number of
languages; the German census, I think,
mentions over sixty. But most of these
languages are spoken by small groups of
people, or are dialects. In India, the absence of
mass education has fostered the growth of
dialects. As a matter of fact, India is a
singularly unified area so far as languages are
concerned. Altogether in the vast area of India,
there are a dozen languages and these are
closely allied to each other. They fall into two
groups— the Indo-Aryan languages of the
north and center and west, and the Dravidian
languages of the east and south. The Indo-
Aryan languages derived from Sanskrit and
anyone who knows one of them finds it easy to
learn another. The Dravidian languages are
different, but each one of them contains fifty
per cent, or more words from the Sanskrit. The
dominant language in India is:
Hindustani (Hindi or Urdu) which is
already spoken by a huge block of a
hundred and twenty million people and is
partly understood by scores of millions of
others. This language is bound to become
5A.M ZAIDI, THE ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS-VOL-10: 1930-1935: THE BATTLE
FOR SWARAJ at p. 442.
 24

the all-India medium of communication,

not displacing the great provincial
languages, but as a compulsory second
language. With mass education on behalf of
the state this will not be difficult. Already due
to talkies and the radio, the range of
Hindustani is spreading fast. The writer of this
article has had occasion to address great mass
audiences all over India and almost always,
except in the south, he has used Hindustani
and been understood. However numerous the
difficult problems which India has to solve, the
language problem clearly is not one of them. It
already is well on the way to solution.”6
(Emphasis provided)

Nehru acknowledged that Hindustani is bound to become the

all-India medium of communication, since it is spoken by a

large number of people in the country. At the same time, he

recognized the importance of provincial languages by

emphasizing that the intention was not to replace provincial

languages with Hindustani. Thus, he put forward the idea of

Hindustani as a compulsory second language.

32. Based on the developments recounted above, it is clear that

the country was moving forward to accept Hindustani as its

National language during our struggle for independence. Even

the Constituent Assembly’s Rules of Procedure laid down that

6Jawaharlal Nehru, The Unity of India, Foreign Affairs, Volume 16, No. 2 (Jan. 1938), pp.
231-243.
 25

the business of the Assembly would be transacted in

Hindustani, or English. Again, a proviso similar to the one

contained in our present Constitution7 was incorporated,

stating that in cases where a member is unable to express

himself/herself in Hindustani or English, he/she may, with

the permission of the President, speak in their mother tongue8.

33. Why was it then that Hindustani was not recognized as an

official language of the Union? It is now clear that the main

reason behind this was the partition of the nation in 1947 and

adoption of Urdu by Pakistan as its National language. The

ultimate victim was Hindustani.

34. Granville Austin explains in detail the discussions on the

language issue in India before the Constituent Assembly in

particular, and in the country in general, before and after

partition. It is Chapter 12 of his first book9 which throws

considerable light on this contentious and delicate national

issue. It was a pragmatic hope nurtured by our national

leaders in post-independent India and by the majority of the

members of the Constituent Assembly that Hindustani had a

7 See Articles 120 and 210 of the Constitution of India

8
GRANVILLE AUSTIN, THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION: CORNERSTONE OF A NATION, Oxford University
Press (New Delhi; 2000) at p. 274.
9
GRANVILLE AUSTIN, THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION: CORNERSTONE OF A NATION, Oxford University
Press (New Delhi; 2000).
 26

very bright prospect of becoming the national language. The

early debates in the Constituent Assembly indicated a

compromise on this issue between the hardliners from both

sides i.e. between supporters of Sanskritized Hindi and

proponents of liberal mixture of Urdu and Hindi known as

‘Hindustani’. But then comes a strong rupture in the form of

the partition of India, and amongst its several fallouts, one

vital blow was given to Urdu and Hindustani both. This is what

Granville Austin has to say here:

“…Partition killed Hindustani and endangered

the position of English and the provincial
languages in the Constitution. ‘If there had
been no Partition, Hindustani would without
doubt have been the national language,’ K.
Santhanam believed, ‘but the anger against
the Muslims turned against Urdu. Assembly
members ‘felt that the Muslims having caused
the division of the country, the whole issue of
national language must be reviewed afresh’,
said an article in The Hindustan Times. Having
seen the dream of unity shattered by Partition,
by the ‘treachery’ of the Urdu (Hindustani)
speakers, the Hindi extremists became even
more firmly committed to Hindi and to
achieving national unity through it. Speakers of
the provincial languages must learn Hindi and
the regional languages must take second
place, the Hindi-wallahs believed. And as to
 27

English, it should go as Urdu had gone. Were

not both un-Indian?”10

35. Be that as it may, it is a fact now that Hindustani is not the

official language under the Constitution. Under Article 343 of

the Constitution, Hindi is the official language, while the use

of English was made permissible for official purposes for a

period of fifteen years. But this does not mean that Hindustan

and Urdu have become extinct. This was never the intention

of the framers of the Constitution. In a speech to the

Constituent Assembly on the language issue, Jawaharlal

Nehru emphasized that the official language i.e. Hindi shall be

enriched by borrowing the vocabulary from Urdu. His exact

words were:

“…We find that in a particular subject or type

of subjects we speak better in Hindi than in
Urdu and in another type of subjects Urdu suits
us better; it suits the genius of that subject a
little better. My point is that I was both these
instruments which strengthen Hindi that is
going to be developed as our official and
National language of the country. Let us keep
in touch with the people…”11

10 GRANVILLE AUSTIN, THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION: CORNERSTONE OF A NATION, Oxford University

Press (New Delhi; 2000) at pp. 277-278.
11 Constituent Assembly Debates, Vol IX at p. 1415.
 28

This spirit is embodied in Article 351 of the Constitution,

which reads as follows:

“351. Directive for development of the

Hindi language
It shall be the duty of the Union to promote the
spread of the Hindi language, to develop it so
that it may serve as a medium of expression for
all the elements of the composite culture of
India and to secure its enrichment by
assimilating without interfering with its genius,
the forms, style and expressions used in
Hindustani and in the other languages of India
specified in the Eighth Schedule, and by
drawing, wherever necessary or desirable, for
its vocabulary, primarily on Sanskrit and
secondarily on other languages.”

36. Both Gandhi and Nehru were great proponents of Hindustani.

Only a few months before his death Gandhi wrote:

“This Hindustani (Gandhi wrote) should be

neither Sanskritized Hindi nor Persianised
Urdu but a happy combination of both. It
should also freely admit words wherever
necessary from the different regional
languages and also assimilate words from
foreign languages, provided that they can mix
well and easily with our national language.
Thus our national language must develop into
a rich and powerful instrument capable of
expressing the whole gamut of human
thoughts and feelings. To confine oneself
exclusively to Hindi or Urdu would be a crime
 29

against intelligence and the spirit of

patriotism.”12

37. Even today, the language used by the common people of the

country is replete with words of the Urdu language, even if one

is not aware of it. It would not be incorrect to say that one

cannot have a day-to-day conversation in Hindi without using

words of Urdu or words derived from Urdu. The word ‘Hindi’

itself comes from the Persian word ‘Hindavi’! This exchange of

vocabulary flows both ways because Urdu also has many

words borrowed from other Indian languages, including

Sanskrit.

38. Interestingly, Urdu words have a heavy influence on Court

parlance, both in criminal and civil law. From Adalat13 to

halafnama14 to peshi15, the influence of Urdu is writ large in

the language of the Indian Courts. For that matter, even

though the official language of the Supreme Court and the

High Courts as per Article 348 of the Constitution is English,

yet many Urdu words continue to be used in this Court till

date. These include vakalatnama, dasti, etc.

12
GRANVILLE AUSTIN, THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION: CORNERSTONE OF A NATION, Oxford University
Press (New Delhi; 2000) at p. 272.
13 Adalat means ‘Court’.
14 Halafnama means ‘affidavit’.
15 Peshi means ‘appearance’ or ‘presence’.
 30

39. Viewed from another perspective, the Urdu language has come

to be adopted by many States and Union Territories in India

as the second official language in exercise of powers conferred

by Article 345 of the Constitution16. The States which have

Urdu as one of the official languages are Andhra Pradesh,

Bihar, Jharkhand, Telangana, Uttar Pradesh, and West

Bengal, while the Union Territories which follow this practice

are Delhi and Jammu and Kashmir.

40. Even from a Constitutional perspective, the use of language

for official purposes is not according to any rigid formula. For

example, Article 120 of the Constitution prescribes Hindi or

English as the official language of Parliament, but the proviso

to the said Article empowers the Presiding Officer of the House

to allow a member to express themselves in their mother

tongue, if they do not know Hindi or English. The same

principle applies to State legislatures vide Article 210 of the

Constitution.

41. It may also be of same interest to know that when we criticize

Urdu, we are in a way also criticizing Hindi, as according to

linguists and literary scholars, Urdu and Hindi are not two

16 Please refer to the previous paragraphs of this judgment.

 31

languages, but it is one language. True, Urdu is mainly written

in Nastaliq17 and Hindi in Devnagri; but then scripts do not

make a language. What makes languages distinct is their

syntax, their grammar and their phonology. Urdu and Hindi

have broad similarities in all these counts. The noted Urdu

scholar Gyan Chand Jain, in Urdu, Hindi ya Hindustani

published in magazine Hindustani Zaban (Jan-April 1974),

writes:

“It is absolutely clear that Urdu and Hindi are

not two separate languages. To call them two
languages is to belie all principles of linguistics
and to deceive oneself and others….Even
though Urdu literature and Hindi literature are
two different and independent literatures,
Urdu and Hindi are not two different
languages…Enumerating Urdu and Hindi as
two languages, in the Indian Constitution, is
political expediency, not a linguistic reality”18

Professor Gyan Chand Jain does take into consideration the

fact that in our Constitution, Urdu and Hindi are mentioned

as two different languages, but that the author says, “is

political expediency, not a linguistic reality.” According to

Amrit Rai, “…their recognition as two separate languages

17Urdu written in Perso-Arabic script in calligraphic style is called ‘Nastaliq’.

18Our source for this extract is AMRIT RAI, A HOUSE DIVIDED: THE ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF
HINDI/HINDAVI, Oxford University Press (1984) at p. 3.
 32

under the Constitution need not deter linguists from

questioning the scientific validity of their separation”19.

42. The noted Hindi scholar Ram Vilas Sharma, who is a strong

supporter of Hindi as a national language, in his book Bharat

ki Bhasha Samasya writes:

“Hindi-Urdu are not two separate languages;

they are basically one and the same. Their
pronouns, verbs, and basic vocabulary are the
same. There are no two other languages in the
world whose pronouns and verbs are one
hundred per cent the same. Russian and
Ukrainian are much akin to each other but even
they are not so closely alike.”20

43. Another outstanding Urdu scholar, and a leader of the Urdu

movement, Abdul Haq, in his book Qadim Urdu says:

“It is a clear fact and needs no further

adumbration that the language we speak and
write and call by the name ‘Urdu’ today is
derived from Hindi and constituted of Hindi”21

44. If there are dissimilarities, there are plenty between Hindi and

high Hindi, like there are between Urdu and high Urdu. But

close similarities exist between Hindi and Urdu, when these

19
AMRIT RAI, A HOUSE DIVIDED: THE ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF HINDI/HINDAVI, Oxford
University Press (1984) at p. 3.
20 Our source for this extract is AMRIT RAI, A HOUSE DIVIDED: THE ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF

HINDI/HINDAVI, Oxford University Press (1984) at p. 6.

21 Our source for this extract is AMRIT RAI, A HOUSE DIVIDED: THE ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF

HINDI/HINDAVI, Oxford University Press (1984) at p. 6.

 33

are spoken day-to-day. We fall back again on Gyan Chand

Jain, who writes:

“…It is a fact that the difference between

average Urdu writing and average Hindi
writing is not as great as the difference
between average Urdu and difficult Urdu, or
that between average Hindi and difficult Hindi.
In the literature of every language, be it Urdu
or Hindi or English, one finds different levels of
language according to the stock of words used-
on the one hand, the altogether simple
language of everyday speech, and on the other
a language difficult to comprehend, weighed
down by words from the classical language or
from an alien language…”22

45. This is not an occasion to have an elaborate discussion on the

rise and fall of Urdu, but this much can be stated that this

fusion of the two languages Hindi and Urdu met a roadblock

in the form of the puritans on both sides and Hindi became

more Sanskritized and Urdu more Persian. A schism exploited

by the colonial powers in dividing the two languages on

religion. Hindi was now understood to be the language of

Hindus and Urdu of the Muslims,23 which is such a pitiable

22 Gyan Chand Jain, Urdu Hindi ya Hindustani, Hindustani Zaban (Jan-April, 1974). However,
our source for the extract is AMRIT RAI, A HOUSE DIVIDED: THE ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF
HINDI/HINDAVI, Oxford University Press (1984) at p. 4.
23 See AMRIT RAI, A HOUSE DIVIDED: THE ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF HINDI/HINDAVI, Oxford

University Press (1984) at pp. 8-13 and 285-289.

 34

digression from reality; from unity in diversity; and the

concept of universal brotherhood.

46. Coming to the present case, it must be stated that a Municipal

Council is there to provide services to the local community of

the area and cater to their immediate day-to-day needs. If

people or a group of people, residing within the area covered

by the Municipal Council are familiar with Urdu, then there

should not be any objection if Urdu is used in addition to the

official language i.e. Marathi, at least on the signboard of the

Municipal Council. Language is a medium for exchange of

ideas that brings people holding diverse views and beliefs

closer and it should not become a cause of their division.

47. And these are the words of our former Chief Justice of India,

M. N. Venkatachaliah, who makes a fervent plea for the

preservation of Urdu, while speaking in a seminar in Delhi:

“The Urdu language has a special place in

India. The Urdu language conjures up and
inspires deeply emotive sentiments and
thoughts from the sublimity of the mystic to
the romantic and the earthy, of perfumes of
camaraderie, of music and life’s wistfulness
and a whole range of human relationships.
Its rich literature and lore is a treasure house
of the noblest thoughts on life’s mysteries.
Urdu is not simply one of the languages of
this country. It is a culture and civilisation in
itself…But today this great culture needs
 35

urgent measures for its very survival…The

richness of Urdu culture needs to be restored
to its pristine glory.”24

48. Our misconceptions, perhaps even our prejudices against a

language have to be courageously and truthfully tested against

the reality, which is this great diversity of our nation: Our

strength can never be our weakness. Let us make friends with

Urdu and every language. If Urdu was to speak for herself, she

would say:

“urdu hai mirā naam maiñ 'Khusrav' kī pahelī

kyuuñ mujh ko banāte ho ta.assub kā nishāna
maiñ ne to kabhī ḳhud ko musalmāñ nahīñ maanā
dekhā thā kabhī maiñ ne bhī ḳhushiyoñ kā zamāna
apne hī vatan meñ huuñ magar aaj akelī

urdu hai mirā naam maiñ 'Khusrav' kī pahelī”25

Urdu is my name, I am the riddle of 'Khusrav'

Do not hold me for your prejudices
I never considered myself a Muslim
I too have seen happier times
I feel like an outsider in my homeland today
Urdu is my name, I am the riddle of 'Khusrav'

24 See Danial Latifi, Urdu in UP, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 36, No.7 (Feb 17-23,
2001), pp. 533-535 at p. 535.
25 Extract from a Nazm by poet Iqbal Ashhar
 36

49. The display of an additional language cannot, by itself, be said

to be in violation of the provisions of the 2022 Act. The High

Court while reaching the above findings had considered the

relevant provisions of law. We completely agree with the

reasoning given by the High Court that there is no prohibition

on the use of Urdu under the 2022 Act or in any provision of

law. The entire case of the appellant to our mind is based on

a misconception of law. We see no reason therefore to interfere

in the present case. These appeals are liable to be dismissed,

and are hereby dismissed.

50. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

….…...……………………………J.
(SUDHANSHU DHULIA)

……....……………………………J.
(K. VINOD CHANDRAN)

New Delhi
April 15, 2025