New Delhi, Five years after the National Education Policy 2020 introduced greater flexibility in the three-language formula, fresh data tabled in the Lok Sabha reveal that regional-language instruction remains limited in India’s flagship centrally-run school networks.
According to figures submitted by the Ministry of Education on 1 December, just 226 of the 1,405 sanctioned Kendriya Vidyalayas (KVs) – equivalent to 16.1 per cent – currently provide tuition in one of ten regional languages. Punjabi leads with 55 KVs, followed by Kannada (48), Malayalam (42), Tamil (36) and Assamese (26). Gujarati, Bengali, Marathi, Manipuri and Bodo are offered in fewer than ten KVs each.
KV policy mandates Hindi and English from Class I to VIII, with Sanskrit compulsory in Classes VI–VIII. From Class IX onwards, students may choose any two languages from Hindi, English and Sanskrit. Regional languages can be introduced only if at least 15 students opt for them, allowing schools to hire contractual teachers.
In contrast, the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya (JNV) network – also under direct central control – performs markedly better on regional-language provision. Of the 689 sanctioned JNVs, 665 teach at least one of 18 listed “local languages” from Classes VI to IX as a compulsory subject. However, the data classify Hindi as a local language in 315 schools, somewhat inflating the headline figure. Excluding Hindi, Assamese is the most widely taught regional language (51 JNVs), with the remaining 16 languages each offered in fewer than 30 schools.
The ministry did not disclose the state-wise distribution of regional-language teaching in either network.
The figures were presented in response to a question from Trinamool Congress MP Sharmila Sarkar and come against the backdrop of continuing political debate over the NEP’s three-language formula, which recommends that at least two of the three languages taught should, wherever possible, be native to India.
Minister of State for Education Jayant Chaudhary emphasised that the KV curriculum is designed primarily for children of transferable central government employees, necessitating a strong common linguistic core while retaining provision for regional options where demand exists.
Critics of the three-language policy, particularly in non-Hindi-speaking states, have long argued that its implementation risks imposing an additional linguistic burden. The latest data suggest that, at least within centrally administered elite institutions, regional-language penetration remains modest half a decade after the policy’s launch.
