A major legal challenge has arrived. The Supreme Court Against the Central Board of Secondary Education’s (CBSE) decision to make third language compulsory for class 9 and 10 students from the academic session 2026-27. According to a report by LiveLaw, a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by parents and teachers from several cities has questioned both the timing and implementation of the new language policy.The matter was mentioned before Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, who agreed to list the petition next week after senior advocate Mukal Rohatgi’s request for an urgent hearing.During the mention, Rohatgi argued that the new policy could adversely affect the academic preparation of students. As reported by Live Law, he told the court that students studying in Class 9 cannot suddenly be expected to learn a new language in such a short period of time and then appear for Class 10 exams. He warned the move would create “chaos” for students, schools and parents.
Parents and teachers from four cities approached the court.
The petition was filed under Article 32 of the Constitution by 19 petitioners, including parents and teachers from Delhi, Gurugram, Noida and Chennai. The respondents in the case are the central government, CBSE and the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT).At the center of the controversy is CBSE Circular No. Acad-33/2026 issued on May 15, 2026. From July 1, 2026, Class 9 students will have to study three languages, identified as R1, R2 and R3, out of which at least two are indigenous Indian languages, the circular said.Under the policy, students who want to study a foreign language such as French or German can study it as a third language only if the first two are Indian languages. Otherwise, the foreign language can only be taken as an additional fourth subject.
The petition states that the CBSE suddenly changed its stand.
The petitioners have argued that the circular is in direct conflict with the earlier CBSE communication issued on April 9, 2026. According to the petition, CBSE had earlier clarified that the third language requirement for Class 9 students will not be implemented till the academic session 2029-30.Schools and families plan the school year based on that assurance, the petition claims. He argues that the sudden change just weeks before implementation has left students and institutions confused.Many students have already spent years studying foreign languages and will now be forced to suddenly switch to another language in the middle of their schooling, the petition added.
Questions were raised about teachers and textbooks.
One of the central arguments in the petition relates to the lack of infrastructure to implement the policy. The petitioners have alleged that the circular itself recognizes the shortage of trained teachers and textbooks. According to the petition, CBSE has allowed temporary arrangements such as assigning teachers of other subjects who have “functional proficiency” in the language and using Class 6 textbooks with additional vernacular content for Class 9 students.The petition argues that such actions expose the lack of preparation behind the rollout. Invoking Article 14 of the Constitution, the petition claims that the policy is “manifestly arbitrary”. It also refers to Article 21A, which argues that meaningful education cannot be ensured simply by imposing a compulsory subject without adequate teaching infrastructure and educational planning.
Refer to the application. NEP 2020 Stress warning on students
The petitioners have also relied on the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, arguing that the policy framework emphasizes flexibility and clearly states that no language should be imposed on students or states.The petition further claimed that the revised mandate is against the National Curriculum Framework for School Education 2023 and contradicts the CBSE’s earlier notification on phased implementation.Another concern that has been raised before the court is the academic pressure that may be placed on students already studying foreign languages. The petition argued that forcing subjects to change at the secondary level could disrupt continuity during board examination years and create unnecessary stress.
Foreign language teachers may also be affected.
The petition also invokes Article 19(1)(g), which argues that teachers and institutions involved in foreign language education may suffer professional harm if foreign languages are pushed out of the mainstream trilingual system.The petition cites media reports and representations from parents claiming that confusion has started to spread in schools. A communication cited in the petition had reportedly offered Hindi, Sanskrit and French language options for Grade 9 under the revised structure.The petitioners have sought cancellation of CBSE’s circular of May 15 and reinstatement of the earlier position of April 9, which had postponed the implementation of compulsory education for Class 9 students till 2029-30. They have also sought interim relief to prevent the policy from being applied to existing students while the matter is pending in the Supreme Court.
