Today, On 11th March, The Supreme Court of India sharply criticised Dinesh Prasad Saklani for filing a disturbing affidavit on the disputed Class 8 Social Science chapter alleging corruption in the judiciary, saying it failed to name experts or reveal approval.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court criticized NCERT Director Dr. Dinesh Prasad Saklani’s claim that the disputed Class 8 Social Science chapter on “corruption in judiciary” had been rewritten.
The Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi was hearing a suo motu matter related to the contentious NCERT textbook.
The court said the director’s affidavit was disturbing, noting it failed to identify who the subject experts were that supposedly redrafted the chapter or who authorized its inclusion.
The Bench observed that the affidavit merely stated the chapter had been rewritten and would be included in the next academic session under the applicable school curriculum framework, but gave no names or approval details.
The court warned this lack of transparency could create further complications.
Therefore, the court ordered that the revised chapter must not be published until it is examined by a committee of domain experts.
The Bench directed the central government to form that committee, requiring it to include one retired judge, one distinguished academician and one eminent lawyer.
The court said,
“If NCERT wishes to teach the next generation about the judiciary, we are disappointed that no single eminent jurist is there in the committee. We are equally perturbed by the stand taken by NCERT director. If at all the chapter is re written we direct the same shall not be published unless approved by a committee of domain experts. We direct Government of India to frame a committee of domain experts which should have one former senior judge, one renowned academician and one renowned practitioner,”
The Bench ordered the expert panel to be constituted within one week and instructed that the National Judicial Academy in Bhopal be consulted in preparing materials on legal studies.
The Court also barred the Union government and state governments from involving Professor Michel Danino, Suparna Diwakar and Alok Prasanna Kumar who the NCERT director said helped draft the earlier version in any future textbook work funded by the state.
The Bench stated,
“At the outset, we have no reason to doubt that professor Michel Danino along with Ms Diwakar and Mr Alok Prasanna Kumar either does not reasonable knowledge about Indian judiciary or they deliberately, knowingly misrepresented the facts in order to project a negative image of Indian judiciary before students of class 8 who are at an impressionable age. There is no reason as to why such persons be associated in any manner with preparation of curriculum or finalisation of text book for the next generation. We direct Union, all States, all institutions recieving state funds, to disassociate them from rendering any service which would mean payment to them from public funds,”
The three may, however, seek modification of this order by approaching the Supreme Court and filing their responses.
The Court additionally ordered action against certain social media users for irresponsible conduct.
The Bench said,
“Some elements in so called social media have acted irresponsibly. We firmly believe in catching bull by its horns. We direct the Government of India to identify the platforms and the persons who have indulged in so for lawful action to be taken. The law must take its course. Even if they are hiding in this country somewhere we will not spare them,”
The matter was heard today. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Central government, informed the court that NCERT had submitted an unconditional apology.
He added that the government has instructed NCERT to review textbooks across all grades.
The SG submitted,
“Two affidavits have been filed tendering unconditional apology. An ad was also put out with apology. Central govt has also directed NCERT to review all books across all standards,”
The Chief Justice noted that, according to the NCERT Director’s affidavit, the disputed chapter has been rewritten and inquired who had undertaken that revision.
The CJI asked,
“Director NCERT says the chapter has been rewritten now..Who has rewritten this? Justice Bagchi: It says it has been duly re written. Where is they chapter and who has done that?”
The NCERT counsel responded that subject-matter experts carried out the revision.
Justice Bagchi remarked,
“If our understanding of grammar is correct, in what manner has it been rewritten and what is the content of the present chapter. After concern expressed us the director of NCERT comes up with such a laconic statement!”
SG Mehta assured the bench, “Nothing will go into the book unless vetted by the committee of domain experts.”
The Court ultimately directed the formation of an expert committee to examine the revised chapter and ordered that the earlier experts involved in drafting the chapter be blacklisted.
Summary of orders
- Central government to set up an expert committee (one retired judge, one eminent academician, one renowned lawyer) to review the revised chapter;
- The reworked chapter cannot be published without the committee’s approval;
- The three individuals involved in the earlier controversial draft are to be disassociated from any state-funded curricular work;
- The government is directed to identify and take lawful action against social media users responsible for irresponsible posts.
The textbook at the center of the controversy, Exploring Society: India and Beyond (Class 8, Vol. 2), included a passage on “corruption in the judiciary” within a chapter titled “The role of the judiciary in our society.”
As reported by media the textbook contains a section devoted to“corruption in the judiciary” within a chapter discussing“The role of the judiciary in our society.”
This chapter outlines various forms of judicial corruption and mentions significant challenges faced by the judicial system, such as a backlog of cases due to insufficient judges, complex legal procedures, and inadequate infrastructure.
The book reportedly includes a segment titled “corruption in the judiciary” within a chapter focused on “The role of the judiciary in our society.”
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal first brought the matter to the Court’s attention on February 25, at which point the bench said it had already taken cognisance of the issue.
NCERT subsequently issued a press release calling the contested passage an inadvertent lapse in judgment, stating it would withdraw that portion and revise it following appropriate consultations.
NCERT stands for National Council of Educational Research and Training. It is an autonomous organisation under the Government of India that designs and publishes school textbooks, especially for CBSE schools.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
