# Mrs. Varshatai w/o. Sh. Sanjay bagade v. The State of Maharashtra through its Secretary, Ministry of

- **Citation:** 2025 INSC 486
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 2025-04-15
- **Bench:** Sudhanshu Dhulia, K. Vinod Chandran
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/mrs-varshatai-w-o-sh-sanjay-bagade-v-the-state-of-maharashtra-through-its-38783
- **Pages:** 26

## Headnote

Issue arose whether use of Urdu on a signboard of the building of
Municipal Council in Maharashtra is violative of any provision of law.
Headnotes†
Maharashtra Municipal Council, Nagar Panchayats and
Industrial Township Act, 1965 - ss.308, 318 - Maharashtra
Local Authorities (Official Languages) Act, 2022 - Use of
Urdu on the signboard of the Municipality in Maharashtra -
Board displaying the name of the Municipal Council on its
building in Marathi at the top with translation below in Urdu
language - Challenged by the appellant-former member of
Municipal Council - High Court held that 2022 Act does not
prohibit the use of an additional language which is Urdu
in the instant case, on the signboard of Municipal Council
building - Interference with:
Held: Not called for - High Court was right in its conclusion -
There is no prohibition on using any other language, especially
one included in the VIIIth Schedule of the Constitution - Enactment
recognizes that language essentially is a tool of communication
which cannot be condemned, when this language is being used
by a community or group - Marathi and Urdu occupy the same
position under Schedule VIII of the Constitution - Purpose for use
of Urdu is merely communication - 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-Marathi, at least on the signboard
* Author
626
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
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 - Display of
an additional language cannot, by itself, be said to be in violation
of the provisions of the 2022 Act - No prohibition on the use of
Urdu under the 2022 Act or in any provision of law - Case of the
appellant based on a misconception of law. [Paras 15, 19, 46, 49]
Language - Urdu language - Usage and recognition - Prejudice
against Urdu - Elucidation:
Held: Urdu 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 - Urdu was the sixth
most spoken scheduled language of India - It is spoken by at
least a part of the population in all States and Union Territories,
except the north-eastern States - Prejudice against Urdu, arises
from the misconception that Urdu is alien to India, however,
it is incorrect as Urdu, like Marathi and Hindi, is Indo-Aryan
language - Urdu language was born in this land, it developed
and flourished in India and attained ever greater refinement and
became the language of choice for many acclaimed poets - Even
today, language used by the common people of the country is
replete with words of Urdu language - One cannot have a dayto-day conversation in Hindi without using words of Urdu or words
derived from Urdu - Urdu words have a heavy influence on Court
parlance, both in criminal and civil law - Influence of Urdu writ
large in the language of Indian courts - Urdu language has been
adopted by many States and Union Territories in India as the
second official language in exercise of powers conferred by Art.
345 - Furthermore, Urdu and Hindi are not two languages, but
is one language, both having broad similarities - Constitution of
India. [Paras 18, 20, 27, 37-39, 41]
Language - Language and religion - Primary purpose of a
language - Explanation:
Held: 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 - Language is culture - Language is the
yardstick to measure the civilizational march of a community and
its people - Primary purpose of a language will always remain
communication - Lan

## Text

_Characters 0–39,992 of 55,949. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39992 for what follows._

[2025] 4 S.C.R. 625 : 2025 INSC 486
Mrs. Varshatai w/o. Sh. Sanjay bagade
v.
The State of Maharashtra through its Secretary, Ministry of
Law and Judiciary, Mantralaya, Mumbai and Ors. Etc.
(Civil Appeal No(s). 5187-5188 of 2025)
15 April 2025
[Sudhanshu Dhulia* and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Issue arose whether use of Urdu on a signboard of the building of
Municipal Council in Maharashtra is violative of any provision of law.
Headnotes†
Maharashtra Municipal Council, Nagar Panchayats and
Industrial Township Act, 1965 - ss.308, 318 - Maharashtra
Local Authorities (Official Languages) Act, 2022 - Use of
Urdu on the signboard of the Municipality in Maharashtra -
Board displaying the name of the Municipal Council on its
building in Marathi at the top with translation below in Urdu
language - Challenged by the appellant-former member of
Municipal Council - High Court held that 2022 Act does not
prohibit the use of an additional language which is Urdu
in the instant case, on the signboard of Municipal Council
building - Interference with:
Held: Not called for - High Court was right in its conclusion -
There is no prohibition on using any other language, especially
one included in the VIIIth Schedule of the Constitution - Enactment
recognizes that language essentially is a tool of communication
which cannot be condemned, when this language is being used
by a community or group - Marathi and Urdu occupy the same
position under Schedule VIII of the Constitution - Purpose for use
of Urdu is merely communication - 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-Marathi, at least on the signboard
* Author
626
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
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 - Display of
an additional language cannot, by itself, be said to be in violation
of the provisions of the 2022 Act - No prohibition on the use of
Urdu under the 2022 Act or in any provision of law - Case of the
appellant based on a misconception of law. [Paras 15, 19, 46, 49]
Language - Urdu language - Usage and recognition - Prejudice
against Urdu - Elucidation:
Held: Urdu 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 - Urdu was the sixth
most spoken scheduled language of India - It is spoken by at
least a part of the population in all States and Union Territories,
except the north-eastern States - Prejudice against Urdu, arises
from the misconception that Urdu is alien to India, however,
it is incorrect as Urdu, like Marathi and Hindi, is Indo-Aryan
language - Urdu language was born in this land, it developed
and flourished in India and attained ever greater refinement and
became the language of choice for many acclaimed poets - Even
today, language used by the common people of the country is
replete with words of Urdu language - One cannot have a dayto-day conversation in Hindi without using words of Urdu or words
derived from Urdu - Urdu words have a heavy influence on Court
parlance, both in criminal and civil law - Influence of Urdu writ
large in the language of Indian courts - Urdu language has been
adopted by many States and Union Territories in India as the
second official language in exercise of powers conferred by Art.
345 - Furthermore, Urdu and Hindi are not two languages, but
is one language, both having broad similarities - Constitution of
India. [Paras 18, 20, 27, 37-39, 41]
Language - Language and religion - Primary purpose of a
language - Explanation:
Held: 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 - Language is culture - Language is the
yardstick to measure the civilizational march of a community and
its people - Primary purpose of a language will always remain
communication - Language as a representative of culture makes
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
627
Mrs. Varshatai w/o. Sh. Sanjay bagade v. The State of Maharashtra through
its Secretary, Ministry of Law and Judiciary, Mantralaya, Mumbai and Ors. Etc.
discussion on it both sensitive and delicate - People of India have
taken great pain in resolving the language issue at the Centre,
which is the unique achievement considering the linguistic diversity
of the nation - 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 - Misconceptions, perhaps
even the prejudices against a language have to be courageously
and truthfully tested against the reality, which is the great diversity
of the nation. [Paras 17-21, 46, 48]
Constitution of India - Schedule VIII - Arts. 345, 351 - Power
of the State to adopt official languages - States with more
than one official language - Stated. [Paras 21-26]
Case Law Cited
Uttar Pradesh Hindi Sahitya Sammelan v. State of Uttar Pradesh
[2014] 13 SCR 675 : (2014) 9 SCC 716 - referred to.
Books and Periodicals Cited
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, pp 274, pp 277-278, pp 272; A.M ZAIDI, THE
ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS-VOL-8:
1921-1924: INDIA AT THE CROSS-ROADS at p. 635; A.M ZAIDI,
THE ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESSVOL-10: 1930-1935: THE BATTLE FOR SWARAJ at p. 442;
Jawaharlal Nehru, The Unity of India, Foreign Affairs, Volume 16,
No. 2 (Jan. 1938), pp. 231-243; Constituent Assembly Debates,
Vol IX p. 1415; AMRIT RAI, A HOUSE DIVIDED: THE ORIGIN
AND DEVELOPMENT OF HINDI/HINDAVI, Oxford University Press
(1984) p. 3, 6, 8-13, 285-289; Gyan Chand Jain, Urdu Hindi ya
Hindustani, Hindustani Zaban (Jan-April, 1974); Danial Latifi, Urdu
in UP, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 36, No.7 (Feb 17-23,
2001), pp. 533-535 - referred to.
List of Acts
Constitution of India; Maharashtra Municipal Council, Nagar
Panchayats and Industrial Township Act, 1965; Maharashtra Local
Authorities (Official Languages) Act, 2022; Uttar Pradesh Official
Languages Act, 1951.
628
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
List of Keywords
Sign board of Municipal Council; Urdu language; Linguistic
diversity; Mother tongues; Part XVII of the Constitution; Language
issue; Cocanada Session of 1923; Congress Constitution of 1934;
Hindustani; Indian National Pact; Constituent Assembly's Rules of
Procedure; Use of Urdu on signboard of the building of Municipal
Council in Maharashtra; Language, a tool of communication;
Marathi and Urdu; Display of additional language; Language and
religion; Primary purpose of language; Language is not religion;
Prejudice against Urdu; Ganga-jamuni tahzeeb; Hindustani tahzeeb;
Composite cultural ethos; Indo-Aryan language.
Case Arising From
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No(s). 5187-5188
of 2025
From the Judgment and Order dated 10.04.2024 of the High Court
of Judicature at Bombay at Nagpur in WP No. 1568 of 2023 &
WP No. 2703 of 2023
Appearances for Parties
Advs. for the Appellant:
Kunal Cheema, Satyajeetsingh Raghuwanshi, Raghav Deshpande,
Shubham Chandankhede, Ms. Kirti, Ms. Saloni Shukla.
Advs. for the Respondents:
Ms. Preet S. Phanse, Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Aaditya Aniruddha
Pande.
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
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 considerate
towards all mankind.'
- Mouloud Benzadi
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
629
Mrs. Varshatai w/o. Sh. Sanjay bagade v. The State of Maharashtra through
its Secretary, Ministry of Law and Judiciary, Mantralaya, Mumbai and Ors. Etc.
1.
Leave granted.
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 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.
630
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
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 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 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:
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
631
Mrs. Varshatai w/o. Sh. Sanjay bagade v. The State of Maharashtra through
its Secretary, Ministry of Law and Judiciary, Mantralaya, Mumbai and Ors. Etc.
Old
New
"Section 308. Powers to
suspend execution of orders
and resolutions of Council on
certain grounds-
(1) If, in the opinion of the
Collector, the execution of
any order or resolution of a
Council, or the doing of anything
which is about to be done or is
being done by or on behalf of a
Council, is causing or is likely
to cause injury or annoyance
to the public or is against public
interest or to lead a breach of
the peace or is unlawful, he
may by order in writing under his
signature suspend the execution
or prohibit the doing thereof."
"Section 308. Powers to
suspend execution of orders
and resolutions of Council on
certain grounds-
(1) If the Council or any
Committee resolves contrary
to provisions of this Act or any
other law, or rules, bye-laws, or
the Government directions, then
it shall be the responsibility of
the Chief Officer to send it to
the Collector for suspension of
execution of such a resolution
or prohibition of doing thereof,
within the period of three days
from the receipt of the said
resolution. The Collector shall
decide on such proposal 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 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.
632
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
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 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)
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
633
Mrs. Varshatai w/o. Sh. Sanjay bagade v. The State of Maharashtra through
its Secretary, Ministry of Law and Judiciary, Mantralaya, Mumbai and Ors. Etc.
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."
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,
634
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
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 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 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.
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
635
Mrs. Varshatai w/o. Sh. Sanjay bagade v. The State of Maharashtra through
its Secretary, Ministry of Law and Judiciary, Mantralaya, Mumbai and Ors. Etc.
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.
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
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
636
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
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 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 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."
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.
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
637
Mrs. Varshatai w/o. Sh. Sanjay bagade v. The State of Maharashtra through
its Secretary, Ministry of Law and Judiciary, Mantralaya, Mumbai and Ors. Etc.
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. 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 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:
638
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
"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 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.
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
639
Mrs. Varshatai w/o. Sh. Sanjay bagade v. The State of Maharashtra through
its Secretary, Ministry of Law and Judiciary, Mantralaya, Mumbai and Ors. Etc.
S.
No.
State/Union
Territory
Official
Language(s)
Other official
language(s)/
language(s)
permitted to be
used for official
purposes
1.
Andhra Pradesh
Telugu
Urdu, English
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
Pradesh
Hindi
Sanskrit
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
(Meiteilon)
English
14.
Meghalaya
English
Khasi, Garo
15.
Mizoram
Mizo
English
640
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
16.
Odisha
Odia
English
17.
Punjab
Punjabi
English
18.
Rajasthan
Hindi
English
19.
Sikkim
English, Nepali,
Bhutia, Lepcha
Limbu, Sunuwar,
Tamang, Bhujel,
Newari, Rai,
Gurung, Mangar,
Sherpa
20.
Tamil Nadu
Tamil
English
21.
Telangana
Telugu
Urdu, English
22.
Tripura
Bengali,
Kokborok
English
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
Nicobar Islands
Hindi
English
27.
Dadra and Nagar
Haveli and
Daman and Diu
Hindi, English
Gujarati
28.
Delhi
Hindi
Urdu, Punjabi,
English
29.
Jammu and
Kashmir
Kashmiri,
Dogri, Hindi,
Urdu, English
30.
Ladakh
Hindi
English
31.
Puducherry
Tamil
Telugu, Malayalam,
English
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
641
Mrs. Varshatai w/o. Sh. Sanjay bagade v. The State of Maharashtra through
its Secretary, Ministry of Law and Judiciary, Mantralaya, Mumbai and Ors. Etc.
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.
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 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
3
A.M Zaidi, The Encyclopaedia of Indian National Congress-Vol-8: 1921-1924: india at the cross-roads at
p. 635.
4
The Indian National Pact, Clause 3.
642
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
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.
(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
5
A.M Zaidi, The Encyclopaedia of Indian National Congress-Vol-10: 1930-1935: The Battle for swaraj at
p. 442.
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
643
Mrs. Varshatai w/o. Sh. Sanjay bagade v. The State of Maharashtra through
its Secretary, Ministry of Law and Judiciary, Mantralaya, Mumbai and Ors. Etc.
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 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 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
6
Jawaharlal Nehru, The Unity of India, Foreign Affairs, Volume 16, No.