The Supreme Court of India has officially closed proceedings on a suo motu case concerning a contentious section in a now-retracted Class 8 Social Science textbook published by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). The textbook, which included content on ‘corruption in the judiciary,’ sparked significant controversy earlier this year.
Court Proceedings and Rulings
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana convened on Tuesday to clarify portions of a previous order and to formally conclude the matter. The issue originated in February following a news report on the textbook titled Exploring Society: India and Beyond (Class 8, Vol. 2). The section in question detailed ‘corruption at various levels of the judiciary’ and cited ‘massive backlog of cases’ due to ‘a lack of an adequate number of judges, complicated legal procedures, and poor infrastructure’ as challenges facing the judicial system.
The Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance, noting that the chapter’s content was derogatory to the judiciary’s dignity. Following this, NCERT acknowledged the problematic nature of the content, attributing it to an unintentional oversight, and subsequently withdrew the textbook from circulation.
Impact on Academicians
Attention then shifted to the three academicians responsible for drafting the chapter: Professor Michel Danino, Suparna Diwakar, and Alok Prasanna Kumar. The Court initially issued a directive for educational institutions to sever ties with these experts. However, this directive was contested, and the academicians argued that they were penalized without due opportunity to defend themselves. The Supreme Court later reversed its blacklisting order and retracted its earlier accusation that these experts had willfully misrepresented facts.
Clarifications on the Court’s Order
During the proceedings, Senior Advocate Arvind Datar, representing the academicians, requested further clarification on the Supreme Court’s May 22 order. He highlighted Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s previous submission, which indicated that the curriculum had not been presented to all necessary NCERT committees. Datar contended that this did not accurately reflect the procedural process, as the textbook had indeed been reviewed by the appropriate committees.
SG Mehta clarified that his comment was not an accusation against the academicians but a factual statement regarding the procedural oversight. The Supreme Court then clarified that these statements were submissions from NCERT and not observations or orders from the Court itself. With these clarifications, the Court formally closed the case.
The closure of the case represents the conclusion of legal proceedings over the controversial textbook chapter, with the Supreme Court emphasizing that its earlier statements were not judicial findings but rather recorded submissions.
