The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the government to remove the PDF version of Class 8 NCERT textbook that are available online. Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said the court wants to identify the person responsible for publishing a chapter that refers to corruption in the judiciary. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the court that the Centre supports the judiciary and will take any steps the Supreme Court asks for.
SC wraps Centre, NCERT
The Supreme Court on Thursday continued to strongly criticise NCERT over its new Class 8 Social Science textbook. Chief Justice of India Surya Kant expressed serious concern about a chapter that talks about corruption and case backlogs in the judiciary. He said the content appeared to be part of a carefully planned attempt to damage the image of the courts.
“It seems to us that there is a calculated move to undermine the institutional authority and demean the dignity of the judiciary. This, if allowed to go unchecked will erode the sanctity of judicial office in estimation of public at large and within impressionable minds of youth,” CJI Kant said.
For the second day in a row, the Chief Justice pulled up the National Council of Educational Research and Training over the issue.
Meanwhile, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta offered a full and unconditional apology on behalf of the Education Ministry.
What is the NCERT textbook issue?
The matter relates to a Class 8 Social Science textbook brought out by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). A section in the book has led to controversy because it includes content about corruption in the judiciary. The Supreme Court took up the issue on its own.
The passage appears in a chapter titled “The Role of the Judiciary in Our Society.”
The issue was brought to the court’s notice on Wednesday by senior lawyer Kapil Sibal before a bench led by the Chief Justice. During the hearing, the court said it had already taken note of the matter.
Supreme Court’s sharp criticism
Chief Justice Surya Kant’s Bench made it clear that it would not consider the controversy as a simple mistake by an editor. Instead, it stated it wanted a comprehensive investigation to find out who was to blame. The CJI remarked during the hearing, “Heads must roll!” We won’t close the case,” as quoted by Bar and Bench.
The court also made it clear that its involvement was not meant to silence criticism, saying, “The need for judicial intervention is not to stifle criticism but to protect the integrity of education.” The Chief Justice also questioned how sincere the apology was that was sent out in a press release. He said that the court would look into “whether the apology has been tendered genuinely or it’s merely a way to wriggle out of the consequences when a substantial irreversible damage is done” at the right time.
Justice Bagchi pointed out how far the information had spread online and called the portrayal “extremely lopsided.” He also said that “take down orders also have to be issued” because of how far it had spread in the digital world. The Bench further stated, “We tell you not to teach based on the physical or digital copy of the subject book,” according to Bar and Bench.