Eroding Federalism in Education Funding

Overview

The Union Government’s decision to withhold Tamil Nadu’s central share of Samagra Shiksha funds due to its rejection of the National Education Policy (NEP 2020) raises concerns about federalism and state autonomy in education.

This move not only affects Tamil Nadu’s education system but also sets a precedent for coercive central policies in areas that fall under the Concurrent List of the Constitution.

Relevance:
GS-02 (Indian Polity)

Key Dimensions of the Article:

What is the Issue?
What is National Education Policy (NEP)?
Why is it a Concern?
Constitutional and Political Implications
The Need for a Flexible Approach

What is the Issue?

The Union Government has withheld ₹2,152 crore in education funds for Tamil Nadu under the Samagra Shiksha scheme because the State refuses to implement NEP 2020.
The Central Government has linked funding to the adoption of NEP in “letter and spirit”, including the three-language formula, which Tamil Nadu has historically opposed.

What is National Education Policy (NEP)?

The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 is India’s first major education reform of the 21st century, replacing the 1986 National Policy on Education (NPE). It provides a new vision for education, from primary schooling to higher education, including technical courses.
Key Features of NEP 2020
- Drafted by Experts: The policy was prepared under the leadership of Dr. K. Kasturirangan, with guidance from the Ministry of Education.
- Comprehensive Reforms: It covers all levels of education, ensuring a modern and flexible learning system.
- Five Core Principles: The policy is based on:
  - Access (education for all)
  - Equity (inclusive education)
  - Quality (better learning outcomes)
  - Affordability (cost-effective education)
  - Accountability (effective governance)
- Alignment with Global Goals: It aligns with the United Nations’ 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), aiming to transform India into a global knowledge hub.
- Student-Centric Learning: NEP 2020 promotes a flexible, multidisciplinary approach, helping students explore their unique talents and skills.

Why is it a concern?

Erosion of Federalism: Education falls under the Concurrent List, meaning both the Centre and States have a say in policy formulation. Forcing NEP compliance undermines cooperative federalism.
Language Imposition: Tamil Nadu has followed a two-language policy (Tamil and English) since 1968, rejecting the three-language formula. The Centre’s insistence on it disregards linguistic autonomy.
Impact on Education Infrastructure: The withheld funds have affected 40 lakh students and 32,000 staff members, creating financial strain on schools.

Constitutional and Political Implications

The Union Education Minister has accused Tamil Nadu’s leadership of being politically motivated and suggested that the state must adhere to the “rule of law,” implying non-compliance with the Constitution.
Tamil Nadu’s Chief Minister has questioned the constitutional basis for enforcing the three-language policy and warned against coercion.
The move sets a dangerous precedent where the Centre can condition funds on policy compliance, reducing States’ autonomy.

The Need for a Flexible Approach

Policies concerning the Concurrent List should involve dialogue and adaptability rather than rigid enforcement.
Linking Samagra Shiksha and PM SHRI funding to NEP compliance is counterproductive. Instead, funding should be tied to general educational performance indicators.
Tamil Nadu should expedite its State Education Policy as a viable alternative to the NEP to ensure academic continuity and stability.

Conclusion

The Centre’s approach risks weakening cooperative federalism and fostering resentment among states. A pragmatic solution would be to delink central education funding from NEP compliance and allow states the flexibility to develop their own education policies while ensuring quality education for all.