Reference Article: The Hindu
UPSC Relevance:
– GS Paper II: Centre-State Relations, Federalism, Education Policy, Role of the Judiciary in Maintaining Constitutional Balance, Government Schemes and Policy Implementation
– Essay Paper: Cooperative Federalism and Education Reforms in India
Kerala’s recent decision to sign the Prime Minister Schools for Rising India (PM SHRI) scheme marked a significant policy shift, surprising many observers given its long-standing opposition to the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. The PM SHRI scheme aims to upgrade and brand 14,500 schools nationwide as model institutions aligned with NEP-2020. Kerala, along with Tamil Nadu and West Bengal, had opposed the NEP, contending that it encroached on the State’s powers under the Concurrent List and sought to infuse education with communal and unscientific content.
The move triggered political turmoil within the ruling Left Democratic Front (LDF), particularly between its key allies — the Communist Party of India (CPI) and the Communist Party of India (Marxist) [CPI(M)] — leading to a temporary freeze on the State’s participation in the scheme.
Education and Federal Policy Dynamics
Kerala’s educational performance stands out nationally — with a near-universal gross enrolment ratio, high retention rates, and strong learning outcomes supported by modern school infrastructure. The State has already achieved or surpassed many of the targets envisioned under NEP-2020, making PM SHRI appear as a symbolic or cosmetic exercise rather than a meaningful upgrade.
However, participation in PM SHRI would require Kerala to align with NEP provisions such as the integration of ‘Indian Knowledge Systems’, widely criticised for promoting pseudoscientific and ideologically driven content. This ideological concern forms the core of Kerala’s and Tamil Nadu’s opposition to NEP-2020.
The broader controversy also reveals how financial coercion is being used as a tool of policy enforcement. The Centre has withheld funds under Samagra Shiksha to push States toward accepting PM SHRI and NEP-2020. This approach effectively penalises States for dissent, undermining the spirit of cooperative federalism enshrined in the Constitution.
Judicial and Federal Implications
Tamil Nadu has already approached the Supreme Court against the Centre’s decision to link Samagra Shiksha funding with NEP-2020 compliance. However, the case has not been accorded the urgency such a constitutional issue demands. Kerala, facing similar fiscal pressure, is now considering legal redress to safeguard its share of central educational grants.
This situation raises critical questions about India’s evolving federal structure, where the Centre’s control over financial transfers can weaken State autonomy. In such circumstances, the judiciary’s proactive intervention becomes essential to ensure that federal cooperation is not reduced to conditional compliance.
Key Issues and Analysis
| Issue Area | Key Points |
|---|---|
| Federal Tension | Centre’s use of financial leverage under Samagra Shiksha to enforce NEP compliance challenges cooperative federalism. |
| State Autonomy | Education is a Concurrent subject; States like Kerala and Tamil Nadu assert that NEP-2020 encroaches upon their legislative domain. |
| Ideological Concerns | Integration of ‘Indian Knowledge Systems’ seen as an attempt to introduce unscientific or communal elements into curricula. |
| Administrative Impact | Withheld funds caused salary delays, pushing Kerala to sign PM SHRI for pragmatic reasons despite ideological opposition. |
| Judicial Oversight | Courts must safeguard the federal balance by ensuring equitable fund distribution and respect for State autonomy. |
Way Forward
- Judicial Review: The Supreme Court must adjudicate on the constitutionality of conditional fund allocation to protect State autonomy.
- Decentralized Policy Adaptation: States should be allowed flexibility in implementing educational reforms consistent with local needs and constitutional values.
- Fiscal Fairness: The Centre should delink essential grants like Samagra Shiksha from policy compliance to avoid fiscal coercion.
- Transparent Dialogue: Cooperative consultation through the Inter-State Council or NITI Aayog could prevent policy confrontations.
- Ideological Neutrality in Education: Any national education framework must uphold scientific temper, inclusivity, and constitutional morality.
Analytical Perspective
The Kerala-PM SHRI episode epitomizes the delicate balance between fiscal dependence and policy autonomy in India’s quasi-federal system. While the Centre’s goal of uniform quality education is legitimate, coercive conditionality undermines the principle of cooperative governance.
Kerala’s experience shows that fiscal centralization without policy flexibility risks alienating high-performing States and deepening political fault lines. Education policy must therefore evolve through dialogue and consensus, not through compulsion.
Conclusion
Kerala’s temporary suspension of PM SHRI participation reflects a broader struggle for federal integrity in India’s education sector. As States resist the imposition of ideologically tinted national frameworks, constitutional federalism and State autonomy emerge as central themes in the governance discourse. The judiciary’s role in reinforcing these principles will be pivotal in determining whether India’s education reforms remain inclusive, equitable, and constitutionally grounded.
UPSC Mains Practice Question:
The PM SHRI controversy in Kerala highlights the tension between educational uniformity and federal autonomy. Critically examine the implications of Centre-State relations in the implementation of NEP-2020.”
