THE JHARKHAND STORY DESK
New Delhi, May 22: The Supreme Court on Friday recalled its earlier order barring three academics associated with a controversial NCERT Class 8 chapter on the judiciary from participating in academic projects of Central and State universities and public educational institutions.
The apex court also removed its adverse observation that the academics had “deliberately and knowingly misrepresented facts” to project a negative image of the judiciary before students.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi passed the order while hearing applications filed by Professor Michel Danino, Suparna Diwakar and Alok Prasanna Kumar seeking recall of the March 11 order.
SC Says Governments Can Decide Independently
While reiterating that the chapter was “wholly undesirable,” the court said the Union government, States and other authorities are free to independently decide whether to associate the academics with future academic work.
“Owing to the explanation given by the applicants, we deem it appropriate to modify para 8 of the order and recall the direction given to the Government of India/State/UT/Institutions to disassociate the three applicants from academic activities,” the bench observed.
Academics Deny Malicious Intent
Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for Professor Michel Danino, argued that the earlier order was passed without hearing the academics. He said the chapter was not an individual work but a collective academic exercise and sought suspension of the adverse observations, citing their far-reaching impact.
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing Alok Prasanna Kumar, argued that discussions on judicial corruption and delays were part of a broader effort to give students a realistic understanding of institutions. He said there was no malicious intent behind the content.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi, however, observed that the chapter appeared to present corruption as a problem unique to the judiciary without adequately highlighting its positive contributions, including legal services.
Senior Advocate J Sai Deepak, appearing for Suparna Diwakar, submitted that his client had only a limited role and said the ban would adversely affect their livelihood.
Centre Opposes Future Association
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the court that the Union government had already decided not to associate the three academics with future projects. He also disputed the claim that the chapter was collectively approved by all members of the concerned committee.
During the hearing, the Solicitor General also raised objections to a cartoon in a Class 11 textbook. The bench said the issue could be examined by the expert committee headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice Indu Malhotra, constituted to review the judiciary chapter.
Background of the Case
The Supreme Court had earlier taken suo motu cognisance of the NCERT chapter discussing corruption in the judiciary and judicial delays. In February, the court ordered a complete ban on the textbooks containing the chapter and directed its removal.
