New Delhi:

The political row over proposal to refer to India as “Bharat” in NCERT textbooks snowballing, the man behind the proposal told NDTV today that it was only meant for students of CBSE and in classrooms. “At home they can say whatever,” retired Professor CI Issacs told NDTV in an exclusive interview.

Mr Issacs is heading the Committee for Social Sciences, which made the recommendation that has stirred up a hornet’s nest. Amid Opposition attack, NCERT (National Council of Educational Research and Training) has said no decision has been taken regarding the recommendations, made in response to move to revise the curriculum in line with the National Education Policy 2020.  

Along with replacing the name “India” with “Bharat” in textbooks, the panel has also suggested introducing “classical history”, instead of “ancient history” and including “Indian Knowledge System” in the syllabus.

Asked why this change is needed at this point, Professor Issacs said they were not “removing” anything.   

“Our mindset is toned by colonial education. Now it is a new education system. New chapter. Something new is needed, nothing traditional,” he said, citing Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s call for an update in the country’s education policy.  

Calling the change “essential”, he said it has the backing of a number of academicians who were not part of the committee.

Asked if the move does not open another Pandora’s box of opposition charges about politicization of education, Mr Issacs said, “We never think about election.  None of my team are involved in politics. Five are ladies. Housewives”.

On why this had to be included in textbooks, he said it was for the teachers.  

“Of course teachers will say India,” he said, pointing out that they were also products of colonial education, like himself, who also says India. The change, he said, can be effected in the textbooks of senior classes, starting from Class 8.  

India and Bharat are names mentioned in the very first article of the Constitution. Asked why, in that case, it could not be left to individual choice, he said the rule is applicable only to CBSE students.   

The Opposition has called the proposal an effort to “indoctrinate an entire generation”.  

Rashtriya Janata Dal’s Manoj Jha has called it a “panic reaction to INDIA bloc”. “Article 1 of the Constitution says “India that is Bharat”. The people who framed it, Babasaheb Ambedkar. Nehru, Azad, Patel – they thought something?” he said. Then holding up a copy of the Constitution, he said, “Will this be the next target?”

“This is anti-people, anti-India. This is completely wrong. I appeal to government. You can’t change the history of India,” said Congress’s DK Shivakumar.  

The Bharat-India controversy had started when the government sent out G20 invites in the name of “President of Bharat” instead of “President of India”. Later, the nameplate of PM Modi during the G20 summit in New Delhi also read “Bharat”, instead of India.

New Delhi:

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea challenging the appointment of senior IAS officer Nidhi Chhibber as the chairperson of the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), saying she has the qualification for the post.

The high court said it was not inclined to issue a writ of quo warranto as no prima facie case was made out by the petitioner and Chhibber is qualified to be appointed as the chairperson of CBSE.

Justice Chandra Dhari Singh said the petition by Independent School Federation of India was a “gross misuse of law”.

“The writ of quo warranto is issued in cases where there is a finding by this court under its writ jurisdiction that the person holding the public office does not possess the requisite qualification to be appointed to the position. The said writ is issued by the courts to prohibit the unqualified person to occupy the said position.

“In the instant case, this court is not inclined to issue a writ of quo warranto, as no prima facie case is made out by counsel for the petitioner…,” the high court said.

The court passed the order on the petition claiming that Chhibber was appointed by way of bureaucratic re-shuffle and that she did not fulfil the requisite terms and conditions for appointment to the position.

The petitioner urged the court to pass a direction for production of the entire record pertaining to the eligibility and experience of the officer.

In pursuance to the court’s direction, Chhibber filed documents relating to her qualification for the purpose of appointment as CBSE chairperson and also referred to certain documents to show that she has worked in the Education department for 48 months in the cadre of Director.

Her lawyer submitted that the allegations made in the petition qua her qualification that she does not possess the minimum experience of three years in the field of education, are incorrect.

After perusing the documents, the court said it was prima facie not satisfied with the averments made in the petition and held that the executive record showed that the officer was eligible for the post.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)