SC Imposes Life Ban on Prof Michel Danino Over NCERT Judiciary Chapter Controversy
The Supreme Court has barred three scholars from government projects following a ruling that their textbook content damaged the judiciary's image among students.
Introduction
In a significant ruling concerning educational standards and judicial integrity, the Supreme Court of India has imposed a life ban on three academics. The bench, comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, held these individuals responsible for projecting a negative image of the judiciary. This decision stems from their involvement in drafting a specific chapter for the Class 8 NCERT textbook that referenced corruption within the judicial system. The court emphasized that students at this impressionable age should not be misled regarding institutional functioning.
The Bench's Directive and Academic Accountability
The Supreme Court ordered that the Union government immediately identify the social media entities responsible for endorsing the objectionable content to malign the judiciary. Consequently, a strict directive was issued barring the three academics from any assignment with government or government-aided institutions. Prof Michel Danino chaired the Textbook Development Team (TDT), while Suparna Diwakar and Alok Prasanna Kumar were identified as the drafters of the controversial chapter titled The Role of Judiciary in Our Society. The bench noted that these individuals either lacked reasonable knowledge about the judiciary or deliberately misrepresented facts. In response, NCERT director Dinesh Prasad Saklani and school education secretary Sanjay Kumar tendered an unconditional apology for the major and unpardonable lapse. They promised to implement preventive steps against future occurrences of such lapses in educational materials.
Social Media Mischief and Government Action
The court expressed strong disapproval regarding social media platforms and individuals who defended the reference to alleged corruption after the initial ban on textbook circulation. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta remarked that Newton’s law has been redefined by social media, suggesting that for every action, there is now a disproportionate and idiotic overreaction. The bench directed the Union government to catch the bull by its horns regarding these mischief mongers. Authorities are tasked with furnishing full details of the sites and persons running them so that suitable legal action can be taken. While the court acknowledged that objective criticism is permitted, it firmly believes in taking the law’s course against those spreading misinformation.
Future Curriculum Standards and Expert Committees
Looking toward future educational frameworks, the bench clarified that its orders do not prevent legitimate criticism of institutional deficiencies. However, they disapproved of NCERT’s stance that the controversial chapter had been duly rewritten without proper oversight. The National Syllabus and Teaching Learning Material Committee was noted to lack a jurist or person from the legal field during the draft approval process. To rectify this, the bench mandated that any revised version must be approved by a committee of domain experts including a former judge, an eminent academician, and a renowned law practitioner. Furthermore, the Union government is requested to constitute a committee within one week to associate the National Judicial Academy, Bhopal, for finalizing legal studies curriculum for Class 8 and higher classes.
