The Eighth Schedule of the Indian Constitution: how language inclusion creates exclusion

Eighth Schedule of the Indian Constitution

The Eighth Schedule was formulated as a listing of languages that would contribute to enriching Hindi. Birla explains that M Satyanarayana, a member of the Constituent Assembly, initially compiled a list of 12 languages for inclusion in the Schedule, with the approval of Jawaharlal Nehru. Nehru subsequently added Urdu to the list, highlighting its role in representing India’s Indo-Islamic heritage.

K.M. Munshi (Source: Wikipedia)

In addition, K M Munshi, a noted nationalist and member of the Constituent Assembly, advocated for the inclusion of Sanskrit, citing its enduring civilisational significance across the Indian subcontinent and its influence on many major Indian languages.

Over time, the Schedule expanded beyond the original 14 languages to include Bodo, Dogri, Konkani, Maithili, Manipuri, Nepali, Santhali, and Sindhi, bringing the total to 22. Sindhi was added through the 21st Amendment Act of 1967; Konkani, Manipuri, and Nepali were added by the 71st Amendment Act of 1992; and Bodo, Dogri, Maithili, and Santhali were included through the 92nd Amendment Act of 2003.

According to the Constitution, the inclusion of regional languages in the Eighth Schedule serves two primary purposes: to draw members representing these languages to form a Committee to review the use of Hindi as the Official Language and for Hindi to draw from these languages for its development. On this, Birla concludes, “The background for including the Eighth Schedule when India became a Republic includes both anti-colonial nationalism and regional language movements since the late 1800s.”

How languages are selected for the Eighth Schedule

According to Indian linguist Bhadriraju Krishnamurti in his essay Official Language Policies with Special Reference to the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution of India, the Constituent Assembly did not lay down any formal criteria for the inclusion of languages in the Eighth Schedule.  Instead, as Birla notes, their discussions revolved around three central linguistic issues: the debate over whether Hindi or Hindustani should serve as the official language, and the mechanisms to promote the selected language; the planned withdrawal of English as an associate official language after a 15-year transition period ending in 1965; and the creation of constitutional safeguards to protect and promote India’s major regional and minority languages.

Implicitly, however, Krishnamurti determined that the considerations included languages with literary traditions and established scripts, those spoken by large populations in contiguous regions, languages added as political concessions—as in the case of Sindhi and Nepali—and those recognised as official languages in newly formed states, such as Konkani and Manipuri.

In The Eighth Schedule: A Linguistic Perspective, professor and linguist D P Pattanayak observes: “What is of interest is the fact that Hindi is sought to be developed as the national language drawing features from the languages of the Eighth Schedule.”

Interestingly, English — despite its widespread use and role in official spheres — has never been part of the Eighth Schedule. A proposal for its inclusion was made in 1959, but it was firmly opposed by Jawaharlal Nehru. As cited in the Official Languages Amendment Bill and Resolution, 1967, Nehru remarked: “It was obviously a wrong thing to do, as English is not an Indian language.” Birla asserts that English was deliberately excluded from the Schedule due to nationalistic sentiments that associated it with British colonial dominance.

“Another guiding principle in the selection process,” according to Birla, “was the languages’ suitability for administrative, communicative, cultural, educational, scientific, and technological purposes.” She explains that this criterion led to the exclusion of many of India’s indigenous tribal languages from the original fourteen, as they were considered insufficiently developed for governmental and administrative use.

Birla elaborates on the efforts made by previous committees to define clearer criteria for inclusion. The Ashok Pahwa Committee (1996) proposed that a language could be included in the Eighth Schedule if: it was an official language in at least one state; a significant portion of a state’s population spoke it; it was an independent language rather than a dialect or derivative of one already listed; it had recognition from the Sahitya Akademi; and it possessed a well-defined and developed literary tradition.

Later, the Sitakant Mohapatra Committee (2003) added more specific benchmarks. It recommended that a language must have at least 5 million speakers, based on census data from the previous three decades, to qualify as being spoken by a substantial population. The language should also serve as a medium of instruction at least up to the secondary level, preferably extending to the university level. Additionally, its script—whether indigenous, borrowed from a dominant regional language, or using Devanagari—should have been in established use for at least 50 years. The committee also stressed that the Sahitya Akademi must actively support literary activities in the language, among other criteria.

Sitakant Mahpatra (Source: Wikipedia)

Despite these efforts, no official standard has been adopted. As Birla writes, “…at this moment there is no fixed criteria for inclusion.” The Ministry of Home Affairs confirms this position: “As the evolution of dialects and languages is dynamic, influenced by socio-eco-political developments, it is difficult to fix any criterion for languages, whether to distinguish them from dialects, or for inclusion in the Eighth Schedule to the Constitution of India.”

The ministry adds, “The Government is conscious of the sentiments and requirements for inclusion of other languages in the Eighth Schedule and will examine the requests keeping in mind these sentiments, and other considerations such as evolution of dialects into language, widespread use of a language, etc.”

Perceived benefits  

The perceived benefits of being listed in the Eighth Schedule are both symbolic and practical. Krishnamurti, drawing from his observations of the functioning of the Eighth Schedule since 1950, outlines several concrete advantages. He notes that languages listed in the Eighth Schedule are eligible for translation services in Parliament if spoken by any member, they are included as options in the Indian language paper for the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) examinations, and receive developmental funds from the central government, as language falls under the Concurrent List. Additionally, mass media outlets facilitate the broadcasting of content in scheduled languages, further reinforcing their public presence and accessibility.

Yet, some scholars offer a more critical view. Indian linguists R S Gupta and Anvita Abbi, in their essay The Eighth Schedule: A Critical Introduction, argue that the tangible benefits derived from being in the Schedule may be relatively limited, describing them as “marginal—a few million rupees here and there by way of grants of development.” However, they emphasise the more indirect and symbolic benefits, noting that a language listed in the Eighth Schedule is the most eligible candidate for being employed as state language and as the medium of instruction and examination. Such inclusion, they argue, not only confers actual power and prestige, but also constructs an appearance of power and prestige.

Birla, in this context, notes that calls for inclusion in the Eighth Schedule have often been grounded in the argument that newly proposed languages exhibit sufficient development and possess substantial speaker populations, thereby justifying the same recognition and benefits afforded to previously listed languages. “These demands mainly come from the idea that regional language identity serves as a political identity, connecting language, region, and culture historically and culturally,” she says.

Notably, the Sahitya Akademi, a government-sponsored autonomous agency, was established in the early 1950s to promote literature in the original 14 Scheduled languages and English. Over time, several additional literary languages were brought under the Akademi’s purview. Scholars suggest that such recognition increases a language’s likelihood of being included in the Eighth Schedule.

Sahitya Akademi Award (Source: Wikipedia)

However, Gupta and Abbi caution that while listed languages are empowered, unlisted languages are increasingly marginalised. The 22 languages currently on the Schedule, they argue, “have gained power, recognition and prestige, while others have been left to languish under the yoke of such ‘demeaning’ labels as ‘dialects,’ ‘minor languages,’ and ‘tribal language.’” They further identify the politicisation of the language issue as a direct consequence of the Eighth Schedule.

Several other scholars echo this concern, arguing that the Eighth Schedule tends to submerge over 1,600 other languages under dominant, mainstream tongues. While the broader assimilationist aim might appear laudable, Gupta and Abbi describe the Schedule as “a device to swallow the small fish—the languages not included in the Eighth Schedule.”

Emphasising the corollary impact on unlisted languages, Birla draws attention to the particularly adverse effects on tribal languages, which often fail to meet the criteria for inclusion and thus struggle to gain state support. This, she argues, reveals the deep-seated role of economic, political, and socio-cultural inequalities in determining which languages are included—or excluded. “The exclusion of a language from the Eighth Schedule,” she observes, “is frequently interpreted as a failure to acknowledge the corresponding linguistic community’s cultural identity, rights, and heritage.”

She further questions: “Does inclusion and officialisation in the Eighth Schedule create an environment for the number of speakers of the language to increase?”

Is the Eighth Schedule irrelevant?

According to Birla, the Eighth Schedule can be seen as an attempt to reconcile two aims: preserving democratic, federal, and liberal traditions in governance, and protecting the linguistic rights of speaker communities. “How far the purpose has been solved, and whether it has become more symbolic and political,” she speculates, “will probably have different answers depending on the community you speak to.” Still, Birla acknowledges that inclusion does appear to offer certain advantages, even if they are largely political or symbolic.

She also argues that the Eighth Schedule serves to reinforce the status of Hindi as the nation’s official language. This interpretation stems from its constitutional roots in Articles 344(1) and 351. Article 344(1) establishes the Commission and Committee of Parliament on Official Language, while the rest of the article outlines its functions—most notably, the promotion of the “progressive use of the Hindi language for the official purposes of the Union.”

Over time, the Eighth Schedule has created a new hierarchical ordering of languages. Scholars argue that English operates above the Eighth Schedule altogether, often referred to as a ‘supra-language’ that ranks higher than any other. “Then there are languages of the Eighth Schedule with an in-built cleavage between Hindi and other languages,” observe Gupta and Abbi. Within the Eighth Schedule, regional languages are positioned below Hindi, each maintaining marked territories or zones of influence. Still lower are what some linguists term the ‘Infra-ES languages’—those not listed in the Schedule and which may or may not be recognised by the Sahitya Akademi.

Summing up this stratification, linguist Ayesha Kidwai, who teaches at Jawaharlal Nehru University, tells Indianexpress.com: “So the Eighth Schedule, from being something which was just to enrich Hindi, almost immediately transformed into what my friend [activist and professor] Hany Babu has called the Chaturvarna system.”

According to Babu, this four-tiered structure comprises Sanskrit, Hindi, scheduled, and non-scheduled languages. Scholars like him argue that such a framework has fostered a competitive inter-lingual dynamic among vernaculars and institutionalised a kind of hierarchical multilingualism in India. A clear example of this competition lies in current protests: some ask why languages with rich literary traditions—such as Rajasthani, Braj, and Awadhi—were subsumed under Hindi, while Konkani was recognised as a distinct language separate from Marathi in the Eighth Schedule.

For Kidwai, the consequences of this hierarchy are evident: “And now, if you want to preserve your language or want to assert yourself politically, there is a long list of, I think, 38 languages waiting to be added to the Eighth Schedule. Because that is the one that is going to ensure that you will be recognised and taught in schools etc.”

Beyond the lack of institutional support, political recognition, and social legitimacy, there is also the looming fear that languages not listed in the Eighth Schedule are at risk of extinction. She notes that a majority of India’s endangered languages are found in the Northeast and tribal regions, where smaller communities speak them. “Most of the endangered languages are not recognised either constitutionally or even by state governments,” she says.

Yet, as Birla cautions, even government recognition is no guarantee of survival. Some languages included in the Eighth Schedule, such as Manipuri and Bodo, and others recognised by state governments — such as Ao, Angami, Chang, Khasi, Khiamniungan, and Konyak—are still endangered.  This, according to Birla, underscores the limited role of government recognition in language preservation. It points instead to deeper political and social structures and attitudes, held by both governmental and non-governmental institutions, that must be addressed if linguistic diversity in India is to be meaningfully protected.

Further Reading

1. 1. Language And The State: Perspectives on the Eighth Schedule by R S Gupta, Anvita Abbi, Kailash S Aggarwal
   2. Linguistic Structure and Language Dynamics in South Asia by Anvita Abbi, R S Gupta, Ayesha Kidwai
   3. Indian Polity by M Laxmikanth