The National Council of Education, Research and Training (NCERT) has revealed serious procedural lapses in its high-powered National Syllabus and Teaching Learning Material Committee (NSTC) through a recent Supreme Court affidavit, raising questions about policy implementation in India’s school curriculum development.
The affidavit, filed on March 10 by NCERT Director Dinesh Prasad Saklani, lists the late economist Bibek Debroy, who passed away on November 1, 2024, as one of 19 active members of the NSTC. This oversight indicates the committee has not been reconstituted in over 16 months, despite its mandate to develop syllabi and textbooks for Classes 3-12, as notified on July 21, 2023. Education Ministry sources confirmed the panel continued functioning without replacement, highlighting a policy gap in maintaining institutional continuity for critical educational reforms.
Chief Justice Surya Kant, leading a three-judge bench, sharply criticized NCERT on March 11 for issuing curriculum without proper multi-level approvals. The court took suo motu cognizance after a February 24 report flagged a controversial Class 8 social science chapter on “corruption in the judiciary” and “massive backlog” as challenges facing India’s justice system. CJI Kant remarked the affidavit was an “eye-opener,” noting that content from the Textbook Development Team (TDT) comprising Michel Danino, Suparna Diwakar, and Alok Prasanna Kumar was merely digitally circulated to some NSTC members, bypassing full committee review.
This procedural failure underscores a policy misalignment between NCERT’s stated processes and execution. The NSTC, chaired by M C Pant (former Chancellor of the National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration), was designed to ensure rigorous oversight for transitioning textbooks from Classes 1-2 to higher grades, yet operated short-staffed and without formal updates post-Debroy’s death.
The controversy exposes broader policy challenges in India’s New Education Policy (NEP) 2020 implementation, which emphasizes revised syllabi to foster critical thinking while reducing ideological biases. Retaining a deceased member’s name in official documents even labeling Debroy as “Late” in the withdrawn textbook signals administrative inertia that could undermine public trust in curriculum credibility. Legal experts view the Supreme Court’s intervention as a directive for stricter accountability, potentially mandating committee reconstitution and mandatory full reviews before textbook publication.
NCERT’s admission that the contentious chapter evaded NSTC scrutiny points to decentralized decision-making risks within the Textbook Development Team, conflicting with the centralized policy oversight envisioned under NEP. This could prompt policy reforms, including statutory timelines for committee reconstitution and digital audit trails for approvals, to align educational governance with constitutional mandates under Article 21A (right to education).
The Supreme Court’s scrutiny has amplified calls for transparent policy mechanisms in NCERT operations. With the NSTC entrusted to revise materials for millions of students, such lapses risk politicizing education especially on sensitive topics like judicial integrity and invite further legal challenges under administrative law principles of natural justice. Policymakers must now address whether ad-hoc functioning suffices for a national body shaping future generations, or if legislative backing for NSTC’s powers is needed to prevent recurrence.
As the court hearing continues, this episode reinforces the judiciary’s role in enforcing policy discipline, ensuring NCERT’s processes meet constitutional standards for uniform, unbiased education delivery. The affidavit not only verifies Debroy’s inclusion as a factual error but catalyzes overdue reforms in educational policy execution