top of page

By:

Correspondent

21 August 2024 at 10:20:16 am

Merit Mafia

The NEET scandal, which has shaken the futures of nearly 23 lakh students across India, now leads unmistakably to Maharashtra. The alleged ‘kingpin’ of the paper leak racket, according to the CBI, is a chemistry professor from Nashik who ran a private coaching centre. He was a man entrusted with access to examination material through his association with the National Testing Agency and now stands accused of converting that privilege into a criminal enterprise. The symbolism is uncomfortable....

Merit Mafia

The NEET scandal, which has shaken the futures of nearly 23 lakh students across India, now leads unmistakably to Maharashtra. The alleged ‘kingpin’ of the paper leak racket, according to the CBI, is a chemistry professor from Nashik who ran a private coaching centre. He was a man entrusted with access to examination material through his association with the National Testing Agency and now stands accused of converting that privilege into a criminal enterprise. The symbolism is uncomfortable. Over the years, India has grown grimly accustomed to national-level examination scandals emerging from the badlands of governance in Bihar or Uttar Pradesh. Paper leaks, proxy candidates and exam mafias seemed to belong to a familiar geography of institutional collapse. Maharashtra, by contrast, liked to imagine itself above such decay by projecting itself as a modern, educationally enlightened state whose cities drew students from across the country. That illusion now lies shattered. According to investigators, the accused professor allegedly dictated questions and answers during private coaching sessions held in Pune days before the NEET examination. Students copied them down in notebooks. Many later matched the actual paper verbatim. Another accused allegedly charged lakhs while promising leaked papers and medical admissions. For years now, Maharashtra’s educational ecosystem has been drifting towards something predatory. Cities like Pune, once celebrated as intellectual centres, increasingly resemble giant marketplaces of academic anxiety where coaching institutes reign like parallel governments. ‘International schools’ demand fees that verge on extortion. Professional education has become a punishing financial contest in which parents mortgage savings, futures and sanity in pursuit of admissions. Maharashtra has always been a state with a rich progressive educational legacy. But today, Pune’s old sobriquet of ‘Oxford of the East’ carries an unintended irony. The city still produces engineers, doctors and software professionals in enormous numbers. But it also exemplifies the industrialisation of aspiration. Education has become transactional in the crudest sense. Once that transformation occurs, the leap from aggressive commercialisation to outright criminality should come as no surprise. In this light, the NEET leak appears less like a shocking rupture than the logical culmination of a wider moral decline. When educational institutions begin operating like extraction businesses, middlemen and racketeers inevitably emerge to monetise desperation further. Millions of students still cling to the belief that competitive examinations, however unforgiving, offer at least a narrow pathway of fairness. A scandal like NEET corrodes that belief. It seems to suggest honest students that hard work alone may not suffice when others can simply purchase advantage. But Maharashtra should worry about something else too: a drastic reputational decline. A state once synonymous with educational seriousness increasingly risks association with coaching cartels, extortionate fees and examination rackets. When the alleged kingpin of the country’s most notorious entrance-exam leak emerges not from the expected hinterlands of dysfunction but from Maharashtra, it suggests that the rot has travelled far beyond than what anybody imagined.

Lingua Pragmatica

Updated: Mar 20, 2025

As Southern leaders like M.K. Stalin rage against Hindi, Andhra Pradesh’s Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu offers a model of pragmatism over parochialism.

Chandrababu Naidu
Andhra Pradesh

Amid the cacophony of opposition in southern states to Hindi, Andhra Pradesh CM N. Chandrababu Naidu has taken a markedly pragmatic stance by remarking recently in the state Assembly that there was no harm in learning other languages. Hindi, Naidu noted, was useful for communication across India, particularly in political and commercial hubs like Delhi. His remarks, though avoiding explicit mention of the NEP, were widely seen as an endorsement of multilingualism and a rebuke to the linguistic chauvinism that has gripped parts of the South.


Few issues in India stir political passions quite like language. It is not merely a means of communication but a marker of identity, a relic of colonial resistance, and a source of political mobilization. In the southern states, where anti-Hindi sentiment has long been entrenched, the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and its three-language formula have reignited old tensions. No state embodies this defiance more than Tamil Nadu, where the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) led by M.K. Stalin has framed the policy as an assault on its linguistic autonomy.


Naidu’s words, welcomed by his ally and Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan, mark a sharp contrast with the DMK’s position. Tamil Nadu’s hostility towards Hindi dates back to the 1930s, when C. Rajagopalachari’s attempt to introduce it in schools met with fierce resistance. The anti-Hindi agitations of the 1960s cemented the DMK’s ideological stance, with its first Chief Minister, C.N. Annadurai, famously warning that Hindi imposition could push Tamil Nadu towards secession.


The question, however, is whether this rigid opposition serves Tamil Nadu’s interests. While Stalin, with an eye to the upcoming Tamil Nadu Assembly polls, has been relentlessly portraying Hindi as a threat to his state’s regional identity, Naidu, a partner of the BJP-led Centre, is framing it as a tool for economic mobility. His argument is not that Hindi should replace Telugu or English but that it offers a competitive advantage.


The economic case for multilingualism is compelling. Indians who speak multiple languages tend to have better job prospects, higher earnings and greater geographic mobility. Andhra Pradesh’s Telugu-speaking diaspora is a case in point. Telugus make up a significant proportion of Indian-origin professionals in the United States, the Gulf, and Southeast Asia as Naidu pointed out, hinting that this success story was built not on linguistic rigidity but on adaptability.


In a country where inter-state migration is rising and where Hindi remains the most widely spoken language, refusing to learn it amounts to self-imposed isolation. Tamil Nadu’s approach, by contrast, risks limiting its youth. The DMK government has refused to implement the three-language policy, keeping schools strictly bilingual with Tamil and English. Its justification that Hindi is not necessary for global success could be true in a narrow sense but ignores the domestic context. If Tamil filmmakers can dub their movies into Hindi to expand their audience, why should Tamil students be denied access to the language that could open more doors for them within India?


The DMK has accused successive central governments, particularly under the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), of pushing Hindi at the expense of regional languages. Yet, rejecting Hindi outright is an overcorrection. The reality is that Hindi is an important language in India’s economic and political landscape. Naidu’s position, one of accommodation rather than confrontation, offers a middle ground that other Southern leaders would do well to consider.


Some states already recognize this. Karnataka, despite its own history of linguistic pride, has allowed Hindi to be taught as an optional language. Kerala, whose migrants work in Hindi-speaking regions and the Gulf, has been less hostile to Hindi education. Naidu’s model, balancing regional identity with practical necessity, offers a way forward. Languages should be embraced, not politicized. Southern leaders would do well to listen to him.

Comments

bottom of page