The Union government told the Supreme Court on Friday that it has set up an expert committee to review the contentious NCERT Class 8 social science chapter on the judiciary, acting on directions issued by the court during the recent textbook controversy.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed a bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant that the panel will include senior advocate and former Attorney General KK Venugopal, former Supreme Court judge Justice Indu Malhotra, and former Supreme Court judge and current National Judicial Academy director Justice Aniruddha Bose, along with a vice chancellor.
“We have appointed a committee… Mr Venugopal has accepted to be a member. Justice Indu Malhotra would be the judge. We have requested Justice Aniruddha Bose… and there will be one Vice Chancellor,” Mehta submitted, indicating that the panel combines legal, judicial and academic expertise as envisioned by the court.
The move comes amid an ongoing controversy surrounding a chapter on “corruption in the judiciary”, which prompted the Supreme Court to take suo motu cognisance last month.
At the same time, the bench, which also included justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, was hearing a separate public interest litigation challenging a line in an older Class 8 textbook that stated “recent judgments tend to view the slum dweller as an encroacher in the city”. The court declined to intervene, noting that the statement represented a viewpoint. “Everyone has a right to have a viewpoint about a judgment of the court,” the Chief Justice observed.
The bench also pointed out that the issue had become irrelevant as the textbook in question is being replaced, and disposed of the petition filed by Pankaj Pushkar.
The Centre’s assurance follows a series of strong observations by the Supreme Court over the past month. In February, the court took suo motu cognisance of a Class 8 textbook titled Exploring Society India and Beyond, which referred to alleged corruption and pendency in the judiciary. The court said the content could harm the institution’s dignity and ordered the immediate withdrawal of the book, including both physical copies and digital versions.
Following this, NCERT and the Union government issued unconditional apologies, and the chapter was withdrawn.
However, the matter resurfaced when the court was told that a revised version of the chapter may be introduced in the upcoming academic session. Expressing concern over the lack of transparency in the revision process, the bench directed that no updated chapter should be included in the curriculum without being examined by an independent expert panel set up by the Centre.
The court had earlier suggested that such a panel should include a former senior judge, a respected academician and an experienced legal practitioner, a composition that the newly formed committee appears to reflect.
In a detailed order on March 11, the Supreme Court had criticised the way the controversial chapter was prepared and circulated. It directed that Padma Shri professor Michel Danino, educator Suparna Diwakar and legal researcher Alok Prasanna Kumar should not be involved in any capacity in preparing textbooks or curriculum for public institutions.
The bench said it had “no reason to doubt” that the authors either lacked proper understanding of the judiciary or had “deliberately misrepresented facts” in a manner that could create a negative impression among students.
It also highlighted procedural lapses, noting that the chapter was never placed before the National Syllabus and Teaching Learning Material Committee, a key NCERT body responsible for curricular decisions. Instead, it was shared selectively in digital format among a limited group of members.
Calling the episode an “eye opener”, the court questioned how such material could be published without approval at any level and criticised the lack of institutional safeguards. “If this is the casual way to publish curriculum for students in the country, what do you expect us to say?” the bench had remarked.
The court further asked the Centre to review the composition of the committee and consider including domain experts, especially eminent jurists, if subjects related to the judiciary are to be taught.
It also made it clear that any future inclusion of a chapter on the judiciary, whether in Class 8 or other classes, must first be examined by a committee of experts constituted by the Union government within a set timeframe.
While stressing the importance of accuracy and balance, the court clarified that its intervention was not meant to discourage criticism of the judiciary. “If the judiciary, like any other institution, is suffering from deficiencies and an expert committee highlights them, it would be a welcome step,” the bench said, while warning against “biased narratives” that could mislead young students.
The court also suggested that institutions such as the National Judicial Academy could play a role in shaping legal education content.
