The Karnataka High Court has observed that the English language should not be overlooked or discarded and there can be no universal formula to use one language in governmental and official affairs.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice NV Anjaria and Justice KV Aravind observed, “The Kannada language may be endeared, at the same time utility of English language should not be overlooked or discarded. The English is an official language for use in the High Court under the Constitution. There can be no universal formula as to one language should only be used in the Governmental affairs…At local levels, however, it is hoped that the Government and the officers as far as possible, may use, promote and give prominence to the local Kannada language to subserve the culture and the people of Karnataka. It cannot be, but, a universal phenomenon.”

Advocate JR Mohan appeared for the Petitioner while AGA Niloufer Akbar appeared for the Respondents.

A writ petition in the nature of a public interest litigation was filed praying to issue directions to the Karnataka Lokayukta to use the Kannada Language in all its day-to-day office works while passing orders, issuing notices, endorsements etc.

The Court said that it would not justify passing such orders and entertaining the petition just on the basis of promotion and importance of the language. The use of language in official affairs is a matter of policy, convenience and realism.

“At the same time, wherever it is necessary, the use of English language in addition to Kannada language cannot be disbanded. The judicial pronouncements, the law reports, statute books and important notifications and out-state or overseas correspondence with the State authorities are all in English language. There should be requisite blend of local language and global language in running the Government affairs.”, the Court noted.

Accordingly, the Court dismissed the petition.

Cause Title: Sri Gurunath Vadde v. State of Karnataka and Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024: KHC:24102-DB)

Appearances:

Petitioner: Advocate JR Mohan

Respondents: AGA Niloufer Akbar

Click here to read/download the Judgment