TAMIL NADU TAKES CENTRE TO SUPREME COURT OVER EDUCATION FUNDS
In a dramatic escalation of the ongoing standoff between the Tamil Nadu government and the Union Government, Chief Minister M.K. Stalin’s administration has approached the Supreme Court, demanding the immediate release of over Rs 2,291 crore in education funds under the Samagra Shiksha Scheme. The state alleges that the Centre is unlawfully withholding these crucial funds as leverage to force the implementation of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and the PM SHRI Schools scheme—policies that Tamil Nadu has vocally opposed. The legal battle has thrust the issue of federalism, education rights, and political autonomy into the national spotlight, igniting heated debate across the country.
The ongoing tussle between Tamil Nadu and the Union Government over education funds highlights the complex nature of India’s federal structure. Education is a subject that falls under the concurrent list, meaning both the Centre and states have jurisdiction. However, Tamil Nadu’s firm stance on maintaining autonomy over its education policies reflects a broader assertion of state rights, especially in culturally sensitive areas such as language and curriculum design.
Financial experts have pointed out that the withholding of Rs 2,291 crore in Samagra Shiksha funds places significant strain on Tamil Nadu’s budget. The state government has had to reallocate resources from other sectors to ensure that schools continue to function smoothly. This diversion could potentially impact other development programs, underscoring the far-reaching consequences of the funding impasse.
THE CORE OF THE DISPUTE: SAMAGRA SHIKSHA FUNDS AND NEP 2020
At the heart of the dispute is the Samagra Shiksha Scheme, a centrally sponsored initiative aimed at supporting inclusive and equitable quality education from pre-primary to higher secondary levels. Tamil Nadu, which has consistently ranked among India’s best-performing states in education, claims it has fully complied with the scheme’s guidelines. The Project Approval Board cleared the state’s proposal in February 2024, yet, as of May 2025, not a single rupee of the Centre’s 60% share—amounting to Rs 2,151.59 crore for FY 2024–25—has been released. The state is also seeking 6% annual interest from May 1, 2025, until payment is made.
The state government alleges that the Centre is using financial pressure to compel Tamil Nadu to adopt the NEP 2020 and sign the Memorandum of Understanding for the PM SHRI Schools scheme. These policies, especially the NEP’s three-language formula, have been fiercely resisted in Tamil Nadu, where language is a deeply sensitive cultural and political issue. The DMK government insists that the NEP and PM SHRI are not binding on the state and that education policy should remain a state subject, not dictated by the Union Government.
Civil society organizations and education activists have voiced concern over the potential disruption to students’ learning experiences. Many argue that political disagreements should not come at the cost of children’s education. They have called for dialogue and cooperation between the Centre and Tamil Nadu to find a mutually agreeable solution that prioritizes the welfare of students above all else.
The Tamil Nadu Teachers’ Association has also weighed in, emphasizing the challenges faced by educators due to delayed funding. Teachers rely on timely salaries and resources to maintain classroom quality. The association has urged both governments to resolve the dispute quickly to avoid demoralizing the teaching workforce, which plays a critical role in shaping the state’s educational outcomes.
CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE: ARTICLE 131 AND FEDERAL RIGHTS
Tamil Nadu has filed its case directly in the Supreme Court under Article 131 of the Constitution, which allows states to challenge the Union Government in legal disputes over constitutional rights. The state’s petition seeks not only the immediate release of the withheld funds but also a declaration that the Centre’s actions are “unconstitutional, illegal, arbitrary and unreasonable.” Tamil Nadu is asking the Supreme Court to affirm that state laws—such as the Tamil Nadu Uniform System of School Education Act and the Tamil Nadu Tamil Learning Act—take precedence over non-statutory central policies like the NEP and PM SHRI.
The petition also demands that the Centre fulfill its statutory obligations under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act (RTE), including paying its share of 60% of the expenditure before the start of every academic year. The state argues that withholding funds undermines teachers’ salaries, school infrastructure, and essential entitlements for students, such as free uniforms, textbooks, and transport for children in remote areas.
POLITICAL AND SOCIAL FALLOUT: ACCUSATIONS OF “PETTY POLITICS”
Chief Minister Stalin has publicly accused the BJP-led central government of playing “petty politics” with the future of Tamil Nadu’s children. At a recent public event, Stalin reiterated the DMK’s commitment to resisting the NEP and protecting the state’s educational autonomy. He also reaffirmed the party’s push to move education to the State List of the Constitution, ensuring that states have the final say over education policy. Stalin expressed confidence in the legal battle, citing recent Supreme Court victories that strengthened state rights in other domains.
The controversy has drawn widespread attention from educators, parents, and political observers across India. Many see the Centre’s move as an attempt to centralize control over education and undermine the federal structure. Others argue that uniform education standards are necessary for national integration and competitiveness. The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education, in its March 2025 report, criticized the Centre’s decision to withhold funds from states like Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and West Bengal, calling it “unjustified” and urging immediate resolution.
Meanwhile, opposition parties in Tamil Nadu have used the issue to criticize the Centre’s approach to federalism. They argue that the BJP-led government’s insistence on implementing the NEP and PM SHRI schemes without accommodating state-specific concerns reflects a centralized mindset that undermines India’s diversity. This political rhetoric has further intensified the debate around education funding.
Looking forward, experts suggest that this conflict could serve as a catalyst for revisiting the design of centrally sponsored schemes. There is a growing consensus that such schemes should allow greater flexibility for states to tailor programs to their unique contexts while ensuring accountability and transparency in fund utilization. Tamil Nadu’s assertiveness may inspire other states to demand similar autonomy, potentially reshaping the landscape of education governance in India.
TAMIL NADU’S EDUCATION MODEL: INVESTMENT, OUTCOMES, AND RESILIENCE
Despite the funding freeze, the Tamil Nadu government has continued to prioritize education, allocating a record Rs 55,261 crore to the School and Higher Education Department for 2025–26. This includes major investments in infrastructure, teacher salaries, digital classrooms, and science labs. The state has launched its own schemes to cover gaps left by the withheld central funds, ensuring that students’ learning is not disrupted.
Tamil Nadu’s education model, based on its own laws and the 5+3+2+2 structure, has delivered strong outcomes, with Gross Enrollment Ratios above the national average. The state’s refusal to implement the NEP’s three-language formula—favoring Tamil and English instead—reflects both cultural pride and a longstanding political consensus. The government argues that its approach is more inclusive and better suited to local needs.
IMPACT ON STUDENTS, TEACHERS, AND SCHOOLS
The ongoing standoff has real-world consequences for millions of students and teachers. The delay in releasing Samagra Shiksha funds has strained the state’s finances, forcing it to dip into its own resources to pay salaries, maintain infrastructure, and provide free uniforms and textbooks. Rural and underprivileged students, who rely most on government support, are particularly vulnerable. Teacher unions and parent associations have voiced concern, warning that prolonged funding gaps could erode the quality of education and widen inequalities.
NATIONAL DEBATE: FEDERALISM, LANGUAGE, AND THE FUTURE OF EDUCATION
The Tamil Nadu case has reignited the national debate over the balance of power between the Centre and states, especially in culturally sensitive areas like education and language policy. Legal experts note that the Supreme Court’s decision could set a precedent for other states resisting centrally driven reforms. The outcome will likely influence how future education schemes are designed, funded, and implemented across India.
LOOKING AHEAD: WHAT’S AT STAKE FOR TAMIL NADU AND INDIA
As the Supreme Court prepares to hear the case, all eyes are on the outcome—not just for Tamil Nadu, but for the future of cooperative federalism in India. The state’s bold legal challenge and unwavering stance on educational autonomy have galvanized supporters and critics alike. The Centre, meanwhile, faces mounting pressure to resolve the impasse and ensure that students do not become collateral damage in a political tug-of-war.
The next steps will be closely watched by policymakers, educators, and civil society across the country. The verdict will shape not only the fate of Tamil Nadu’s education system but also the contours of Centre-state relations in the years to come.
The Supreme Court’s impending verdict on Tamil Nadu’s plea will be closely watched as a litmus test for the balance of power between the Centre and states in India’s federal framework. Legal experts believe that a ruling in favor of Tamil Nadu could reinforce the principle of cooperative federalism, compelling the Union Government to respect state autonomy in education policy and funding. Conversely, a decision favoring the Centre might embolden more centralized control over education, potentially leading to uniformity but also sparking resistance from other states seeking to preserve their unique educational identities.
Follow: Tamil Nadu Government
