Q. Consider the following statements regarding safeguards for languages in the Constitution of India:
1. The Constitution provides for a Special Officer for Linguistic Minorities, to be appointed by the President.
2. As per the Constitution, the Governor of a state can direct a language to be recognised officially in the state.
Which of the above given statements is/are correct?

[A] 1 only

[B] 2 only

[C] Both 1 and 2

[D] Neither 1 nor 2

Answer: A
Notes:

Exp) Option a is the correct answer.

Statement 1 is correct: Article 350B of Constitution of India provides for a Special Officer for linguistic minorities. According to the article:

  • There shall be a Special Officer for linguistic minorities to be appointed by the President.
  • It shall be the duty of the Special officer to investigate all matters relating to the safeguards provided for linguistic minorities under this Constitution and report to the President upon those matters at such intervals as the President may direct, and the president shall cause all such reports to be laid before each House of Parliament and sent to the Government of the States concerned.

Statement 2 is incorrect: According to the Constitution, when the President (not the Governor of State) is satisfied that a substantial proportion of the population of a state desire the use of any language spoken by them to be recognised by that state, then he may direct that such language shall also be officially recognised in that state. This provision aims at protecting the linguistic interests of minorities in the states. So, it is the President and not the Governor who can give direction about the official language in a state.

Blog
Academy
Community