Deleted NCERT Judiciary Chapter Was a Collaborative Academic Effort, Professor Informs Supreme Court
Affidavits in Supreme Court claim withdrawn NCERT judiciary chapter was developed through a multi-member academic process, not by individuals
New Delhi: The ongoing NCERT judiciary chapter controversy has taken a new turn as Professor Michel Danino, educator Suparna Diwakar, and legal researcher Alok Prasanna Kumar defended their involvement in the now withdrawn Class 8 social science chapter on the judiciary before the Supreme Court of India.
In separate affidavits submitted ahead of the hearing, the trio stated that the chapter was the outcome of a “collective and collaborative” academic exercise, rejecting allegations that it was authored by a few individuals. Danino clarified that the material was prepared by a 51 member Textbook Development Team, with contributions from multiple experts, and not limited to three people as earlier suggested by NCERT director Dinesh Prasad Saklani.
He also challenged claims that the draft was shared only among a small group, explaining that multiple versions of the chapter were circulated through a large Google group of over 40 members between September and December 2025. According to him, several senior members of curriculum committees were regularly informed and invited to review the content during the drafting process.
Diwakar, in her affidavit, clarified that her role was limited to coordination as part of the National Syllabus and Teaching Learning Material Committee and did not involve authorship or evaluation of the chapter. Kumar, meanwhile, expressed concern over being “unjustifiably singled out,” noting that NCERT’s policies do not assign individual authorship for such textbooks.
The development comes after the apex court’s earlier order directing authorities to disassociate the three individuals from curriculum-related work, citing concerns over their understanding or representation of the judiciary. However, the court allowed them to seek modifications to the directive, prompting their latest submissions.
Defending the content, Danino maintained that the chapter aimed to encourage critical thinking among students, in line with the National Education Policy 2020 and the National Curriculum Framework 2023. He emphasized that the textbook followed a balanced approach by discussing both the roles and challenges of institutions such as the judiciary, legislature, and executive.
Senior advocates Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Aravind Datar, and J Sai Deepak represented the petitioners before a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, requesting that the matter be heard after two weeks.
