Language war heats up between CPI(M) MP John Brittas and BJP's Ravneet Bittu

New Delhi: Accusing Union Minister Ravneet Bittu of writing to non Hindi-speakers only in Hindi as part of a “deliberate policy”, CPI(M) Rajya Sabha MP John Brittas has shot off a letter to him in Malayalam in protest, hoping that he will take efforts to understand what has been written.

Brittas, whose response came after Bittu responded on October 21 to his two 'Special Mentions' and a Zero Hour submission related to Railways in Rajya Sabha, said he could speak and comprehend Hindi in a minimal way but has no mastery so that he could read and comprehend letters in Hindi.

Emphasising that there are south Indian MPs who cannot even understand Hindi, he said in the letter, “despite all this, I understand that you are writing to them in Hindi. At this moment, I or these MPs have no intention to learn Hindi for the purpose of comprehending your letters.”

“It has been a norm and precedent that letters addressed from union government to south MPs are written in English. Lately however that's not the case, and Ravneet Bittu makes it a point to write exclusively in Hindi. I am compelled to reply to him in Malayalam,” Brittas said, sharing the letter.

In his letter, Brittas said the repeated Hindi-only replies suggest a “deliberate policy” and expressed hope that Minister of State for Railways Bittu would read his letter like the way he read the letters in Hindi and comprehended it.

The Rajya Sabha MP said Hindi is only one of the 22 languages mentioned in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution and use of Hindi and English, especially for south Indians, for official purposes has been the policy and practice.

He also cited the 1963 law on official languages and said for all official purposes, English has also to be used for all official purposes of the Union and for the transaction of business in Parliament. The Minister is violating this, he said.

In a statement, Brittas said the Act explicitly provides that English shall be used for communication between the Union and any State which has not adopted Hindi as its official language.

"The significance of these provisions cannot be understated, as they are intended to uphold the linguistic inclusivity of the Parliament, particularly with representatives from Southern States, where Hindi is neither the official language nor widely spoken, and to ensure unimpeded communication across linguistic diversities," he said.

"The recent pattern of Hindi-only replies contravenes these statutory language provisions, posing a barrier to effective communication and hindering MPs from non-Hindi-speaking regions in their parliamentary work," he adde