The issue of national language was resolved when the Constitution-makers virtually accepted all major languages as 'languages of India' or India's national languages. But the matter could not end there, for the official work of the country could not be carried on in so many languages. There had to be one language in which the central government would carry on its work and maintain contact with the state governments. The question was what would be the language of all-India communication? In other words what would be India's official and link language? Only two candidates were available for the purpose: English and Hindi ..

But in fact the choice had already been made in the pre-Independence period by the leadership of the national movement, which was convinced that English would not continue to be the all-India medium of communication in free India Hindi or Hindustani?

Hindi or Hindustani, the other candidate for the status of official or link language, had already played this role during the nationalist struggle, especially during its mass phase. This role of Hindi had been accepted by leaders from non-Hindi speaking part of the country because of its being the most widely spoken and understood language in the country. Lokmanya Tilak Gandhiji C Rajagopalachari, Subhash Bose and Sardar Patel were some of Hindi's enthusiastic supporters. In its sessions and political work, 'the National Congress had substituted Hindi and the provincial languages in place of English.

Reflecting a national consensus the Nehru Report had laid down in 1928 that Hindustani which might be written in Devanagri or Urdu script would be the common language of India, but the use of English would be continued for some time. Ultimately the Constitution of free India was to adopt this stand except for replacing Hindustani by Hindi.

Consequently because of the unanimity in the pre-Independence period, the real debate in the Constitutional Assembly occurred over two questions: would Hindi or Hindustani replace English and what would be the time frame in which the replacement would occur?

As son as the discussion on the question of official language began, sharp differences arose and the problem proved to be extremely difficult, especially as it was highly politicised from the beginning. The question of Hindi or Hindustani was soon resolved, though with a great deal of acrimony. Gandhiji and Nehruji both supported Hindustani, written in Devanagri or Urdu script.

Though many supporters of Hindi disagreed, they had tended to accept the Gandhi-Nehru viewpoint. But once the Partition was announced the champions of Hindi were emboldened, especially as the protagonist of Pakistan had claimed Urdu as the language of Muslims and of Pakistan. The votaries of Hindi now branded Urdu 'as a symbol of secession'. They demanded that Hindi in Devanagri script be made the national language. Their demand split the Congress party in the middle. In the end the Congress Legislative Party decided for Hindi against Hindustani no 78 to 77 votes, even though Nehru and Azad fought for Hindustani. The Hindi bloc was also forced to compromise and accept that Hindi would be the official language and not the national language ...

(Source: The Nation and the World. 16 November, 1999)

I.K. Gujral's Views on Urdu

.. The Gujral Committee Report has, by and large, been implemented. Despite all the mix-up and hassles, now one of the remaining proposals to be implemented and which I did during my prime ministership to push through was the proposal to set up the Maulana Azad National Urdu University which is located in Hyderabad. And I am its first Chancellor.

Similarly, Urdu academies have been set up in almost every state. The difficulty lies in some Hindi states where Urdu is not being taught in schools. Even Urdu has been given second language status in many of them. UP's is an example of this.

But, by and large ... the animosity against Urdu has melted away ... India ... is a country of diversity and every language must get a chance to flourish. The discrimination against Urdu is most unfortunate. I say this with a degree of satisfaction but resistance is melting away. There are indeed people who are not pro-secularism, there are political parties opposed to secularism and these are the parties who are opposed to Urdu also. (Source: The Nation and the World, 16 September, 1999)