New Delhi, May 10 -- Faced with a petition from a Delhi-based lawyer hailing from Tamil Nadu pushing for the national implementation of the National Education Policy (NEP) seemingly in public interest, the Supreme Court suggested that his children could anyway learn Hindi (one of his main arguments) in Delhi. Dismissing a petition from advocate GS Mani seeking the implementation of NEP in Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, and Kerala, the court said it cannot compel any state to adopt it. A bench of justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan said the court can only consider the violation of fundamental rights due to a policy's implementation. The court said, "The Supreme Court through Article 32 of the Constitution (power to issue writs) can issue directions to ensure fundamental rights of citizens is protected. It cannot directly compel any state to adopt a policy like the NEP 2020. But the court may intervene if the state's action or inaction related to the NEP violates fundamental rights or any other legal rights (of citizens)." Mani claimed the policy was being opposed on the grounds of the three-language formula and that it requires students to learn Hindi. Mani told the court he is from Chennai but settled in Delhi when asked: "Who are you and how are you concerned with NEP?" The court told Mani he had no cause to file the plea since he lives in Delhi. It dismissed the plea, saying Mani has nothing to do with the cause he proposes to espouse. "Though he may be from Tamil Nadu, yet on his admission he is now residing in New Delhi." The court told Mani that his children could continue learning Hindi in Delhi. "We do not propose to examine this issue in this writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution," said the court, adding, "The main issue may be examined by this Court in an appropriate proceedings." Tamil Nadu chief minister MK Stalin has led the opposition to the three-language formula under NEP and accused the Union government of trying to impose Hindi. He has argued that the rights of states have been eroded and maintained that education should solely be a state subject. Stalin has demanded the reversal of the 42nd Constitutional Amendment, which moved education to the concurrent list or subjects on which both the central and state governments can legislate, in 1976. The Union government and Tamil Nadu government have sparred over a series of issues, including withholding of funding under the Samagra Shiksha scheme over the latter's refusal to implement the National Education Policy....