A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana issued notice on the fresh petitions but refused to halt the implementation of the circulars at this stage, observing learning language never goes waste.

The court had earlier too issued notice to the Union government, NCERT and CBSE on a previous set of petitions in May.

Under the policy, students from Class 9 will have to study two Indian languages, triggering widespread concerns among parents and students, particularly over the abrupt changes it demands from those already pursuing other languages since Class 5.

Petitioners highlighted that English is being treated as a non-native language and raised serious practical issues regarding the availability of teachers and textbooks for multiple Indian languages.

Senior advocate Anand Grover for the petitioners argued that the CBSE circulars lacked statutory backing and that only the NCERT has the authority to frame academic requirements.

"The circulars are without authority of law... They are imposing languages without giving options. No teachers, no books are available," he submitted, stressing the importance of languages that enhance employability.

Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan also for the petitioner contended that despite some dilution in the subsequent circular issued on June 29, core problems remained. He pointed out that the policy treats English - a language used in India for over 300 years - as non-native while pushing for Indian languages.

He also informed the court that the NCERT website had only three textbooks available, far short of the promised resources for multiple languages.

Senior Advocate Shyam Divan also for the petitioners pointed out that the National Education Policy had envisaged implementation by 2030, but the CBSE had advanced it to the current academic year.

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi highlighted the difficulties for Class 9 students studying foreign languages like French, who are now suddenly required to take up a third language and appear for examinations in April.

Seeking interim protection, the petitioners argued that schools lacked both textbooks and qualified teachers, and that abrupt changes could lead to job losses for existing language teachers.

The bench, however, remained cautious about granting a stay, saying "Learning of language never goes waste."

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for the Centre, sought time to file a response. The court directed the Union government to file its reply within ten days.The bench also heard submissions from intervenors, including those represented by advocates for former Maharashtra minister Fauzia Khan, who highlighted the adverse impact of the policy on the mental health of children, especially from economically weaker sections.

The matter will now be taken up for further hearing next Wednesday.