The Supreme Court of India ruled that Urdu can appear alongside Marathi on the signboard outside the Patur Municipal Council building in Maharashtra. This decision came after a legal challenge questioned whether using Urdu violated the Maharashtra Local Authorities (Official Languages) Act, 2022. The court’s verdict defends India’s linguistic diversity and reflects cultural inclusion in a multilingual nation.
What triggered the controversy?
The controversy began when Varshatai Sanjay Bagade, a retired councillor from Patur in Akola district, objected to Urdu being used alongside Marathi on the council’s signboard. She claimed the 2022 Act declared Marathi the only official language for local bodies, and thus Urdu had no place on official signs.
However, since 1956, Urdu had featured on signboards in Patur. It remained familiar to the local population, especially among Urdu-speaking communities. After the Bombay High Court dismissed her plea in 2021, Bagade approached the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court’s verdict
On April 15, 2025, a bench led by Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran ruled against Bagade. The court stated that no law forbids using multiple languages on municipal signs. Judges clarified that public signage should help communication, not serve political or religious agendas.
“Let us make friends with Urdu and every language”, says Supreme Court rejecting the challenge to the use of Urdu on the signboard of a Municipality in Maharashtra. pic.twitter.com/sMOQKACDTz
— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) April 15, 2025
They emphasized that both Urdu and Marathi form part of India’s linguistic legacy. Rejecting the argument that Urdu was “alien” to Indian identity, the court described such claims as colonial hangovers. The judges said language should bring people together—not create divisions.
Understanding the language law
The Maharashtra Local Authorities (Official Languages) Act, 2022, designates Marathi as the official language for municipal councils. But it does not ban the use of other languages.
Bagade argued that Urdu signage violated the law and insisted that only Marathi should appear. The court disagreed. It explained that the Act only ensures Marathi’s presence. It doesn’t block additional languages, especially when they improve communication with local people.
Urdu’s cultural roots
Justice Dhulia described Urdu as “the best example of Ganga-Jamuni tehzeeb,” a term reflecting Hindu-Muslim cultural harmony in northern and central India. The court recognized Urdu’s deep Indian roots, shaped by centuries of cultural exchange. It stressed that Urdu never belonged to one religion or political group.
The judges noted that Urdu and Hindi share vocabulary and structure. This overlap reflects India’s pluralistic society. The court refused to treat Urdu as a symbol of any one community, affirming it as a shared cultural asset.
Why the merdict Matters?
This ruling challenges the belief that Urdu belongs only to a single group. By allowing Urdu on a municipal signboard, the court recognized it as part of India’s diverse cultural identity—on par with Marathi, Tamil, Hindi, or Bengali.
It also affirms inclusiveness in public spaces. Recognizing multiple languages sends a message of dignity and acceptance to linguistic marginalized groups. For Urdu-speaking Indians, this verdict isn’t just about signage. It’s about being seen, respected, and treated as equals.
The decision could prompt other municipalities—in Urdu-speaking areas like Hyderabad, Lucknow, or Patna—to include Urdu in official displays. It also sets a precedent for embracing regional languages based on local demographics.
Politics and Language: A sensitive mix
Language and politics often intersect in India. States like Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, and Maharashtra have seen decades of language-based movements. Language often stands in for identity and political power.
The Supreme Court struck a balance. It acknowledged the political weight of language but avoided politicizing it. The court firmly stated that language should remain a tool for communication—not a weapon for division.
It also pushed back against efforts to label some languages as “un-Indian.” Politicians have long tried to cast certain tongues as foreign. The court’s decision serves as a reminder that India’s unity lies in its diversity—not forced uniformity.
Broader cultural impact
This ruling encourages wider discussion about how India treats its many languages. Although the Constitution lists 22 official languages, hundreds more are spoken across the country. Many are at risk of fading away.
By defending Urdu here, the Supreme Court sent a powerful message: lesser-used or politically marginalized languages deserve public recognition. Embracing linguistic variety doesn’t weaken national unity—it strengthens it.
Symbol of unity
This isn’t just a legal decision—it’s a cultural moment. The verdict reminds us that language reflects the people who speak it. Seeing your language on a signboard affirms your place in society.
The court’s message is clear: India’s language history can’t be trimmed to fit narrow ideas of nationalism. It must expand to include every voice—from widely spoken languages like Hindi to rich, historic ones like Urdu.
The Supreme Court’s ruling on Urdu and Marathi signage marks a milestone in India’s language debate. It upholds the rights of linguistic marginalized groups and reinforces the value of diversity.
At a time when symbols often divide people, this verdict offers a hopeful view. It shows that unity doesn’t require sameness. India thrives when it embraces its many voices.
