Overview The Supreme Court expressed strong displeasure at the NCERT ’s plan to incorporate a rewritten Chapter IV on judicial corruption in the Class‑8 Social Sciences textbook for the 2026‑27 session. The Court directed the government to set up a high‑level committee before the chapter can be published. Key Developments 28 March 2026 : The Court noted that the chapter had been "duly rewritten" as per an affidavit filed by NCERT Director Prof. Dinesh Prasad Saklani. The Court questioned the absence of disclosed "domain experts" who rewrote the chapter. Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta assured that the chapter would not be re‑printed without approval of a newly constituted committee. The bench comprising CJ Surya Kant , Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi ordered the formation of a committee with at least one former judge, one academician and one senior law practitioner. Authors Michel Danino, Suparna Diwakar and Alok Prasanna Kumar were barred from any future government‑funded projects. The Court directed the Union to identify and act against websites circulating the objectionable content. Earlier, on 26 February 2026 , the Court had imposed a complete ban on the book’s publication, re‑printing and digital dissemination under the Contempt of Courts Act . Important Facts The rewritten chapter was prepared under the supervision of visiting professor Michel Danino, with assistance from Suparna Diwakar and Alok Prasanna Kumar. It was only digitally circulated to a few members of the NSTMC , bypassing the standard approval process. The Court emphasized that the authors appeared to lack "reasonable knowledge about the Indian judiciary" and warned that any deliberate misrepresentation to project a negative image of the judiciary would attract criminal contempt proceedings. NCERT later issued an "unconditional and unqualified" apology, withdrew the book, and announced a review of textbooks across all classes. UPSC Relevance Illustrates the checks and balances between the judiciary and executive in safeguarding institutional integrity (GS2: Polity). Highlights procedural safeguards in the curriculum‑approval mechanism, relevant for questions on education policy. Shows the application of the Contempt of Courts Act to protect the dignity of the judiciary. Demonstrates the role of the Solicitor General in representing the Union in high‑profile cases. Provides a case study on the importance of expert committees in policy formulation and review. Way Forward The government must constitute the mandated committee, ensure its recommendations are incorporated, and revise the composition of the NSTMC to prevent similar lapses. Additionally, strict monitoring of digital dissemination of educational material and swift action against non‑compliant websites are essential to uphold the credibility of the education system and the judiciary.