Two recently published volumes of Bharatiya Bhasha Parivar (BBP), which claim to present a framework arguing that all Indian languages belong to a single linguistic family, have come under sharp criticism from their contributors over the
alleged violations of publication ethics.
An academic who contributed content to the first volume has written to Chamu Krishna Shastry, chairman of the Bharatiya Bhasha Samiti (BBS) — a Union government-appointed panel — alleging a breach of authorship acknowledgement norms.
Both volumes are also silent on peer review, a minimum requirement for the publication of any paper or research findings.
The first volume, titled BBP: A New Framework in Linguistics, has mentioned names of 26 scholars under the “content, writing, editing and review” section. They include 13 linguists, five academicians working in language teaching departments in different universities, four history scholars and one scholar each of physics, zoology, bio-technology and anthropology. There is also a list of 42 persons under “acknowledgement for content contribution”.
The volume comprises five chapters, but none of the chapters carry the names of individual authors — a standard practice in academic
publishing to ensure proper attribution.
The second volume, Collected Studies on BBP: Perspectives and Horizons, however, follows a different approach. It lists 32 individuals under “list of contributors” and also carries the names of authors with the title of the chapters.
The volume also identifies P. Phani Krishna, academic coordinator at the BBS and assistant professor of linguistics at Delhi University, along with P.B. Debnath and Sayantan Mitra, both academic consultants at the BBS, as the “in-house editorial team”.
According to sources, the academic who raised objections wrote to the BBS in October 2025, protesting the divergent practices followed in two volumes. His contribution was included in a chapter of the first volume without attribution. In his letter, he argued that merely listing contributors’ names at the beginning of a volume does not adequately represent individual scholarly contributions.
He also questioned how he could cite the work in his curriculum vitae, annual progress reports or institutional records when his name was not associated with the chapter he authored.
The academic requested the BBS to issue a corrigendum clearly identifying the portions authored by him. However, the BBS has not responded to his email for over three months.
Another contributor criticised the absence of peer review, stating that any academic study must be evaluated by subject experts before publication. “In-house review is not sufficient for publishing research papers,” he said.
“Peer review is the minimum ethical requirement for academic publication. Both volumes are silent on this aspect. At best, this can be termed a report, not a study,” the contributor added.
The BBS was set up by the NDA government in 2021. Shastry, a member of the RSS-affiliated Samskrita Bharati, has served as its chairman since then.
An email has been sent to Shastry on January 23, 2026, to understand his perspectives on the alleged authorship violations. His comments are awaited.