The three academics, who were barred from offering their expertise following the row over an NCERT book chapter containing "offending" contents on corruption in the judiciary, approached the Supreme Court on Monday to explain their stand, saying no individual had the sole say in the drafting of the content and it was a collective process.
A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was told that the three experts -- Professor Michel Danion and his associates Suparna Diwakar and Alok Prasanna Kumar -- were not some "fly-by-night persons" and had a "lot of credibility".
Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing Alok Prasanna Kumar, submitted that the earlier comments of the court have caused great prejudice to them and hence they have filed applications to explain their stance.
The CJI asked Sankaranarayanan, "Are you defending your actions?" The senior counsel said the academicians are trying to give a context and the endeavour is to show the court the new pedagogy that has come as per the National Education Policy, including other issues.
"Class 6, Class 7 textbooks also deal with issues faced by the legislature, executive and the Election Commission.
"The argument was that the judiciary was singled out. Those issues have also been dealt with. We want to show the court the process. These are not fly-by-night persons. They are academicians with a lot of credibility. The author (Alok Prasanna) himself was an advocate and has appeared before this court," Sankaranarayanan submitted and sought time to be heard by the court.
Senior advocate Arvind Datar, appearing for Michel Danion, said that his client has also filed an explanation.
Senior advocate J Sai Deepak appeared for Suparna Diwakar and said, "The sum and substance of the application is that this was a collective process and no individual had the sole say or authority." The top court directed the application be taken on record and said it would hear them after two weeks.
It also recorded the submission of Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, appearing for the Centre, that a committee comprising former apex court judge Justice Indu Malhotra, former attorney general KK Venugopal and Prakash Singh, who is vice chancellor of Garhwal University, has been constituted to review the contents of the revised chapter.
It noted that the committee will collaborate with the National Judicial Academy at Bhopal headed by former apex court judge Justice Aniruddha Bose.
The bench also noted that NCERT had issued a notification dated April 2 reconstituting the National Syllabus and Teaching Learning Material Committee (NSTC), a high-powered committee for the preparation of the national syllabus and teacher learning material.
The committee will comprise 20 distinguished members, with MC Pant serving as its Chairman.
The top court posted the suo motu case for hearing after two weeks.
On March 11, acting tough against three experts involved in the drafting of the controversial chapter in NCERT's class 8 social science book, the top court had directed the Centre and all state governments to disassociate from them.
It directed the Centre to constitute a committee of domain experts within a week for the purpose of finalising the curriculum of NCERT's legal studies of not only class 8 but higher classes also.
The top court was informed that the chapter was drafted by the textbook development team under the chairmanship of Michel Danino and consisting of members Suparna Diwakar and Alok Prasanna Kumar.
"At the outset, we have no reason to doubt that professor Michel Danion and his associates Suparna Diwakar and Alok Prasanna Kumar either do not have reasonable informed knowledge with respect to Indian judiciary and/or they deliberately and knowingly misrepresented the facts in order to project a negative image of Indian judiciary before the students of class 8...," the bench had said.
The top court had said it sees no reason as to why these persons be associated in any manner for the purpose of preparation of curriculum or for finalisation of textbooks for the next generation of children.
It had directed the Centre, state governments and Union Territories, universities, and public institutions receiving government funds to "disassociate three of them forthwith and not to assign any responsibility which incur fully or partially public funds".
It had, however, said that the court’s order shall be subject to their approaching the top court for modification along with an explanation, if any, they wish to tender.
It noted that Professor Dinesh Prasad Saklani, Director of the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT), has filed an affidavit tendering unconditional and unqualified apology on his behalf and on behalf of NCERT for inclusion of the chapter.
On February 26, the apex court imposed a "complete blanket ban" on any further publication, reprinting or digital dissemination of NCERT's Class 8 social science book which contained the "offending" contents on corruption in the judiciary, saying they have fired a gunshot and the judiciary is "bleeding".
Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by The Telegraph Online staff and has been published from a syndicated feed.