PM SHRI Scheme Controversy

The PM SHRI scheme controversy has taken center stage in Indian education policy discussions. 

The Kerala government’s recent decision to approach the Supreme Court after the center withheld ₹1,500 crore in educational funding has intensified this issue.

 At the heart of the PM SHRI scheme controversy lies Kerala’s refusal to sign the MoU required to join the PM SHRI scheme, which many view as a larger battle over educational autonomy and centralization.

What is the PM SHRI Scheme?

The PM SHRI (Prime Minister’s Schools for Rising India) scheme is an initiative launched by the Union Ministry of Education to modernize 14,500 schools into model institutions. 

It aligns with the National Education Policy 2020, promoting digital infrastructure, smart classrooms, and skill-based learning. With a budget of ₹27,360 crore, the Centre contributes ₹18,128 crore over five years, sharing costs with the states.

However, the PM SHRI scheme controversy has exposed the friction in center-state relations, particularly concerning how such schemes are designed and implemented across India.

Kerala’s Opposition and Legal Stand

Kerala, along with Tamil Nadu and West Bengal, has refused to join the PM SHRI initiative. 

According to the Kerala government, the scheme is closely tied to the National Education Policy 2020, which they believe promotes the saffronization of education and undermines state-specific education models.

This position has deepened the PM SHRI scheme controversy, as the state now alleges that the center is using the scheme to exert undue influence. 

The matter is set to reach the Supreme Court through a Kerala Supreme Court education petition, claiming that the ₹1,500 crore withheld is critical to programs under the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan.

Broader Political and Educational Implications

The PM SHRI scheme controversy is not just a financial disagreement—it symbolizes a deeper rift in educational governance in India. 

Kerala argues that the scheme challenges the constitutional authority of states over education, sparking a classic center-state education funding conflict.

As the controversy continues, it adds fuel to the ongoing Kerala vs. Centre on education policy debate, which is now being closely watched by educationists, legal experts, and political analysts alike.

States Opting Out: More Than a Policy Decision

With three major states—Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal—choosing to stay out of the PM SHRI initiative, the PM SHRI scheme controversy now reflects a broader political resistance. 

The issue has become an example of how a central education scheme can turn into a full-fledged political showdown.

This resistance questions the center's one-size-fits-all approach and has reignited concerns over the impact of NEP on state autonomy and regional educational needs.

The NEP 2020 Dispute and the MoU Issue

One of the central triggers of the PM SHRI scheme controversy is the MoU that states are required to sign with the Union government. Kerala has objected to this clause, arguing that it binds the state to central directives, limiting flexibility.

This PM SHRI schools MoU issue is closely tied to the ongoing National Education Policy 2020 dispute, which critics say shifts control from state to central hands under the guise of reforms.

Final Thoughts

The PM SHRI scheme controversy is more than just a policy disagreement; it’s a test of federal principles in India’s education system. 

As the Kerala Supreme Court education petition moves forward, it may reshape how educational funding and governance operate between the center and states. In the end, the PM SHRI scheme controversy reflects the ongoing tug-of-war between national reforms and regional priorities. 

For SSC aspirants, this issue offers rich insight into how governance, law, and education policy intersect in real-world scenarios, making it a high-priority current affairs topic for 2025.