The Kerala government has decided to continue with the Pradhan Mantri Schools for Rising India (PM SHRI) scheme while placing conditions on its implementation. The decision comes as the state reviews the legal, financial and policy implications of participating in the centrally sponsored programme. A four-member cabinet sub-committee has been formed to examine these issues before further action is taken.
PM SHRI, launched by the Union Ministry of Education, seeks to develop selected government schools into model institutions aligned with the objectives of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. Kerala has stated that its participation in the scheme should not alter the state’s curriculum framework or its administrative role in school education. The developments are significant for the 2026–27 academic session as they involve education funding, Centre-state coordination and the implementation of national education initiatives.
Kerala to Proceed with PM SHRI Under State-Specific Conditions
The Congress-led United Democratic Front (UDF) government has said Kerala will continue with the PM SHRI scheme while preserving its existing education framework.
Chief Minister V.D. Satheesan said the previous Left Democratic Front (LDF) government had signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Centre in 2025. According to the state government, the agreement has legal and financial implications that require careful consideration before any decision on withdrawal can be taken.
To review the matter, the government has constituted a four-member cabinet sub-committee headed by General Education Minister N. Samsudheen. The committee has been tasked with examining the legal provisions of the MoU, assessing the financial implications and recommending how the scheme can be implemented without affecting Kerala’s education policies.
Kerala’s Current Position
|
Issue |
State Government’s Position |
|
Curriculum |
Continue with the Kerala Curriculum Framework (KCF). |
|
School Selection |
Retain authority over selecting participating schools. |
|
Education Policy |
Existing state education policies will remain unchanged. |
|
Next Step |
Await the cabinet sub-committee’s recommendations. |
Curriculum Differences Remain a Key Issue
Differences between Kerala’s curriculum framework and the National Education Policy 2020 continue to be a central part of the discussion.
The state follows the Kerala Curriculum Framework (KCF) 2023, which differs from the NEP in areas such as school structure, admission age and curriculum priorities. According to the state government, the framework places emphasis on scientific temper, democratic values, secularism and gender sensitivity while also promoting regional cultural traditions through classroom learning.
Curriculum Comparison
|
Area |
Kerala Curriculum Framework |
NEP 2020 |
|
School Structure |
3+7+5 model |
5+3+3+4 model |
|
Class 1 Admission Age |
6 years |
Recommended at 5 years |
|
Curriculum Focus |
Scientific temper, democratic values, secularism and gender sensitivity |
National policy framework |
|
Cultural Learning |
Includes Kathakali, Mohiniyattam and Kalaripayattu |
Integration of arts into school education |
Kerala has also continued using supplementary learning material for selected subjects as part of its curriculum framework.
Financial Implications Remain Under Review
According to the Kerala government, withdrawing from the PM SHRI agreement could affect funding linked to school infrastructure and ongoing education programmes.
General Education Minister N. Samsudheen told the Assembly that the provisions of the MoU make unilateral withdrawal legally complex. The government has stated that discontinuing participation could affect funding earmarked for PM SHRI schools as well as pending allocations under the Samagra Shiksha programme.
Funding Potentially Affected (State Government Estimate)
|
Funding Component |
Estimated Amount |
|
PM SHRI school infrastructure support |
₹912–1,000 crore |
|
Pending Samagra Shiksha allocation |
₹1,151.48 crore |
|
Total funding potentially affected |
More than ₹2,000 crore |
The cabinet sub-committee is expected to examine these estimates as part of its review.
Education Funding Also Under Discussion
The delay in the release of Samagra Shiksha funds has become part of the broader debate surrounding the scheme.
According to the Kerala government, the delay has affected welfare measures intended for differently-abled children, including access to assistive devices, educational support and related services.
Separately, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education has observed that funding under the Samagra Shiksha programme should be considered independently of policy differences related to the implementation of PM SHRI. The committee’s observations have added to the wider discussion on education funding and Centre-state coordination.
Political Responses Reflect Differing Views
The government’s decision has drawn varied responses from political parties and organisations.
Some leaders within the ruling coalition have expressed reservations about implementing the scheme while maintaining that Kerala’s education framework should remain unchanged. Opposition leaders have questioned the government’s interpretation of the MoU and its position on whether the agreement can be withdrawn from. There have also been differing views regarding the nature of funds released by the Centre and their relationship with the PM SHRI programme.
These differing positions continue to shape the debate on education policy and Centre-state relations in Kerala.
What Happens Next?
The cabinet sub-committee is expected to submit its findings after reviewing the legal, financial and policy aspects of the PM SHRI scheme.
Its recommendations will help determine how Kerala proceeds with implementation while retaining its curriculum framework and administrative role in school education. The outcome may also influence future discussions on education funding and the implementation of national education initiatives in other states.
At the time of writing, the cabinet sub-committee’s report has not been made public, and the state’s final implementation framework is awaited.