36. There is an another argument on behalf of the appellant that the respondents/petitioners could not have turned around after having appeared in the examination and acquiesced to the procedure prescribed under the notification. To this, the answer of learned counsel for the respondents/petitioners is that there cannot be a medium of instruction in respect of the Higher Grade technical qualification of Sewing, Music, Drawing and Physical Education. We cannot accept this argument of the respondents/petitioners, inasmuch as no educational course can be normally imparted without a medium of instruction. Even the Deaf and Dumb schools have a medium of visual reading and lip movement and the school for the Blind have a Braille medium. The subjects of Special Teachers are not only practical, but also contain some part of theory. The argument of the respondents/petitioners that there is no medium at all to study the subjects is simply preposterous. Whether it is Drawing or whether it is Sewing or Music or Physical Education, the course has to be imparted even if orally, through an instruction, which has to have a medium. Thus, the argument that there is no medium as urged by the respondents/petitioners has to be rejected outright. A script has to be studied and translated either by signs or by any other medium or by any other linguistic medium. We can only advise the writ petitioners and the learned counsel to read an authority on the subject viz., “The Loom of Language” by Frederic Bodmer.
