It is basically your internal affair. We have learned that imposing a foreign language on a people has dire consequences.India also went through a phase for several years after independence when many North Indian leaders felt that Hindi should be the link language of India (as English was considered a colonial relic). However, that led to agitations in the South against Hindi (and through that North Indian) imposition. There are still some confused politicians who call for Hindi as the link language but now it is no longer compulsory to learn Hindi in south but it is an optional language.
An observation only:
You impose Sanskritized Hindi with military boots on the ground where you can. The Nagas, Mizos, Garo, Khasis, and the people of Sikkim, Manipur, Arunachal, Tamil Nadu, oppose the imposition of official Sankritized Hindi in the Devnagari script as dictated by your Rajbhasha Viibhag ( Department of official languages). Goa and Maharashtra oppose official Hindi too. Very few Indians are against common simple street Hindustani ( Hindi ) mixed with local dialects. India has given up using the Hindi language as a tool of cultural oppression only on non-Hindi speakers religious majority population. The language is linked to a religious identity: "Hindi Hindu Hindustan "
An interesting article here explains the cultural straight jacket:
The rule is different for minorities of course.
In Kashmir you just recently dumped Urdu and substituted it with Sanskritized Hindi in the Devnagari script hoping to "transform" Kashmiris into the " Indian " mold.
Curious to see Indians touting linguistic similarities with Pakistan over Urdu, when the language itself in its written form is dead in India, basically killed off under the "Hindi, Hindu, Hindustan " slogan. Urdu was native to India in the north; studied and spoken by urban elite with no religious distinctions. Urdu co-existed with Hindi in the Devnagari script until the growing communal divide since the 1920s deemed anyone speaking or writing in Urdu an anti-national in India.
For some obscure reason not clearly defined why, the western zone of Pakistan in 1947 adopted Urdu as the language of communication when it should have been Saraiki. The biggest, and in my opinion only mistake made by Mr. Jinnah (himself a Gujarati speaker) was to declare Urdu as the national language of Pakistan which had tragic consequences later with regards to the former eastern wing. That is in the past now and we in Pakistan are much wiser, which is why all signage and documentation now is in both the local language as well as Urdu. In time Urdu will fade away and a new link language most probably Saraiki will emerge. Mandarin will be the language for technical and scientific education.
.In many aspects, India's diversity is more continental in nature. Hence, no surprise that we do need interpreters with the same country.
Keep your Parliament interpreters. Just don't envision adding Pashto, Punjabi, Baluchi, and Sindhi speaking interpreters to your interpreter pool.
Ram Manohar Lohia would not have been amused.An interesting story of my student days. We went on a student exchange trip to Europe where we were travelling to Hungary. While checking into a hotel there, we Indians (7 of us from various regions of India) started discussing in English among us. The receptionist asked in surprise as to why we were not talking in 'Indian' amongst us. It would have taken too long for us to explain why so we just smiled and went our way.
To round up from last paragraph in the excellent article in Scroll.in
" In 1955, an Official Languages Commission was appointed by the Union government to coin modern Hindi words given that it was going to be used for the first time as an administrative language. In his autobiography, Hindi poet Harivansh Rai Bachchan describes the amazement the “incomprehensible” Sanskritic neologisms caused. A radio was “vidyut prasaran” (electrical broadcasting device) and a train “lauhpath gamini” (ferrous-path voyager)."