Umm, I don't think it's really "progressive" in India to learn English. I differ with Swagato on this completely. True, India bears a complicated relationship with the language because of its colonial past, but for the longest time ever now (and definitely in the 80s and the 90s) learning English has not been a big deal. In fact, it's not as complicated or as "edgy" a decision. Everyone learns English not because there is an overarching desire for the postcolonial subject to mimic the modernity of the colonial power but because, for whatever reason, English has become and is as much India's language as anyone elses. So the medium of instruction in India is actually English in all academic and professional contexts. This is not to say we don't study other "national" or "regional" languages - we do and we know it well. We're just equipped with more languages to speak in than the average person. I'm not saying Swagato's experience is false or invalid - but it's not as general as he makes it sound.
Besides, I find Swagato's stance on how the average Indian uses language slightly problematic, if not mildly insulting. It is not true that English is not taught well. If by not having a command over the language, Swagato means that 18 year olds in India don't speak like they've spent all their life reading the O.E.D, then that is true. But heh, where in the world do people talk without colloquialisms. I don't see what's wrong in a mix of idioms and expressions. I don't see what's so messy about your "mess" unless you have a problem dealing with a different kind of English (and by that I mean not really British or purely American). Would you then call Carribean English a mess too? What is "proper" English?
I find Swagato's views on and assessment of the situation slightly archaic and high-handed. Come on, whose language is it anyway?