Hijab not essential religious practice, ban doesn't affect students' rights: Karnataka govt to HC

The Advocate General also argued that a ban on the hijab in campuses does not violate the right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution

Published: 18th February 2022 04:42 PM  |   Last Updated: 18th February 2022 05:43 PM   |  A+A-

Karnataka High Court

Karnataka High Court (Photo | EPS)

By Express News Service

BENGALURU: Strongly defending the stand of the state government on the hijab issue, Advocate General Prabhuling K Navadagi argued before the Karnataka High Court that the ban is perfectly in accordance with the provisions of the Karnataka Education Act.

Referring to the issues raised by the counsels of the petitioners-students questioning the order passed by the state government on February 5, 2022 to ban the hijab and saffron shawls, Navadagi contended that the hijab is not an essential part of religious practice, as claimed by them.

He also argued that a ban on the hijab in campuses does not violate the right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. As the government does not want to interfere in the matter, religious issues in educational institutions including the decision of prescribing uniforms was left autonomously to the College Development Committee (CDC), he added.

ALSO READ | Hijab row spills over to another college in Udupi, students protest over new dress code

Contending that the impugned government order does not affect any rights of the petitioners-students, he also defended the constitution of CDCs in colleges.

Meanwhile, the full bench of Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justices Krishna S Dixit and JM Khazi adjourned the hearing to Monday.  

Before the adjournment, a counsel of the students submitted before the court that the interim order is being misused by some educational institutions asking students to remove the hijab, though the order was restricted to institutions where CDCs are constituted.

This apart, the minorities welfare department has also implemented the interim order in the educational institutions coming under it, he added. The Advocate General objected, saying that there was no cause of action.

Then the bench asked the counsel to file a proper application before the court to take cognisance.



Comments

Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the newindianexpress.com editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on newindianexpress.com are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of newindianexpress.com or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. newindianexpress.com reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

flipboard facebook twitter whatsapp