Ahmadi : We all know why they wear hijab, they come from conservative backgrounds. What will be natural fall out of this? From a pure common sense point. Is it not likely the effect. Most of girls wearing hijab come from very conservative families.
Ahmadi : When your lordships are considering a matter of vast importance, impacting several people...is it not a matter of common sense, whether or not evidence was read out, is not a common sensical fall out of the GO.
Justice Gupta : There is no foundation of that in the writ petition read by Mr.Mucchala that you are going to Madrassas, that is not the case set up. HC has not discussed it.
J Dhulia : Before the HC you said Essential Religious Practice.
Ahmadi : GO impinges upon the Preambular promise of fraternity and is opposed to fraternity both in letter and spirit.
Ahmadi : This particular class of students, who were confined to madrassas, had come out of the stereotypes and joined secular education. Today, if you take away, what they consider as an essential practice, what will be effect. They will be forced to go back to Madrassas.
Ahmadi : GO impinges upon the Preambular promise of fraternity and is opposed to fraternity both in letter and spirit.
Ahmadi : National Education Policy encapsulates the thinking that schools are places of diversity and critical thinking.
Ahmadi : National Education Policy 2020 does not mention the words uniform or discipline even once while discussing what constitutes good education
Ahmadi : This Court has disapproved forced homogeneity.
Ahmadi : GO confuses fraternity with uniformity and mandates that students should transcend their group identity and follow standardises practices.
Ahmadi : To say I will not accept someone else wearing the Hijab is contrary to the concept of Fraternity in the preamble.
Ahmadi : What is the rationale which comes out of the GO?
Justice Dhulia : They have pointed out GO does not say No Hijab and it only says nothing wrong if you say that.