Hijab Ban- Karnataka High Court Full Bench Hearing- LIVE UPDATES

Kamat: State says wearing of head scarf can be a problem as other students want to display their religious identity. The answer has been given by SC, the state has to make a conducive atmosphere.

Kamat : Whether the right to religion offends public order is to be decided by the State.

CJ : The GO does not say anything about public order. GO says uniform is to be decided by CDC.

Justice Dixit : Do you want to exclude legislators? Kindly read and do not make assumptions. It is said Committee comprises of x, y, z. MLAs have no veto power.

Kamat : Are not MLAs aware of constitutional provisions?They will do accordingly.

Kamat : This is an extra-legal committee. See the repercussions. I can understand the State doing it. This is a mockery of Fundamental freedom. I say it is completely illegal.

Kamat : Constitution says Article 25 will be subject to public order. State says public order will be what is decided by an MLA committee. Public order is an essential state function. Can't be left to MLA Committee?

Kamat : I daresay that the person who has drafted this GO has not looked at Article 25.

Kamat: This whole delegation to CDC to decide whether to permit of wearing of headscarf or not is a total abdication of state responsibility.

Kamat : That issue does not arise here. People are only wanting to wear a headscarf which is a facet of their right of conscience.

Kamat : The last submission which I want to make is even I need not go as far deep into ERP at all. Because ERP theory comes in when practice of fundamental rights of religion violates someone else fundamental rights.

Kamat : Since the Quran itself says so in respect of head scarf, we need not go to any other authority and this will be protected under Article 25.