Hijab Ban- Karnataka High Court Full Bench Hearing(Day 4)- LIVE UPDATES

Kumar refers to Rule 11 of the Education Rules.

He refers to the rule which says that educational institution should give one-year advance notice to parents for changing uniform.

Chief Justice says if the bench feels the requirement of assistance, the bench will hear the intervenors.

Prof Ravivarma Kumar Sr Adv now resumes submissions. He is referring to the Education Act.

Chief Justice : Alright. Let's begin the hearing.

AM Dar Sr Adv says Senior Advocates be given priority.

Adv Raj : Because it involves a constitutional issue, please permit intervenors for at least five minutes.

CJ : Petitioners are represented by senior lawyers.

Adv Shadan Farasat: Lordships may impose time limit on us. I am going to submit on international law and obligations in this context. I am sure nobody else is arguing that. Please impose time limit, but don't exclude us.

Chief Justice : Petitioners are being represented by senior advocates. Where is the question of considering the interventions? These applications will waste the time of the court.

Advocate General : In the Sabarimala dissenting matters, Justice Indua Malhotra had observed that in religious matters interventions in PIL cannot be allowed.

CJ : Your suggestion is that one lawyer should argue one petition and arguments should not be repeated. From the causelist we find so many IA have been filed regarding intervention. What we feel is that all these IA are not required to be considered. Because this is not a PIL

Adv Kaleswaram Raj: My suggestion is lordships should prescribe the order for arguing for each advocate and time limit.

Advocate General : I would support that.

Bench assembles.

Adv Subhash Jha: This is the fourth day, every lawyer is capable of arguing for hours. The submission is that issue which the lordships is to decide is not res-integra. Let it be decided as expeditiously as possible.