Hijab Ban- Karnataka High Court Full Bench Hearing (Day 10)- LIVE UPDATES

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

24 Feb 2022 2:21 PM IST

  • Hijab Ban- Karnataka High Court Full Bench Hearing (Day 10)- LIVE UPDATES

    Karnataka High Court Full Bench will continue hearing on a batch of petitions challenging the hijab ban in educational institutions.The matter is before a bench comprising Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice JM Khazi will hear the petitions today at 2.30 PM.On Monday, Chief Justice sought a clarification from the State regarding its stand on banning hijab....

    Karnataka High Court Full Bench will continue hearing on a batch of petitions challenging the hijab ban in educational institutions.

    The matter is before a bench comprising Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice JM Khazi will hear the petitions today at 2.30 PM.

    On Monday, Chief Justice sought a clarification from the State regarding its stand on banning hijab. This arose in view of the AG's submission that the Government Order dated February 5, which has been challenged in the writ petitions, does not prescribe any ban on hijab and that it is only an "innocuous" order which asks students to follow the uniforms prescribed by their institutions.

    "What is your stand? Whether hijab can be permitted in institutions or not?", the Chief Justice raised a pointed query.

    "The operative portion of the GO leaves it to the institutions", the AG submitted.

    "If institutions permit hijab, you have objections?", the CJ asked further

    "If the institutions are to permit, we would possibly take a decision as and when the issue arises...", the AG responded.

    "You have to take a stand", the CJI reiterated.

    "My answer is that we have not prescribed anything. The Order , it gives complete autonomy to institution to decide uniform. Whether students be allowed to wear dress or apprarel which could be symbol of religion, the stand of the state is.. element of introducing religious dress should not be there in uniform. As a matter of principle, the answer is in preamble of Karnataka Education Act which is to foster secular environment", the AG replied.

    AG argued that petitioners have not shown that wearing hijab is an essential religious practice in Islam and thus, the protection under Article 25 of the Constitution is not available to them.

    Yesterday, the High Court clarified that the interim order passed by it on February 10, which prohibited wearing of religious dresses by students in classrooms, will apply to both degree colleges and Pre-University (PU) Colleges, where uniform has been prescribed.

    The Court also clarified that its order applies only to students and not teachers.

    FOLLOW THE LIVE UPDATES HERE

    Live Updates

    • 24 Feb 2022 4:32 PM IST

      Kamat : We don't have to go to Westminster. Please have a look at Section 143 of the Education Act. CDC is constituted by a 2014 circular. I am not challenging the circular. I am challenging the vesting of executive functions on this CDC, which are for the authorities under Act.

    • 24 Feb 2022 4:27 PM IST

      Kamat : Public order ground has been virtually given up. Now we come to the point whether the College Development Committee, which I call the MLA committee, has jurisdiction to prescribe this. Your lordships put searching questions to both sides.

    • 24 Feb 2022 4:27 PM IST

      Kamat cites a judgment.

      Justice Dixit gives the citation.

      Kamat : I am amazed at your lordships memory. At my age, I can't remember.

    • 24 Feb 2022 4:26 PM IST

      Kamat: In the affidavit the state say they are doing it on the ground of Public Order. There is a version of public order in the GO, given up by the AG in the arguments. A definition of Public order against the constitution is put. Is this the way a GO is framed?

    • 24 Feb 2022 4:26 PM IST

      Kamat : Now we come to the operative part..g has said last three lines of the operative part of GO was not required. So it has been given up. We have a public order ground in the GO, given up by the AG during the arguments.

    • 24 Feb 2022 4:23 PM IST

      Kamat : Third reason why this penultimate part has to go, apart from concessions and doctrine of dictation, is that there is no material. If the judgements are irrelevant, then what is the material to come to understand that hijab is not permissible.

    • 24 Feb 2022 4:22 PM IST

      Justice Dixit : Acting under dictation..the principle in administrative law.

      Kamat : Citing judgments on this point, I know is showing lamb to the shining sun.

    • 24 Feb 2022 4:22 PM IST

      Kamat: Second, even if lordships were to discard the concession made by AG. This portion of the GO also has to go because it offends the doctrine of dictation in administrative law. AG says operative portion is innocuous but master is saying hijab is not essential.

    • 24 Feb 2022 4:22 PM IST

      Kamat : This understanding of state in the GO was totally flawed. Firstly, none of those judgments cited are applicable. AG kept on saying till the end that he will explain those judgements, but they were not explained. According to me this part of the GO has to go.

    • 24 Feb 2022 4:18 PM IST

      Kamat : Learned AG in all fairness on first day of opening has clearly said that this is not the purport of the order. He has said that it could be result of over enthusiasm and he has said it may be not required.

    Next Story