Thread by @LawBeatInd

A Special Bench of #KarnatakaHighCourt will shortly resume hearing plea(s) by girl students challenging alleged ban on wearing #Hijab in government PU colleges in Udupi district. Ravivarma Kumar,Sr.Adv, is expected to resume his arguments today. #HijabRow #HijabControversy

While @Devadattkamat concluded his arguments yesterday. The court pulled up a lawyer appearing for the petitioners for filing an application with his affidavit as opposed to that of his client’s #HijabRow #HijabControversy

lawbeat.in/top-stories/la…

Bench assembles #HijabRow #HijabControversy

Subhash Jha: This matter has been going for a few days, let it be decided as expeditiously as possible. The news on this has been picked up by international media. Let us confine to the issue in hand. #HijabRow #HijabControversy

AG: Some time limit may be given.

Court: One lawyer shall one petition. Arguments shall not be repeated. We find that so many interventions have been filed. #HijabRow All these interventions are not required to be considered.

Court: This is not a PIL. These are the WP filed by individual persons, they are being heard. Where is the question of considering these interventions? #HijabRow They will waste the time of the court. #HijabControversy

Court: PILs are also there before us. We will hear them also.

Farasat: Your lordships may hear us, please impose a time limit. #HijabRow #KarnatakaHijabControversy

Dhar, Sr.Adv: Lordships may give time to senior advocates to present their case.

Kaleeswaram Raj submits.

Court: If we require any assistance, we will call upon you to come submit before this court. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Prof. Ravivarma Kumar is called upon to argue.

Kumar: Kindly permit me to show that prescribing the uniform is not vested in any provisions of the act

Kumar refers to pages in his petitioner. Rules under the Karnataka Education Act, 1983. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar: According to these rules, parents have to be given one year notice if there is a change in uniform. The same applies to #Hijab #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar argues on 1995 Rules framed under the Education Act. #HijabRow #HijabBan . He further reads rules pertaining o PU Colleges (Pre University Colleges)

Kumar: The government order has declared that there is no uniform prescribed for college. #HijabRow Can we look into Annexure J

*Audio is unclear* #HijabBan #KarnatakaHighCourt

Kumar reads from guidelines which says uniform is illegal in PU government Colleges.

Kumar: The respondent here is PU government college. This is in the nature of guidelines issued for academic year 21-22 by Department of PU Education. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Court: There is nothing on who has issued and under what authority.

Kumar: This is in the nature of regulation issued by government.

Court: It cannot be a regulation.

Kumar: It is not a rule, it is a statement. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar: I am not saying that it has a force of law.

Court: Is it issued under Section 133 of the Act?

Kumar: It is not an order. The order also recognises it.

Court: You are pressing into this instrument in support of you contention. What is its legality? #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar: This document is all encompassing, it provides academic calendar, admission procedure etc are all given in this. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar explains the guidelines. Takes the court through the document, chapter wise. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar: I am not enforcing this document, I am placing before the court to say what the department itself has said. Principal will be proceeded against in a disciplinary enquiry if they enforce a uniform #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar: Neither the provisions under the act nor under rule is there a prohibition to wear #Hijab there is not prohibition to wearing Hijab. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Court: That may not be the correct question. If this is adopted, there is no ban to carry licensed arms to class

Court: There is no prohibition for carrying anything dangerous to classroom, the power to prescribe has been made available. That has to be independently argued if there is such a prescription. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar: I am not expanding the proposition. I am only saying there is no prohibition. Under what authority have been kept out of class? What rule? #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar reads from a document from his compilation. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar : The GO dated 5th February is a direct indictment of those coming to classes with #Hijab #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar: The government has delegated the power to prescribe uniform to CDC, may I request the court to refer to Education Act? #HijabRow #HijabBan Kindly come to Section 143 of the Act.

Kumar: I have already shown that CDC is not an authority, much less subordinate. So it has no sanction. Kindly come to the 2014 GO by which CDC is formed. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar: Their purpose is to utilise the grants, maintaining academic standards and development of infrastructure. This is not constituted to take care of students welfare.

Court: Can the uniforms not be prescribed to maintain standards? #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar: It cannot be

Court: Why cant it be read that it is for maintaining uniformity and discipline? You are saying, police power, What is it? Uniforms are prescribed in Paatshalas, In education there cannot be any police power #HijabRow #HijabBan

Court: Courts have never treated this as police power. If you bring any judgment I will be happy.

Kumar: The power to discipline student is what I am referring to as police power. #HijabBan #HijabRow

Court: You say CDC has no power to prescribe uniform?

Kumar: This is a committee to which no power can be delegated, it is not an authority under the act. Can an MLA be considered to government? #HijabRow #HijabBan The court asked what is wrong if MLA occupies this position

Kumar: Here is an MLA who is endowed with administrative power, this takes away the basic quality of Indian democracy. Apart from the fact that doctrine of separation of powers ensures no mixing up of 2 function. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar: MLA or MP cannot be entrusted with any power either under the Statute or under the constitution. In 2015, the government constituted a committed under a local MLA for distributing houses. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Court: Was it struck down?

Kumar: The order is stayed. If I can say so. #HijabRow #HijabBan the government moved for vacation the order. The stay was continued.

Kumar: Here the MLAs have been given financial powers. Take judicial note of the fact that MLA will be representing a political party. #HijabRow Can you entrust students to a political party or ideology ? #HijabBan

Kumar: Constitution of a committee of this nature is a death blow to Indian Democracy #HijabRow #HijabBan This order has to be ignored. Don't allow them to exercise power on the student.

Kumar: In South India we are vert fond of religious symbols. The extent to which the religious symbols go is a long way.
Kumar speaks of a case where there is dispute on symbol on a temple elephant's forehead. (Thengalai/Vadagalai) #HijabRow #HijabBan

Court: This should not happen in this case. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar wants to refer to a research paper for the court's information.

Kumar: Kindly take judicial note of the fact that every college going student wears a dupatta.

Court: What is the authenticity of this paper? #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar: I am not asking the court to accept the empirical data. I am not insisting on accepting this. If there are 100 symbols, why is the government picking up only #Hijab ? #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar: Why only #Hijab is taken for this hostile discrimination? Is it not because of the religion ? #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar: Are bangles not religious symbols? Why only pick up these poor muslim girls for discrimination? #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar refers to Article 15.

Kumar: The petitioners are subjected to this only because of their religion. A dupatta is not bad, a bangle wearer is not sent out, a bindi wearer is not sent out? Why only these girls? Cross is also a religious symbol. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Court: It speaks of all persons. You are speaking of this. Suppose if a Hindu wants to wear #Hijab he cannot?

Kumar: It is not. I just want to demonstrate plurality of religious symbols. Why not the crucifix or turban? #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar reads from a #SupremeCourt judgment AIR 1953 SC Page 384. #HijabBan #HijabRow

Kumar reads from another judgment of the #SupremeCourt . AIR 1960 SC 1208 #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar: In the case wherever special police force is deployed the community had to pay the cost. They were exempted for Muslims and Harijans. #HijabBan #HijabRow

Kumar: No other religious symbol is considered in the GO, why only #Hijab? Is it not because of the religion? the discrimination is based purely on their religion #HijabRow #HijabBan

Court: If someone belonging to other community, wears a head gear for medical condition, will she be barred?

Kumar: They can claim exemption. We are not permitted, we are punished straight away. Can they be called teachers? #HijabRow #HijabBan here it is full of prejudice

Kumar: the goal of education is to promote plurality. The classroom should be a reflection of the diversity in the society. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar refers to judgments of the #SupremeCourt in support of his case. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar: This is for the proposition that heterogeneity should be maintained. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar: My respectful submission is if people wearing turban can be in the army, why not a person sporting a religious symbol be not permitted to attend classes? #HijabRow #HijabBan

Kumar: among the girls, Muslim girls are least educated, they have the least representation. They can't be shut out from this on the ground #HijabRow #HijabBan

Court: Can Mr. Yusuf Mucchala, Sr.Adv star.

Mucchala: The petitioners are also Muslim girls, they have been at PU classes pursuing the 2nd year. They have been wearing #Hijab without any problem. After the impugned order, they have been denied their right #HijabRow #HijabBan

Mucchala: The first point I would like to say is that this order suffers from manifest arbitrariness. The court is well aware of the legal propositions in the case of Sairaa Bano. The whole exercise of preventing the Muslim girls from wearing #Hijab is arbitrary #HijabRow

Mucchala refers to the judgment of the #Supremecourt in the triple talaq case.
Court: Are you citing this on manifest arbitrariness?
Mucchala: yes milord. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Mucchala: Can I read the response filed by the government milord. The court may turn to rules which are quoted. These rules provided that there should be a notice if you want to prescribe a uniform.

Court: That is for changing, not prescribing. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Mucchala: These girls were wearing the #Hijab since they joined the college. Can they prescribe the color of the glass a girl is wearing? Uniform must also include something extra .

Court: Were head dress prescribed in the uniform> #HijabRow #HijabBan

Mucchala: If a girl comes bare footed, can she not come to classes? When we say uniform, we cant so strictly confine. We need to understand what was the practice of the school. A notice should have been given. They should be informed. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Court: You say that notice should have been give?

Mucchala: Fairness requires it. Is it a fair procedure ? The parents should have been heard, the girl should have been heard. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Mucchala: Why were the PTA not consulted? What was the hurry to get done with it ? The hurry is that some students are objecting. They are not placing their claim on any religion or any right. Is this fairness? #HijabRow #HijabBan

Mucchala: This is being done only on the grounds of religion. #HijabRow #HijabBan . The fact that it is being done because of opposition is also recorded. It is totally unfair, hence it is manifest arbitrariness.

Mucchala: The question whether a religious a practice is an ERP is compulsory under Article 26, not under Article 25. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Mucchala reads from Article 25.

Mucchala: Sabarimala speaks of how far a court can interfere in the religious rights of the people #HijabRow #HijabBan

Mucchala: In our case Kamat has established that wearing #Hijab is an integral part. The belief has to be protected

Court: You are saying that the ERP test is not necessary for the purpose of attracting in Art 25(1) #HijabRow #HijabBan

Mucchala: One fundamental right reinforces the order. One is not detrimental to the other. Here the impact is important, not the object milords. Here the impact is on my right to education all in the name of maintaining discipline. Why are the Muslim girls put to this choice ?

Mucchala: This choice should be disregarded. This is also opposed to fundamental duties of a citizen. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Mucchala now refers to Karnataka Education Act, 1983.

Mucchala: IS this practice promoting harmony? Is it not against the fundamental duties. #HijabRow #HijabBan The purpose of the act is to promote harmony. When the established practice is there why should they do this? Are we promoting harmony or brotherhood?

Court: We have understood what you are saying, will you be able to finish today? Do you have any other point to elaborate ?

Mucchala: The doctrine of proportionality milord. I would like to submit on this. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Court: If you want to elaborate , give in written submission.
Mucchala: I want to read the components and how it has been totally ignored. I will finish it in 10 minutes. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Mucchala reads from Modern Dental College Vs State of MP of #SupremeCourt

Mucchala: Please come to para 59 milords. #HijabRow #HijabBan

Mucchala: This particular impugned action is not advancing the purpose of the Education Act. #HijabRow Harmony is the real purpose of the act. The measure will go against the purpose of harmony #HijabBan if they want to have uniformity, why not consult?

Mucchala: This is totally disproportionate milord, this is the ground in addition to all the grounds. I thank your lordships. Is this the interim stage?

Court: We dont how you have started arguments, we have started hearing.

#HijabRow #HijabBan

Court: We have not disposed off any interim relief application, let it be very clear.

Court:
We have heard Prof. Kumar and Mr.Yusuf Mucchala has argued today as well. Put up tomorrow at 2.30 Pm.

Court: We are left with 2 PILs. only 2 WPs on behalf of the petitioner #HijabRow

Kumar: A proper application has now been made, seeking a clarification that students will wear the same uniforms. They will use their dupatta to cover their head #HijabRow #HijabBan

AM Dar, Sr.Adv: my matter may also be heard milord.

Court: We will hear you #HijabRow #HijabBan

Court: Take it that we are not permitting anyone to intervene. #HijabRow #HijabBan . There is an IA , the same person has also filed a WP. Why should a cost be not be imposed?