Hijab Case- Sabarimala Judgment Was Pro-Choice; Constitutional Morality Is A Restriction On State Power : Sr Adv Kamat Argues In Karnataka HC
Live LawSenior Advocate Devadatt Kamat today made his rejoinder arguments for Muslim girl students, who are before a Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court, challenging the action of a government PU college in denying their entry for wearing a hijab. Read detailed arguments by petitioners' side here: Permitting Hijab A National Practice; Even Kendriya Vidyalayas Allow; State Can't Say It's Not Essential : Kamat To Karnataka HC Hijab Ban: South African Judgment Allowing Hindu Girl To Wear Nose Ring In School As Cultural Practice Cited Before Karnataka HC If Turban Wearing People Can Be In Army, Why Not Hijab Wearing Girls In Classes : Ravivarma Kumar To Karnataka High Court The Advocate General appearing for the State has argued: wearing of hijab does not fall within the essential religious practise of Islam; right to wear hijab cannot be traced to freedom of expression under Article 19 of the Constitution; Government Order dated February 5 empowering College Development Committees to prescribe uniform is in consonance with the Education Act. Read State's arguments here: Hijab Ban - Students Should Not Wear Religious Symbols In Educational Institutions : Karnataka Govt Tells High Court Hijab Not Essential Practice Of Islam, Karnataka AG Says; What Was Necessity Of Saying This In GO, Asks High Court? High Court Asks Hijab Should Satisfy Tests Of Constitutional Morality & Individual Dignity As Held In Sabarimala Case : AG Tells Karnataka HC The Respondent college and its teachers have argued that students must follow the prescribed uniform to maintain discipline and public order.