"In the matters of campus discipline of the educational institutions, the Court does not substitute its own views in place of the school". Justice Hement Gupta in Hijab Case .

 

Aishat Shifa vs The State of Karnataka and others.
Civil Appeal 7095 of 2022 decided on 13 October 2022
Justice Hemant Gupta and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia

23. We have heard learned counsels for the parties at length. I find that the following questions arise for consideration in the present appeals: 

(i) Whether the appeals should be heard along with Kantaru Rajeevaru (Right to Religion, In Re-9J) and/or should the present appeals be referred to the Constitution Bench in terms of Article 145(3) of the Constitution?

(ii) Whether the State Government could delegate its decision to implement the wearing of uniform by the College Development Committee or the Board of Management and whether the Government Order insofar as it empowers a College Development Committee to decide on the restriction/prohibition or otherwise on headscarves is ex facie violative of Section 143 of the Act?

(iii) What is ambit and scope of the right to freedom of ‘conscience’ and ‘religion’ under Article 25? 

(iv) What is the ambit and scope of essential religious practices under Article 25 of the Constitution? 

(v) Whether fundamental rights of freedom of expression under Article 19(1)(a) and right of privacy under Article 21 mutually exclusive or are they complementary to each other; and whether the Government Order does not meet the injunction of reasonableness for the purposes of Article 21 and Article 14? 

(vi) Whether the Government Order impinges upon Constitutional promise of fraternity and dignity under the Preamble as well as fundamental duties enumerated under Article 51-A sub-clauses (e) and (f)? 

(vii) Whether, if the wearing of hijab is considered as an essential religious practice, the student can seek right to wear headscarf to a secular school as a matter of right? 

(viii) Whether a student-citizen in the constitutional scheme is expected to surrender her fundamental rights under Articles 19, 21 and 25 as a precondition for accessing education in a State institution? 

(ix) Whether in the constitutional scheme, the State is obligated to ensure ‘reasonable accommodation’ to its citizens? 

(x) Whether the Government Order is contrary to the legitimate State interest of promoting literacy and education as mandated under Articles 21, 21A, 39(f), 41, 46 and 51A of the Constitution? 

(xi) Whether the Government Order neither achieves any equitable access to education, nor serves the ethic of secularism, nor is true to the objective of the Karnataka Education Act?”

In the matters of campus discipline of the educational institutions, the Court does not substitute its own views in place of the school authority except in a case of manifest injustice.


Read further  




 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Back to Golaknath – Cosmic journey of the Basic Structure doctrine.

Image
  S.Basavaraj, Senior Advocate, Bengaluru.  The Karnataka Government has taken a decision on 8:10:2022 to increase the quota for Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes from existing 15% and 3% to 17% and 7%. It also proposes to include the legislation in the 9th schedule of the Constitution of India. The article deals with challenge that can be made to a legislation on the doctrine of basic structure and the development of the doctrine.  Overture: With the Supreme Court recognising Articles 14, 19 and 21 golden triangle as part of the basic structure of the Constitution of India in I.R. Coelho v. State of T.N., (2007) 2 SCC 1, challenge to amendment of the Constitution on the anvil of Article 13(2) as enunciated in Golak Nath v. State of Punjab, AIR 1967 SC 1643 has finally reached its original destination at least to a quintessential level. Article 13 which occurs in Part III Fundamental Rights, as it originally enacted in 1950, read thus; 13. Laws inconsistent with o...
Read more

Supreme Court Judge’s children and relatives indulged in sharp practice to obtain favourable orders from the trial Court Judges. Justice Krishna Bhat revels shocking state of affairs.

Image
  The reply speech of Justice Krishna Bhat on his retirement makes shocking revelation about superior Court Judges' kith and kin misusing their position to obtain favourable orders in subordinate Courts. Justice Krishna Bhat candidly discloses how the children of the Supreme Court Judge have been misusing their position. There are instances where the children of SC Judge visiting the trial Court Judges with clients asking for favourable orders/judgments.    Excerpts from Justice Krishna Bhat’s speech.     “Now, I find certain coyness at the higher level and it was felt necessary to rechristen the manner of referring to subordinate Courts in a manner at variance with the nomenclature found at Chapter VI of the Constitution of India. I am not certain that all these similar measures have ensured to instil a sense of self-confidence, value of self respect and sense of independence among the members of subordinate judiciary and without that I suspect Judges at the Tr...
Read more

"Stop pleasing superior Court Judges in the name of protocol. Your judicious acts will protect you". Justice Krishna Bhat urges trial Court Judges.

Image
The reply speech of Justice Krishna Bhat on his retirement has provided substantial material for serious debates concerning the institution of judiciary especially at the Taluka and District levels.  Justice Krishna Bhat's speech makes scathing attack on the following practices. 1. Judges of the superior Courts expecting royal treatment from the trial Court Judges. 2. Kith and kin of superior Court judges trying to influence the trial Court Judges in the discharge of judicial functions. 3. Trial Court Judges trying to please superior Court Judges by unnecessary, unwarranted and often questionable methods. Excerpts from Justice Krishna Bhat’s speech.   “Now, I find certain coyness at the higher level and it was felt necessary to rechristen the manner of referring to subordinate Courts in a manner at variance with the nomenclature found at Chapter VI of the Constitution of India. I am not certain that all these similar measures have ensured to instil a sense of self-...
Read more