“School uniform fosters a sense of ‘equality’ amongst students- instils a sense of oneness, diminishes individual differences, helps focus on learning.” Justice Hemant Gupta.

    

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?” 

195. The argument is that the State is under a positive obligation to create an environment conducive for the exercise of fundamental rights. Conversely, it means that the subjects have no responsibility to create a conducive environment in a nondiscriminatory manner. If the students of one faith insist on a particular dress, there is no stopping for the others to carry their faiths and beliefs to the schools. It would not be conducive to the pious atmosphere of the school where the students seek admission for education. In fact, uniform fosters a sense of ‘equality’ amongst students- instills a sense of oneness, diminishes individual differences, helps focus on learning as students would not be bothered about their social status, improves discipline, fewer conflicts in school, promotes school spirit- generates a sense of belonging, pride, loyalty towards the school, relieves economic pressure on the parents, ensures equality before the educational institution, serves the need of a diverse community and promotes a positive sense of communal identity and does not lead to the growth of disparities of wealth and style. School is the time to learn and lay foundation for the future pursuits in life. The students are expected to maintain discipline and the school is responsible to lay a strong foundation so as to nurture the students as responsible citizens of the country.