NEW DELHI: A Supreme Court judge, Justice Hemant Gupta on Thursday upheld the Karnataka government's decision to ban wearing of hijab inside classrooms of Pre University Colleges, saying permitting one community to wear their religious symbols would be antithesis to secularism.
Justice Gupta dismissed appeals challenging the Karnataka High Court's March 15 judgment which had rejected petitions filed against the state government's decision.
"Secularism is applicable to all citizens, therefore, permitting one religious community to wear their religious symbols would be antithesis to secularism. Thus, the Government Order cannot be said to be against the ethic of secularism or to the objective of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983, he wrote in his separate judgement.
In rather strong words, he said, If a particular student feels that she cannot compromise with the wearing of headscarf or of any other student to wear any outwardly religious symbol, the school would be justified not to allow such student, in the larger interest of treating all the students alike as a part of mandate of Article 14, which is central to the theme of Part III of the Constitution.
The state government disallowed headscarf in Class 10+1 and 10+2.
The students have many years ahead of them where they can carry on their religious faith but the Government Order mandating the wearing of uniform cannot be faulted since the object is in tune with the principles of the Constitution, Justice Gupta wrote.
He further said that 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 and 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- instils 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, Justice Gupta wrote in his 133-page judgment.
The judge also said 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.
The Government Order cannot be said to be contrary to the legitimate State goal of promoting literacy and education. Article 21A is not applicable as all the students are over 14 years of age. The students have a right to education under Article 21, but not of insisting on wearing something additional to the uniform, in a secular school, as a part of their religion, Justice Gupta held.
So, the Government Order cannot be said to be contrary to the State goal of promoting literacy and education as mandated under the Constitution, he concluded.
The Government Order only ensures that the uniform prescribed is adhered to by the students and it cannot be said that the State is restricting the access to education to the girl students through such an Order, Justice Gupta said.
Justice Gupta further went on to declare that the students cannot assert that they have a right to education but they would avail such right as per their own wish and in the manner which they consider appropriate.
Defiance to rules of the school would in fact be antithesis of discipline which cannot be accepted from the students who are yet to attain adulthood. Therefore, they should grow in an atmosphere of brotherhood and fraternity and not in the environment of rebel or defiance, Justice Gupta said.
He said the pre-university college is open to all students of all castes and religions and the object of the state is to provide an opportunity for the students to study in the secular schools.
"The practice of wearing of hijab may be a religious practice or an essential religious practice or it may be social conduct for the women of Islamic faith. The interpretations by the believers of the faith about wearing of headscarf is the belief or faith of an individual. The religious belief cannot be carried to a secular school maintained out of State funds. It is open to the students to carry their faith in a school which permits them to wear Hijab or any other mark, may be tilak, which can be identified to aperson holding a particular religious belief but the State is within its jurisdiction to direct that the apparent symbols of religious beliefs cannot be carried to school maintained by the State from the State funds. Thus, the practice of wearing hijab could be restricted by the State in terms of the Government Order," Justice Gupta wrote.
