Karnataka: Hearing in hijab case concluded
On Friday it asked contending parties to make written submissions if they had more arguments. The petitioners had moved the court after the Karnataka government on February 5 banned religious attire, including headscarves, in classrooms.

On Friday it asked contending parties to make written submissions if they had more arguments. The petitioners had moved the court after the Karnataka government on February 5 banned religious attire, including headscarves, in classrooms.
Senior advocate Ravivarma Kumar questioned the propriety of college development committees (CDCs), headed by MLAs, deciding on student uniforms. CDCs consists of local MLA and his nominees, and this will lead to MLAs exercising his own power, the senior counsel appearing for the petitioners argued. He questioned MLAs performing the dual role as lawmakers and executives with little or no accountability.
Senior advocate Yusuf Mucchala countered state advocate general Prabhuling Navadgi's argument that declaring hijab as essential religious practice would amount to lowering dignity of Muslim women who do not wear a headscarf. He clarified that the petitioners did not seek a general declaration but only prayed for quashing of the February 5 notification so that they could attend classes wearing hijabs.
The Economic Times Business News App for the Latest News in Business, Sensex, Stock Market Updates & More.
The Economic Times News App for Quarterly Results, Latest News in ITR, Business, Share Market, Live Sensex News & More.