Hijab Row: AG Navadagi says, GO leaves institutions to make decision
![Hijab Row: AG Navadagi says, GO leaves institutions to make decision](https://www.24x7liveindia.com/public/uploads/images/2022/02/image_750x500_621375153838a.jpg)
Bengaluru: Karnataka High Court on Monday began hearing various petitions challenging the ban on hijab in educational institutions in the state.
Karnataka High Court asked Advocate General Prabhuling Navadagi whether hijab can be permitted in institutions or not. Advocate General replied that the operative part of the Government Order (GO) leaves it to institutions to make a decision in this regard.
AG said the GO gives complete autonomy to institutions to decide uniform. AG says that the preamble of the Karnataka Education Act is to foster a secular environment. He said the stand of State is that element of introducing religious aspects shouldn't be there in uniform.
Read: https://24x7liveindia.com/hijab-row-know-about-karnataka-high-court-three-judge-bench
AG stuck to his argument that wearing of Hijab doesn't fall under a fundamental right.
CJ Rituraj Awasthi asked, "Institutions are private bodies... These are not statutory bodies, can they be regulated by court order?".
AG said, "Currently, the entire controversy is around whether the hijab is part of Article 25 or not ? In this case (Udupi College), an educational body has taken a stand not to permit hijab".
"The petitioners are seeking for a declaration of a particular dress format to become part of religious sanction so as to bind every woman who follows Islamic faith. That is the seriousness of the claim, added AG.
Senior advocate of Supreme Court Devadatt Kamat has rested his case defending the Muslim petitioners in the High Court.
The court rose for the day. A three-judge bench is hearing the petitions against the banning of hijab in classrooms in Karnataka. The bench is headed by Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi. A single-judge bench of the court had decided to refer the pleas to a larger Bench saying the case involved the larger Constitutional issues.