Hijab ban by Mumbai College

Supreme Court: In the special leave petition challenging the order passed by the Bombay High Court, wherein the Court upheld the circular issued by a Mumbai College, imposing ban on students wearing burqa, hijab or niqab on campus, the division bench of Sanjiv Khanna and Sanjay Kumar, JJ. partly stayed clause 2 of the impugned circular to the extent it directs that no Hijab, Cap or Badge will be worn in the campus.

Background:

The issue in the present case arose after nine students of the Chembur Trombay Education Society’s NG Acharya & DK Marathe College moved the Bombay High Court against a notice from the college instructing them to follow a new dress code from the new academic year beginning in June.

However, the High Court dismissed the plea, observing that the directive aimed to prevent the disclosure of a student’s religion, allowing them to focus solely on their education. Aggrieved, the students filed the present petition.

The petitioners argued that the college, affiliated to Mumbai University and aided by the State, had no power and authority under any law to issue directions giving out such restrictions. Further, the restriction is violative of Article 15 of the Constitution as it creates a hostile environment for female students, particularly from the Muslim faith.

Court’s Order:

The Court questioned the rationale behind the decision and orally said that the students should be allowed to wear what they want to. This decision of the college would work against empowering women.

On the college’s argument that it does not want the religion of students to be revealed, the Court orally said that “Religion is there in the names also. Do not impose such rules”.

The Court while party staying the impugned circular of the College, issued notice to the NG Acharya & DK Marathe College returnable in the week commencing 18-11-2024.

The Court said that it hopes and trusts that the said interim order will not be misused by anybody and clarified that it will be open to the College to move an application for vacation of this order, in case of misuse.

CASE DETAILS

Citation:
2024 SCC OnLine SC 1940

Appellants :
Zainab Abdul Qayyum Choudhary

Respondents :
Chembur Trombay Education Society

Advocates who appeared in this case

For Petitioner(s):
Colin Gonsalves, Sr. Adv., Gayatri Singh, Sr. Adv., Abiha Zaidi, AOR, Hamza Lakdawala, Adv., Racheeta Chawla, Adv., Ali Qambar Zaidi, Adv., Kamran Khwaja, Adv., Nayab Gauhar, Adv., Suriti Chowdhary, Adv., Anuj Bhave, Adv., Pritam Raman Giriya, Adv.

For Respondent(s):
Madhavi Divan, Sr. Adv., Astha Tyagi, AOR, Dinesh Chander Trehan, Adv., Nishtha Tyagi, Adv

CORAM :

Buy Constitution of India  HERE

Constitution of India

Must Watch

maintenance to second wife

bail in false pretext of marriage

right to procreate of convict

Criminology, Penology and Victimology book release

2 comments

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *