26 June 2024 Education >> Miscellaneous  

A college dress code prohibiting Hijabs and Nakabs has sparked a legal battle between the institution and a group of students. The students argue that the code infringes on their fundamental rights, while the college defends it as a measure to promote uniformity and secularism.

The crux of the issue lies in the potential violation of Articles 19(1)(a) and 25 of the Indian Constitution. Article 19(1)(a) guarantees the right to freedom of expression, which some students argue extends to their choice of clothing. Article 25 protects the right to practice one's religion freely.

The students contend that wearing religious attire like Hijabs and Nakabs is an essential part of their Islamic faith and the dress code hinders their religious practice. They believe the college oversteps its bounds by restricting their religious expression.

The college, on the other hand, cites its right to administer the institution under Articles 19(1)(g) and 26 of the Constitution. They argue that the dress code fosters a more disciplined learning environment by promoting uniformity among students and preventing the outward display of religious affiliation.

The college's position is bolstered by a previous court case, Resham (supra), where a similar dress code was upheld. In that instance, the court ruled that such restrictions were reasonable in maintaining secularism within the educational setting.

The court's decision in this case dismissed the students' petition. The judges acknowledged the college's right to administer itself and deemed the dress code a legitimate exercise of that right. Furthermore, the court found insufficient evidence to classify wearing Hijabs or Nakabs as an essential religious practice in this specific case.

The judgment referenced another legal precedent, Fathema Hussain, where a student's challenge to a dress code prohibition on headscarves was similarly unsuccessful. Additionally, the court noted that the students' act of seeking media attention before the legal process concluded may have undermined the legitimacy of their case.

In conclusion, the court sided with the college, upholding the dress code and its right to manage the institution. This case highlights the ongoing debate between individual rights and institutional authority, particularly when it comes to religious expression in educational settings.

  MAHARASHTRA PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES ACT, 2016