DENIAL OF EDUCATION TO HIJABI STUDENTS A VIOLATION OF THEIR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS All India Lawyers Association for Justice   https://ailaj.wordpress.com/2022/03/18/karnataka-high-court-decision-on-hijab-denial-of-education-to-hijabi-students-a-violation-of-their-fundamental-rights/

The Court in its judgment makes no substantive attempt to engage with the fact that this judgment is likely to deny education to many young Muslim women, who are already marginalised, and struggle to access education.
Second, the right to wear a hijab, should have never been premised on whether it's an essential religious practice or not. ... such a framing is problematic, including that it (a) denies agency to Muslim women by deigning hijab to be a mandate rather than a choice (b) essentialises Islam as a “universal and non-bending” religion, and (c) reproduces the patriarchal idea of a maulvi being the final arbiter of Islam.

Read more …

When turbans are allowed on school and college campuses, or sacred ash on the forehead, can one ban the hijab? asks T N Ninan.

It is not your columnist's purpose to stray into territory where others will be better informed.

Rather, it is to shift the focus of debate to what should be society's priority: Women's education, and their participation in the workplace.

By T.N. NInan

https://www.rediff.com/news/column/t-n-ninan-muslim-women-and-the-hijab-debate/20220315.htm

Plea moved in SC against Karnataka HC verdict upholding hijab ban in colleges Ashish Tripathi, MAR 15 2022,  https://www.deccanherald.com/national/student-moves-sc-against-karnataka-hc-verdict-upholding-hijab-ban-in-colleges-1091545.html

The petition filed by Niba Naaz, and another person through advocate Anas Tanwir also claimed the Karnataka Education Act, 1983, and the Rules made thereunder, do not provide for any mandatory uniform to be worn by students. It claimed the right to wear a hijab comes under the ambit of the right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution. The right to wear a hijab also comes under the ambit of ‘expression’ and is thus, protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution,

Questioning the validity of the February 5, 2022 order passed by the state government under the Karnataka Education Act, the petition claimed the direction was issued "with an indirect intent of attacking the religious minorities and specifically the followers of Islamic faith by ridiculing the female Muslim students wearing hijab". "This ridiculing attack was under the guise of attaining secularity and equality on the basis of uniform wherein the College Development Committees prohibited the students wearing hijab from entering the premises of the educational institutions. This step-motherly behaviour of government authorities has prevented students from practising their faith which has resulted in an unwanted law and order situation,

?   PTI as source? 

'Unseen hand' behind hijab row to engineer unrest, disharmony: HC  PTI 15th March, 2022 https://www.rediff.com/news/report/unseen-hand-behind-hijab-row--to-engineer-unrest-disharmony-hc/20220315.htm

"The way the hijab imbroglio unfolded gives scope for the argument that some 'unseen hands' are at work to engineer social unrest and disharmony. Much is not necessary to specify," the three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi said in the order.

"We are dismayed as to how all of a sudden that too in the middle of the academic term the issue of hijab is generated and blown out of proportion by the powers that be,"

The court, however, made it clear that it was not commenting on the ongoing police investigation. "We have perused and returned copies of the police papers that were furnished to us in a sealed cover. We expect a speedy and effective investigation into the matter and culprits being brought to book, brooking no delay," 

The full bench also  dismissed a batch of petitions filed by a few Muslim girl students from Udupi Government Pre-University Girls' College who sought permission that they be allowed to attend classes wearing hijab.