The Supreme Court on Friday slammed a Mumbai college for a ban imposed on students wearing burqa, hijab or niqab on campus and partly stayed the notice issued by the institution in this regard (Zainab Abdul Qayyum Choudhary and Others v. Chembur Tromboy Education Society, NG Acharya and DK Marathe, College of Art, Science and Commerce and Others).
A Bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and PV Sanjay Kumar issued notice on the petition challenging the ban while staying the ban on hijab and caps.
"We issue notice in the week commencing November 18. We partly stay clause 2 of the impugned circular to the extent that it directs that no hijab, no cap, no badges will be allowed. We hope and trust this interim order is not misused by anybody," the Court said in the order.
During the hearing, the Court questioned the rationale behind the decision and said the students should be allowed to wear what they want to.
The Court said that the decision of the college would work against empowering women.
"How are you empowering women by telling them what to wear? Less said the better. Where is the choice for the woman? You have suddenly woken up to the fact that they are wearing it. It is unfortunate that these all being said after so many years of independence and you say religion is there in this country," Justice Kumar said.
On the college's stance that it does not want the religion of students to be revealed, Justice Khanna said,
"Religion is there in the names also. Do not impose such rules."
The petition was drafted by advocate Hamza Lakdawala and filed through advocate Abiha Zaidi.
Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves, representing the petitioner, submitted that students have been stopped from attending classes and were not being given attendance.
"They wore the hijab for 4 years," Gonsalves said.
In response, Senior Advocate Madhavi Divan, representing the college said there are 441 girl students from the Muslim community in the college and only three want to wear the hijab.
She justified the ban, saying that a barrier is created when a girl is wearing a niqab etc.
However, the Court was not impressed with the submission and asked the why the decision was taken out of the blue.
"You may be correct. The background they belong to..family members may say wear it and go and they have to wear. But let all study together," it added.
Justice Kumar also remarked that such rule-making by colleges has to stop. The Court also asked whether people with tilak or bindi will not be allowed by the college.
"That is not part of the instruction at all. You have not said that," the Bench told the counsel representing the college.
Divan opposed the stay and argued that girls will start coming in torn jeans. She added that the niqab was a barrier to interaction.
"Do not take away my (college's) autonomy," she submitted.
At this stage, Justice Khanna said,
"You cannot make it like this. Solution to a lot of this is proper good education. I know a burqa cannot be allowed as you cannot sit in the class like this."
The issue in the present case arose after nine students of the NG Acharya and DK Marathe College at Chembur moved the High Court against a notice from the college instructing them to follow a new dress code from the new academic year beginning in June.
The High Court, however,
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 approached the apex court.
Before the top court, the appellants argued that the college, affiliated to Mumbai University and aided by the State of Maharashtra, had no power and authority under any law to issue directions giving out such restrictions.
Further, it has been argued that the restriction is violative of Article 15 of the Constitution as it creates a hostile environment for female students, more particularly from the Muslim faith.
Wearing a hijab, nakab or burqa does not disrupt the imparting of knowledge in the classroom or hamper discipline or accord them unfair advantages, it has been contended.