The Bombay High Court on Wednesday dismissed a petition filed by nine girl students challenging the dress code prescribed by a college in Mumbai that restrained them from donning hijab or naqab on the ground that the dress code prescribed by the college did not violate the provisions of the Constitution.

While dismissing the petition filed by group of girl students challenging the dress code prescribed by Chembur Trombay Education Society's NG Acharya and DK Marathe College for its undergraduate students, a HC division bench of Justices A S Chandurkar and Justice Rajesh Patil did not violate the provisions of Article 19(1)(a) and Article 25 of the Constitution of India.

“We are satisfied that the Instructions issued by the College under which a dress code has been prescribed for its students does not suffer from any infirmity so as to violate provisions of Article 19(1)(a) and Article 25 of the Constitution of India. The object behind issuing the same is that the dress of a student should not reveal his/her religion which is a step towards ensuring that the students focus on gaining knowledge and education which is in their larger interest,” the HC bench ruled.

“The Instructions have been issued by the College Administration in exercise of its right to administer the educational institution under Article 19(1)(g) and Article 26 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition therefore fails. It is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs,” the two judges noted in their order dismissing the petition.

In their petition, the nine students studying in second and third year undergraduate students  at the Chembur-based college had alleged that the prescription of dress code “as a result of which they are restrained from donning a hijab or nakab is arbitrary and discriminatory. It affects their fundamental rights guaranteed especially under Article 19(1)(a) and Article 25 of the Constitution of India''.

In its ruling, the HC bench said: “...it has been pleaded that the petitioners have been donning a hijab and/or nakab for the last few years. The pleadings in the writ petition to support the plea that donning of a hijab or nakab is an essential religious practice however are insufficient”

“Except for stating that the same constitutes an essential religious practice on the basis of the English translation of Kanz-ul-Iman and Suman Abu Dawud, there is no material placed to uphold the petitioners’ contention that donning of Hijab and Nakab is an essential religious practice,” the Judges noted.

In its concluding part of their verdict, the judges observed: “In the passing, we may note that the learned Counsel for the petitioners was not able to justify the action of the petitioners, who are students, in seeking publicity of filing of the present proceedings even prior to the writ petition being considered for admission. This led to the College questioning the bonafides of the petitioners. Since the petitioners are students, we say nothing more and let the matter rest at that”.

Reacting to the judgement, the lawyer for the petitioners Altaf Khan said: “Apart from the right to practice their religion, the petitioners were also relying on their right to choice and privacy while opposing the college's decision”.

Asked if the petitioners would challenge the high court’s ruling in an upper court, the petitioners’ lawyer said: “I will consult the parents of students and take a final call on moving the Supreme Court in the matter”.