<p>The Supreme Court on Thursday once again declined to give a specific date for hearing on a plea challenging the Karnataka High Court order, that upheld ban on wearing hijab in classrooms for not being a part of essential religious practice in Islamic faith.</p>.<p>A bench presided over by Chief Justice N V Ramana refused to consider a submission made by senior advocate Devadatt Kamat on behalf of girl students that they would lose one academic year if they are denied permission to wear headscarf and appear in examinations beginning since March 28.</p>.<p>"This has nothing to do with exams. Don't sensationalise the issue," the CJI told the counsel.</p>.<p><strong>Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/state/top-karnataka-stories/hijab-row-some-students-are-being-remote-controlled-says-kumaraswamy-1094035.html" target="_blank">Hijab row: Students being remote-controlled, says HDK</a></strong></p>.<p>Solicitor General Tushar Mehta objected to the plea for urgent listing, saying the counsel for the petitioners were repeatedly making the same request.</p>.<p>On March 16 too, the top court had declined a similar request to give a date for hearing in the special leave petitions filed against the High Court's judgement. The court, however, had said it may post the matter for hearing after Holi vacations.</p>.<p>On March 15, the Karnataka High Court's full bench led by Chief Justice dismissed the plea seeking permission to wear hijab in classrooms, saying prescription of uniform was a reasonable restriction.</p>.<p>Immediately thereafter, a plea questioning the High Court's judgement was filed in the top court, contending wearing of hijab was protected under the fundamental rights to privacy, expression and conscience guaranteed under the Constitution.</p>.<p>It also claimed the Karnataka Education Act, 1983, and the Rules made thereunder, do not provide for any mandatory uniform to be worn by students.</p>.<p>Another plea said the High Court order created an unreasonable classification between the non-Muslim female students and the Muslim female students and thereby, was in straight violation of the concept of secularism which forms the basic structure of the Indian Constitution. </p>.<p><strong>Watch latest videos by DH here:</strong></p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Thursday once again declined to give a specific date for hearing on a plea challenging the Karnataka High Court order, that upheld ban on wearing hijab in classrooms for not being a part of essential religious practice in Islamic faith.</p>.<p>A bench presided over by Chief Justice N V Ramana refused to consider a submission made by senior advocate Devadatt Kamat on behalf of girl students that they would lose one academic year if they are denied permission to wear headscarf and appear in examinations beginning since March 28.</p>.<p>"This has nothing to do with exams. Don't sensationalise the issue," the CJI told the counsel.</p>.<p><strong>Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/state/top-karnataka-stories/hijab-row-some-students-are-being-remote-controlled-says-kumaraswamy-1094035.html" target="_blank">Hijab row: Students being remote-controlled, says HDK</a></strong></p>.<p>Solicitor General Tushar Mehta objected to the plea for urgent listing, saying the counsel for the petitioners were repeatedly making the same request.</p>.<p>On March 16 too, the top court had declined a similar request to give a date for hearing in the special leave petitions filed against the High Court's judgement. The court, however, had said it may post the matter for hearing after Holi vacations.</p>.<p>On March 15, the Karnataka High Court's full bench led by Chief Justice dismissed the plea seeking permission to wear hijab in classrooms, saying prescription of uniform was a reasonable restriction.</p>.<p>Immediately thereafter, a plea questioning the High Court's judgement was filed in the top court, contending wearing of hijab was protected under the fundamental rights to privacy, expression and conscience guaranteed under the Constitution.</p>.<p>It also claimed the Karnataka Education Act, 1983, and the Rules made thereunder, do not provide for any mandatory uniform to be worn by students.</p>.<p>Another plea said the High Court order created an unreasonable classification between the non-Muslim female students and the Muslim female students and thereby, was in straight violation of the concept of secularism which forms the basic structure of the Indian Constitution. </p>.<p><strong>Watch latest videos by DH here:</strong></p>
