As the Karnataka High Court continues to hear petitions concerning the hijab saga that has dominated news from the state for the last few weeks, the Karnataka government has insisted that it is not actually interfering with any religious issues, that its order dated 5 February was "totally innocuous" and that it has left it to college authorities to decide what uniforms to prescribe for students.
Even though the Basavaraj Bommai government has insisted in the high court, through Advocate General Prabhuling Navadgi, that it has not imposed any ban on hijabs for Muslim girl students, it has also reiterated the stance taken in the non-operative part of its earlier order – that the wearing of hijabs is not an 'essential religious practice' that needs to be protected under Article 25 of the Constitution.
While the 'essential religious practice' issue issue has come to dominate the proceedings before the high court, it must not be forgotten that there are several other legal questions that need to be asked here, including
Whether the restrictions are manifestly arbitrary.
Whether the rules can be changed suddenly in the middle of an academic year.
Whether the rules on 'uniforms' amount to indirect discrimination.
These questions are extremely important, because the answers to them could mean that the actions of the college authorities in the state and of the Karnataka government are illegal and unconstitutional, regardless of the eventual decision by the bench on the 'essential religious practice' issue.