The Supreme Court on Friday declined to interfere with the dress code prescribed by the CBSE for candidates appearing for the AIPMT exam on Saturday, barring them from wearing either a head scarf and full-sleeved shirt.

A bench of Chief Justice H.L. Dattu, Justice Arun Mishra and Justice Amitava Roy while rejecting the PIL by Students Islamic Organisation of India, said: "If you appear in an examination without a scarf, your faith will not disappear."

Its response came as senior counsel Sanjay Hegde, appearing for the organisation, said: "Wearing head scarf is an essential religious practice. The girls will be forced to abandon the examination."

Describing the plea as "nothing but an ego", the court said that candidates can wear the head scarf after the exam is over. "It is only for three hours... wear scarf after three hours", Chief Justice Dattu said.

The court also observed that faith is something different from wearing a particular type of clothes.

"Sorry, sorry, sorry, we are not going into these small issues," Chief Justice Dattu said rejecting the plea as Hegde sought to urge the court that "minority is a minority".

At the outset of the hearing, Chief Justice Dattu questioned the locus of the SIOI to raise the issue of dress code. "Organisation can't come before us to question dress code and head scarf."

The apex court on June 15 had scrapped the AIPMT for the year 2015-16 following the leak of its question paper and circulation of their answer keys through electronic devices at different examination centres in 10 states across the country.

Earlier the Kerala High Court while refusing to interfere with the dress code prescribed by the CBSE to prevent any unfair practices had granted permission to two Muslim girls to appear in the test wearing head scarf.

The earlier All India Pre-Medical Entrance Test (AIPMT) had been ordered cancelled by the Supreme Court after widespread cheating.

Click to show 9 comments
at your own risk
(alt+shift+c)
By reading the comments you agree that they are the (often anonymous) personal views and opinions of readers, which may be biased and unreliable, and for which Legally India therefore has no liability. If you believe a comment is inappropriate, please click 'Report to LI' below the comment and we will review it as soon as practicable.
refresh Filter out low-rated comments. Show all comments. Sort chronologically
1
Like +6 Object -2 ouch 24 Jul 15, 16:38
"The court also observed that faith is something different from wearing a particular type of cloth."

Yes, in addition to being doyens of law, Supreme Court Judges may now hold forth on the vagaries of faith, spirituality and religion.

The same doyens who day in and day out wear their own version of black robes in terms of the faith it creates in themselves (capacity to dispense justice) and the public are certainly not in a position to talk.
Reply Report to LI
1.1
Show?
Like +1 Object -0 From Pakisthan 24 Jul 15, 18:21
I just love your statement
Reply Report to LI
1.1.1
Show?
Like +3 Object -1 Scooter- 25 Jul 15, 18:51
Dear Friend from across the border- your choice of spelling for your country suggests you are from the southern part of Pakistan! How are the dosas there?
Reply Report to LI
1.1.1.1
Show?
Like +0 Object -0 Soutie 28 Jul 15, 22:16
Maybe he just has a lisp...!!
Reply Report to LI
2
Show?
Like +1 Object -3 Mustafa 24 Jul 15, 23:21
A very unreasonable logic given by the hon'ble chief justice...appearance or disappearance of faith has got nothing to do with it....instead of investigating how the paper leaked and who are involved in scams like 'VYAPAM'....hon'ble justice gave his assent to organizing body to frame any unreasonable rules....names of those who are involved in vyapam are being kept confidential while the genuine rights of girls to dress the way they want to, are violated by our own court..
Reply Report to LI
2.1
Show?
Like +0 Object -1 From Pakisthan 25 Jul 15, 11:26
I just love your statement
Reply Report to LI
3
Show?
Like +0 Object -1 Sheikh Khurshid Alam 25 Jul 15, 10:20
What a hypocrisy of the Indian Judiciary! This same Judiciary insists on prescribed dress code for Advocates and Judges, even if they sweat in the disgusting summer months, they have to maintain the dress code of their colonial masters....black coat,long gown, collar band. Will somebody make me understand what does the LD. Court meant by saying that: "If you appear in an examination without a scarf, your faith will not disappear. "... Then why is that an advocate is not allowed to move before the LD. Court when he is not in his uniform? Does he cesases to be an advocate without his coat, gown and band- yes , according to this very Judiciary's rules a court has every right to not to listen to an advocate who is not in proper uniform. Who will judge the judges!
Reply Report to LI
3.1
Show?
Like +1 Object -0 Huh? 25 Jul 15, 17:57
I am no one to comment on whether the Court was right to be (what some might consider) flippant about a petition concerning faith... but your argument makes no sense.. if anything it shows that the Court is consistent in its attitude towards enforcing dress codes...
Reply Report to LI
3.2
Show?
Like +2 Object -0 lallan ahmad 27 Jul 15, 11:12
Quoting Sheikh Khurshid Alam:
What a hypocrisy of the Indian Judiciary! This same Judiciary insists on prescribed dress code for Advocates and Judges, even if they sweat in the disgusting summer months, they have to maintain the dress code of their colonial masters....black coat,long gown, collar band. Will somebody make me understand what does the LD. Court meant by saying that: "If you appear in an examination without a scarf, your faith will not disappear. "... Then why is that an advocate is not allowed to move before the LD. Court when he is not in his uniform? Does he cesases to be an advocate without his coat, gown and band- yes , according to this very Judiciary's rules a court has every right to not to listen to an advocate who is not in proper uniform. Who will judge the judges!


Come on y faith is involved in everything.. are take exam as everyone else without burka.. unable to understand how one complain about discrimination on the basis of religion and then involves religion in everything.. kindly enlightened
Reply Report to LI

refreshSort chronologically Filter out low-rated comments. Show all comments.