Supreme Court concludes hearing in Karnataka hijab case, reserves Judgment

News Network
September 22, 2022

hijab.jpg

New Delhi, Sept 22: After a marathon hearing over a period of 10 days, the Supreme Court today reserved its judgment on a batch of petitions challenging the Karnataka High Court's judgment which upheld the ban on wearing hijab by Muslim students in educational institutions.

A bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia heard Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, Karnataka Advocate General Prabhuling Navadgi and Addl Solicitor General KM Nataraj for the State. Senior Advocates R Venkataramani, Dama Seshadri Naidu and V Mohana appeared for college teachers. The Petitioners' side had concluded its arguments on Tuesday.

Making rejoinder submissions in the matter today, Senior Advocates Dushyant Dave and Huzefa Ahmadi today submitted that the arguments of Solicitor General regarding involvement of Popular Front of India are wholly irrelevant and are made to cause prejudice. They argued that no material has been shown on record regarding this.

The Petitioners argued that unlike triple talaq and cow sacrifice, Hijab is mentioned in Quran and it is the farz of Muslim women to retain the same. Further, it was contended that in absence of State showing that hijab affects the fundamental rights of others, any restriction on wearing the same affects the freedom of conscience and "behavioural privacy" of Muslim women. It also hampers their education prospects, it was argued.

Allegations about PFI conspiracy false: Dave

The Solicitor General had alleged that till the year 2021, no girl student was wearing any hijab. However, an agitation was started by the Popular Front of India to create 'social unrest' and that the students were made part of this conspiracy.

Dave said he "regrets" such allegations have been imputed sans any pleadings in that regard.

He took the bench through the impugned circular of the Karnataka government, to point out that there is no mention of any PFI activity and rather, the circular cites observance of religious practices as a "hindrance" to unity and equality.

Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi also submitted that argument of PFI was not raised before High Court. "They can't rely on documents not on record. It is an argument introduced to create a prejudice." 

Senior Advocate Devadatt Kamat said that though State made a "grandiose statement" that till 2021 nobody wore hijab, there is no pleading to that context.

Justice Gupta agreed that in one of the writ petitions, there is a mention that the Petitioner was wearing hijab. "And there is no counter-affidavit controverting this fact," Kamat added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 1,2026

Bengaluru: Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar on Sunday criticised the Union Budget presented by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, claiming it offered no tangible benefit to the state.

Though he said he was yet to study the budget in detail, Shivakumar asserted that Karnataka had gained little from it. “There is no benefit for our state from the central budget. I was observing it. They have now named a programme after Mahatma Gandhi, after repealing the MGNREGA Act that was named after him,” he said.

Speaking to reporters here, the Deputy Chief Minister demanded the restoration of MGNREGA, and made it clear that the newly enacted rural employment scheme — VB-G RAM G — which proposes a 60:40 fund-sharing formula between the Centre and the states, would not be implemented in Karnataka.

“I don’t see any major share for our state in this budget,” he added.

Shivakumar, who also holds charge of Bengaluru development, said there were high expectations for the city from the Union Budget. “The Prime Minister calls Bengaluru a ‘global city’, but what has the Centre done for it?” he asked.

He also drew attention to the problems faced by sugar factories, particularly those in the cooperative sector, alleging a lack of timely decisions and support from the central government.

Noting that the Centre has the authority to fix the minimum support price (MSP) for agricultural produce, Shivakumar said the Union government must take concrete steps to protect farmers’ interests.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 23,2026

Karnataka Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot read only three lines from the 122-paragraph address prepared by the Congress-led state government while addressing the joint session of the Legislature on Thursday, effectively bypassing large sections critical of the BJP-led Union government.

The omitted portions of the customary Governor’s address outlined what the state government described as a “suppressive situation in economic and policy matters” under India’s federal framework. The speech also sharply criticised the Centre’s move to replace the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) with the Viksit Bharat–Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Act, commonly referred to as the VB-GRAM (G) Act.

Governor Gehlot had earlier conveyed his objection to several paragraphs that were explicitly critical of the Union government. On Thursday, he confined himself to the opening lines — “I extend a warm welcome to all of you to the joint session of the State legislature. I am extremely pleased to address this august House” — before jumping directly to the concluding sentence of the final paragraph.

He ended the address by reading the last line of paragraph 122: “Overall, my government is firmly committed to doubling the pace of the State’s economic, social and physical development. Jai Hind — Jai Karnataka.”

According to the prepared speech, the Karnataka government demanded the scrapping of the VB-GRAM (G) Act, describing it as “contractor-centric” and detrimental to rural livelihoods, and called for the full restoration of MGNREGA. The state government argued that the new law undermines decentralisation, weakens labour protections, and centralises decision-making in violation of constitutional norms.

Key points from the unread sections of the speech:

•    Karnataka facing a “suppressive” economic and policy environment within the federal system

•    Repeal of MGNREGA described as a blow to rural livelihoods

•    VB-GRAM (G) Act accused of protecting corporate and contractor interests

•    New law alleged to weaken decentralised governance

•    Decision-making said to be imposed by the Centre without consulting states

•    Rights of Adivasis, women, backward classes and agrarian communities curtailed

•    Labourers allegedly placed under contractor control

•    States facing mounting fiscal stress due to central policies

•    VB-GRAM (G) Act accused of enabling large-scale corruption

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 20,2026

Mangaluru: In a major step towards strengthening rural innovation, the Office of the Principal Scientific Adviser (PSA) to the Government of India is supporting the establishment of RuTAGe Smart Village Centres (RSVCs) across the country through collaborations with academic institutions, civil society organisations and philanthropic partners.

As part of this national initiative, Nitte (Deemed to be University) will set up the first RSVCs in the region at Nitte GP in Udupi district and at the Nitte Health Centre, Sevanjali Trust, Farangipete, in Dakshina Kannada district. The centres will be inaugurated on January 21. In South India, the programme is being implemented by the Section Infin-8 Foundation (SI-8).

Speaking to reporters on Monday, SI-8 founder-director Vishwas US said experts from Nitte University and SI-8 would work closely with farmers, students, youth and local entrepreneurs to adapt and deploy technologies tailored to local needs.

Project head Prof Iddya Karunasagar, representing Nitte DU, said the RSVCs at Nitte and Farangipete would serve as demonstration hubs for a wide range of agriculture, energy, skill-development and assistive technologies. These include solar dryers for fruits, vegetables and crops; soil-testing solutions; power weeders and women-friendly farm tools; wind-powered devices for rural artisans; grain storage systems; grass-cutting and tree-climbing equipment; and liquid fertiliser production using cowshed waste.

SI-8 CEO Aravind C Kumar said the centres would also provide access to digital and knowledge-based platforms such as ISRO applications, government scheme portals, market linkage tools and gamified learning resources, along with assistive technologies for persons with visual impairments.

Highlighting the broader impact of the initiative, Principal Scientific Adviser Prof Ajay Kumar Sood said it demonstrated how applied research could bridge the rural–urban divide and help create self-reliant, technology-enabled villages.

The initiative has been made possible through philanthropic support from Dr NC Murthy of ACM Business Solutions, LLC, USA. Dr Sapna Poti, Director (Strategic Alliances) at the Office of the Principal Scientific Adviser, said the long-term objective is to build self-sufficient, technology-driven communities capable of generating sustainable livelihoods on their own.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.