Mrs. Alee Ahmed vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 1662 Gua

                                                                     Page No.# 1/6

GAHC010006022013




                       THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                         Case No. : WP(C)/2090/2013

         MRS. ALEE AHMED
         W/O- MR. SHANAMON A.R., R/O VILL.- MOHMAIKI GAON, P.O. and P.S.-
         BOKAKHAT, DIST.- GOLAGHAT, ASSAM.



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
         REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, EDUCATION SECONDARY
         DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY- 6.

         2:THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
         ASSAM
          KAHILIPARA
          GHY- 19.

         3:THE ASSAM BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
          REP. BY ITS SECY.
          BAMUNIMAIDAM
          GHY- 21.

         4:THE DY. COMMISSIONER
          GOLAGHAT
          P.O. and DIST.- GOLAGHAT
         ASSAM.

         5:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS
          GOLAGHAT
          P.O. and DIST.- GOLAGHAT
         ASSAM.

         6:THE SCHOOL MANAGING COMMITTEE
          KRISTO JYOTI SCHOOL
                                                                                    Page No.# 2/6

             BOKAKHAT
             REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT
             P.O. and P.S.- BOKAKHAT
             DIST.- GOLAGHAT
             ASSAM
             PIN- 785612.

            7:THE PRINCIPAL
             KRISTO JYOTI SCHOOL
             BOKAKHAT
             P.O. and P.S.- BOKAKHAT
             DIST.- GOLAGHAT
            ASSAM
             PIN- 785612

Advocate for the Petitioner   : AMICUS CURIAE

Advocate for the Respondent : ADDL. AG,ASSAM

BEFORE BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)

Date : 17-05-2022

Heard Mr. S Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S M T Chistie, learned counsel for the respondents in the Secondary Education Department of Government of Assam and Ms. D Das, learned counsel for the respondents no. 6 and 7.

2. Considering the nature of the issue raised in this writ petition, by our earlier order dated 05.05.2022, we requested the Principal of the respondent no. 7 Kristo Jyoti School, Golaghat district to remain personally present before the Court for an interaction.

3. The Assistant Principal of the respondent no. 7 Kristo Jyoti School, Golaghat, namely, Mr. Nicholos Kerketta is present in the Court. We have the privilege of having an interaction with Mr. Nicholos Kerketta.

Page No.# 3/6

4. This petition is instituted by the mother of a child namely, Fathima Beevi, who was admitted in the nursery class bearing roll no. 22 in the year 2013 in the respondent no. 7 school, namely, Kristo Jyoti School at Bokakhat in the Golaghat district. According to the petitioner there was no other English medium school in the locality which brought in a compulsion upon the petitioner to admit her child in the said school. According to the petitioner she hails from a village Kilimanoor of Trivandam district in the State of Kerala and is governed by the Islamic religion and the rules governing the persons of Islamic faith. According to the petitioner, as per the Islamic Rules and faith, every female person should cover their body and they can perform and participate in all other activities only upon covering their body. Subsequently, the child of the petitioner namely, Fathima Beevi, as per the Islamic faith which they follow is required to have her head covered by a piece of cloth which is called to be Nakab (Hijab).

5. Upon admission to the respondent no. 7 Kristo Jyoti School, the petitioner insisted upon that her child would attend her classes by wearing the school uniform prescribed by the school but it would also include the Nakab (Hijab) to cover her head. The said requirement of the petitioner was objected by the authorities of the school by claiming that the school is a Christian minority school governed by Article 30 of the Constitution of India and as per their rules and regulation, the prescribed uniform alone can be worn by the students and no further additional mode of dressing can be allowed.

6. In the aforesaid circumstances, Annexure-5, letter dated 28.03.2013 was issued by the Principal of the respondent no. 7 Kristo Jyoti School of Bokakhat providing that the child Fatihma Beevi was given admission in the school on the free will and volition of the petitioner and at the time of taking the admission, the petitioner knew that as per the rules and regulations governing the school, wearing of cloth over and above the uniform would not be allowed and to that extent the petitioner had also given a written undertaking to the school authorities. The school authorities reminded the petitioner that under the rules and regulation of the school no. 24, the uniform to be worn by a student was clearly prescribed and the rules and regulation no. 49 further provides that the parents and guardians and others shall seek admission to their school only if they agree to abide by the rules and regulation of the school. The communication further provides in specific terms that the Nakab is not a part of Page No.# 4/6

the school uniform of the respondent no. 7 Kristo Jyoti School. Accordingly, the petitioner was informed that the Managing Committee of the school had unanimously decided and asked the petitioner to discontinue the further studies of her child in the school concerned and accordingly, 15 (fifteen) days time was granted to do the needful.

7. Being aggrieved by the communication dated 28.03.2013, this writ petition is instituted by the petitioner.

8. We have taken note that this petition was moved to the first time on 22.04.2013 wherein the Court took note of the issue raised for its adjudication and further considering the aspect as regards the uniform prescribed in the minority educational institution, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents was granted 7 (seven) days time to make submissions. When the matter was listed on 30.04.2013, notice was issued and considering the importance of the issue raised, Mr. R Mazumdar, learned counsel was appointed as an Amicus Curiae to assist the Court. But we have taken note that there was no interim order passed by this Court. Subsequently, when the matter was listed on 16.05.2018, the Court had taken note that the issue raised by the petitioner in this writ petition was also an issue in conflict with the rights claimed by the respondent no. 7 school being a Christian Minority Institution which is governed by the principles of Article 30 of the Constitution of India.

9. Be that as it may, an affidavit has been filed by the Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat wherein in paragraph 3, the rights of a minority institution governed by Article 30 had been laid out.

10. We are not expressing any view on the further statement made by the Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat as it would amount to entering into a contentious issue.

11. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we firstly take note that there is no interim order of this Court allowing the child to continue her studies in the respondent no. 7 Kristo Jyoti School by adhering to a dress code which may be contrary to the uniform prescribed by the school authorities but at the same time, when we asked the question to the learned counsel for the parties as to what had happened to the child in the circumstances when the issue was raised in the year 2013 and we have now taken up the matter in 2022, the answer forthcoming is that the child is continuing her studies in the respondent no. 7 Kristo Jyoti Page No.# 5/6

School and is presently pursuing her studies in class VIII and she is continuing to wear the Nakab (Hijab) over and above the prescribed school uniform during all these years.

12. In the circumstance, we requested the presence of Mr. Nicholos Kerketta, the Assistant Principal of the respondent no. 7 Kristo Jyoti School.

13. Mr. Nicholos Kerketta, the Assistant Principal of the respondent no. 7 Kristo Jyoti School, who is present before the Court is fair enough to make a statement before the Court that considering the interest of the child in the present case, the school authorities had allowed to the child to pursue her studies and continued upto class VIII by wearing the Nakab (Hijab) over and above the prescribed school uniform. In doing so, it was also taken note that the stand of the petitioner that the child was required to have admitted to the respondent no. 7 Kristo Jyoti School inasmuch as no good English medium school was available in the locality for any other alternative.

14. In the aforesaid circumstances, we put another query to Mr. Nicholos Kerketta, Assistant Principal that in the facts of the present case as only two more years of the child's education in the school remains, whether, in the manner it was done for the last nine years, the school authorities would allow the child to continue and complete her studies in the respondent no. 7 Kristo Jyoti School.

15. The Assistant Principal, Mr. Nicholos Kerketta with a great humanitarian approach has made a statement that the child would be allowed to continue her studies in the respondent no. 7 Kristo Jyoti School. We appreciate the said stand of the school authorities.

16. In view of such statement of the Assistant Principal, the issue raised in this writ petition, in our view, does not require an adjudication on its merit and we leave the question to be decided in other proceeding that may be raised. But however, as the child is allowed to continue her studies in the school as a humanitarian gesture on the part of the school authorities, we clarify, firstly, that the act of the respondent no. 7 Kristo Jyoti School in allowing the daughter of the petitioner to continue her studies in the school by wearing Nakab (Hijab) over and above the prescribed uniform shall not be treated to be a precedent in any manner to be made applicable to any other person. Secondly, we also take note that it was purely a humanitarian gesture on the part of the respondent no. 7 Kristo Jyoti School in Page No.# 6/6

allowing the petitioner to attend her classes by wearing the Nakab (Hijab) over and above the prescribed school uniform to be for the purpose of the benefit of the child alone rather than to be on the basis of recognizing in any other legal right of the petitioner.

17. In such view of the matter, the concession by the Assistant Principal of the school before the Court in allowing the child to continue her studies by wearing the Nakab (Hijab) over and above the prescribed uniform be also not made basis to claim any other right by the petitioner before the school authorities nor it be the basis for any other person to claim for any other legal right over the respondent no. 7 Kristo Jyoti School. If any other similar issues are raised by any other person in respect of the respondent no. 7 Kristo Jyoti School, the school authorities may deal with such issues, as may be advised by following the required procedure of law and the concession made in this writ petition be not referred as a precedent.

18. Writ petition accordingly stands closed by taking note of the concession of the authorities in the respondent no. 7 Kristo Jyoti School and the child being the daughter of the petitioner be allowed to continue her present studies in the school without raising the issue any further.

19. We again appreciate the stand of Mr. Nicholos Kerketta, Assistant Principal of the respondent no. 7 Kristo Jyoti School, Bokakhat and his presence before the Court has enabled the Court to arrive at the conclusion as arrived hereinabove. We also appreciate the service of Mr. R Mazumdar, learned Amicus Curiae and Mr. Mazumdar candidly states that his honorarium to be paid, be paid to the Legal Aid Committee.

20. Writ petition stands disposed of with the above observations.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant