Supreme Court.

special things

• A student's mother has requested that the obligatory prayer be stopped

• Different method of worship of students

• There is also a punishment for not speaking the congregational prayer in the school

Prayer in Sanskrit and Hindi in Kendriya Vidyalaya Is the propagation of Hinduism?

The hearing on the petition filed in the Supreme Court turned into an interesting conversation when Justice Indira Banerjee said that I still remember the assembly of my school.

In the school where I studied, everyone used to stand together and pray.

On this, the petitioner's lawyer Colin Gonsalves said that the mother of a student studying in Kendriya Vidyalaya has applied that the compulsory prayer should be stopped. 

Justice Banerjee said that but the moral values ​​that we take and teach in school remain with us throughout our life.

Colin again argued that this is a general principle and value, but our prayer before the court is about a special prayer.

It may not be the same for everyone.

Everyone's method of worship is different, but in that school, there is a punishment for not speaking the congregational prayer at the time of assembly.

Now I am a born Christian but my daughter follows Hinduism.

Asto Ma Sadgamaya resonates regularly in my house, but this is a matter of depth.   

Justice Banerjee said, let us take up this matter in October next month.

Colin said that Kendriya Vidyalaya is also applying.

On this, Justice Banerjee adjourned the hearing of the case till October 8.  

On January 28, 2019, the Supreme Court had sent the PIL filed against the prayer in Hindi and Sanskrit in the morning prayer meeting in Kendriya Vidyalaya to a larger bench for hearing.

A two-judge bench hearing the petition had said that the larger bench would now hear the matter.

Along with this, the matter will also be placed before the Chief Justice. 

Praying in Sanskrit and Hindi in Kendriya Vidyalayas Is the propagation of Hinduism?

On this, a two-judge bench in the Supreme Court had said that the matter should be heard by the Constitution Bench.

The bench said that it is a matter of religious importance and a two-judge bench has referred the matter to the Chief Justice for constitution of an appropriate bench. 

Earlier in the morning prayer in Kendriya Vidyalayas is it promoting Hindutva?

The Supreme Court had called for a reply from the Center on the PIL filed regarding this question.

Earlier, the Supreme Court had issued a notice to the Central Government and Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and sought their response.

The Supreme Court said that this is a very serious constitutional issue, which needs to be considered. 

In fact, a lawyer has filed a petition saying that since 1964 morning prayers are being held in Sanskrit and Hindi in Kendriya Vidyalayas, which is completely unconstitutional.

This is against Articles 25 and 28 of the Constitution and cannot be allowed. 

Asto I am happy!

Tamaso me Jyotirgamaya!

Mrityormamritam gamay!

Om Shanti: Shanti: Shanti.. Now these hymns of the Vedas have also been dragged to the Supreme Court.

The controversy is over the inclusion of these verses in daily prayers in Kendriya Vidyalayas every morning.

While hearing the petition, the Supreme Court had issued a notice to the Central Government and the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, asking whether any religious belief is being encouraged by this Hindi and Sanskrit prayer held in the school every morning?

Why is there no universal prayer in its place? 

Vinayak Shah has filed a petition in the Supreme Court, whose children have studied in Kendriya Vidyalaya.

According to the petition, these verses have been included in the prayers of 1125 Kendriya Vidyalayas across the country for the last 50 years.

This prayer also contains other hymns which have the message of unity and being united. 

Devdutt Kamat, appearing for the petitioner, said - it is already decided that if there is a matter of constitutional issues, then it should be heard by a five-judge constitution bench.

This is not just a case of violation of any law or rule, it is about a basic question whether the state has failed to give constitutional rights to the students.

We are not challenging the Uniform Code here, the challenge is the state's directive not to wear head scarves.

Devdutt Kamat said, the matter mainly involved a fundamental question whether the State has failed in its obligation to provide proper facilities to the student under Article 19, 21.

The bench had remarked whether one can wear jeans in the name of fundamental rights.

The same cannot be said for the dress.

Hijab is not a burqa or a jilbab.

this is not the case.

This is a different matter.

There is a need to strike a balance between fundamental rights and discipline in institutions.

Kamat referred to the 2012 circular for Kendriya Vidyalayas.

When girl students can be allowed to wear uniform colored scarf at the Centre, why not in the state. 

Kamat said that Kendriya Vidyalayas also provide for some reasonable restrictions.

Does our constitutional system require a student to give up his fundamental rights under Articles 19, 21 and 25 to pursue education?

The Supreme Court has accepted the principle of fair adjustment in many decisions.

Kendriya Vidyalayas also provide for some reasonable restrictions.

Referring to the circular, Kamat mentioned the restrictions. 

Referring to a decision of the Supreme Court itself, Kamat said that even at the time of the national anthem, the court had exempted those students from standing in the prayer meeting but singing the national anthem.

Justice Dhulia said, there was no insult to the national anthem as he stood up.

This matter is on a different footing.

Kamat said that wearing scarves is also allowed in Kendriya Vidyalayas.

We had made this argument in the Karnataka HC also but the HC rejected it saying that the issue of Kendriya Vidyalayas is different from that of the state government schools.

MoJo: Praying in Hindi in Kendriya Vidyalayas Is the propagation of Hinduism?