Growing of beard by a Muslim is only a religious practice.

1. The facts leading to this Writ Petition are as follows: The petitioner was recruited as Sub-Inspector of Bharat Heavy Electrical Security Force in 1977. He is working as Grade II Sub-Inspector at Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd., Tiruchy. He is attached to Godhavari Platoon.

2. On 3.12.1984 the petitioner applied to the second respondent. Senior Security Officer. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd., (BHEL), Tiruchy. for permission to grow a beard. It was stated by the petitioner that he intended to perform Haj Pilgrimage in the coming 1985 season and as preliminary thereto, as enjoined by tenets of his religion, he decided to permanently grow a beard.

3. By letter dated 17th January, 1985, the second respondent informed the petitioner that he was permitted to grow a beard to celebrate Haj Pilgrimage for 45 days only with effect from 4.12.1984. He has also been informed that no further extension for growing beard will be allowed.

4. In the affidavit, it is stated that the Haj Pilgrimage for 1985 fell on 26.8.1985. The Tamil Nadu Haj Committee-called for applications from intending Haj Pilgrims in January, 1985. The petitioner obtained the application and was due to submit the same in the next few days. The applicants will be obliged to leave India in July, 1985 and return in September, 1985 end. Therefore the grant of permission for 45 days beginning from 4.12.1984 to 18.1.1985 is not really a permission at all. On receipt of the letter dated 17.1.1985 the petitioner made representation to the second respondent, Senior Security Officer, as well as the Security Officer, BHEL (respondents 2 and 3). It was stated by him in his letter dated 25.1.1985 that Muslims employed in police, military and other forces and in all walks of life were allowed to grow beard. Therefore, inasmuch as Haj pilgrimage for 1985 was in August, 1985 the matter might be reconsidered. By communication dated 6.2.1985 the third respondent informed the petitioner that being an employee of security force the petitioner was not permitted to have beard for more than the specified period of 45 days and the period having already lapsed he had to cut his beard. The petitioner was advised to be cleanshaven as a part of his uniform and appearance. He was further informed that his conduct is subject to service rules and discipline required of his employment; and disobedience in this regard would be viewed seriously. Upon receipt of this communication the petitioner again made representation to both the second and third respondents on 10.2.85. In that petition he has stated that growing of beard by Muslims is a religious obligation which has to be given due regard and consideration and that he might be permitted to grow the beard and continue to have the same, and that all proposed action be dropped. A reply was issued by the third respondent on 15.2.1985 that there is no concession to be given to Muslims who have been working in a disciplined force and the petitioner was advised to come for duty with clean shave and he was further advised to remove the beard on or before 22.2.1985 failing which necessary disciplinary action would be taken against him.

5. It is under the above circumstances the writ petition has been preferred and the contention of the petitioner is that in conformity with tenets of his religion he has grown a beard closely trimmed which is not even a few centimetres in length and which will not affect his appearance on duty and that sporting a beard has enhanced his trim bearing and appearance. He believes it to be true that in military and para-military, police and para-police and security and other forces, Muslims and other employees are permitted to grow beard on application as of course and that sporting of a beard by the petitioner will net in any manner interfere with his duty as Sub-Inspector,in the security force. The refusal to grant permission was arbitrary because, no reasons are adduced. Grant of permission is not inconsistent with the existing