well, its quite obvious that when the 'man' challenged the school's authority, and dragged it to the court, sure the school too gave some reasons to defend it self. reasons as to why the no-beard rule exists. its not like the 'man' suddenly bunked the school and went to a judge and the judge just turned him away. when someone brings some organisation or institution to the court, a fixed protocol is followed, where the challenged is sent a memo or court order, and is asked to defend itself.
as to why the rule exists, well, most to all convent schools follow the British missionary way of schooling, wherein keeping a beard is not generally allowed.
and yes, when you get to see freaking Talibs daily on the stupid box, jumping up and down in Afghanistan and NWFP, gunning and bombing people around, forming quite crude, cruel and ancient laws, then most people do get a bit freaked out, like our freaking judge! :D
The rule is discriminatory against personal choice. Please read below for further explanation.
So this judge is no better than a kid who cannot sleep after watching a bad movie!:D Thanks.