Supreme Court Asks Centre For Timeframe To Make J&K A State Again

The government will on Thursday make a "positive statement" on restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir, the Supreme Court was told today after it asked for a "timeframe" for such a move.

The court - hearing petitions challenging the scrapping of Article 370, which gave J&K its special status - had stressed the importance of the restoration of democracy as it asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, "Can you convert a State into a UT? Can a UT be carved out of a State?" To this Mr Mehta replied in the affirmative and pointed to Assam, Tripura and Arunachal Pradesh as examples.

"I have taken instructions. The instructions are that (J&K being a) union territory is not a permanent feature... I will make a positive statement day after tomorrow (but) Ladakh will remain a UT."

In 2019 the government - amid a furious pushback from political activists and opposition leaders - scrapped Article 370 and split Jammu and Kashmir into two union territories - J&K and Ladakh. The government had assured its critics that statehood would restored "once situation returns to normal".

"A statement (on restoration of statehood for J&K) has been made on Parliament floor. Efforts are being made... once situation returns to normal," Mr Mehta told the court today, the 12th day of this hearing.

On Monday the government told the court J&K's present status is not permanent and that statehood will be restored. "It is necessary, for some time, J&K remains under the Union as a Union Territory... ultimately J&K will become a state (again)," the Solicitor General had told the Supreme Court.

Union Home Minister Amit Shah, whose fiery speeches in Parliament led the government's charge to revoke Article 370 - had said as much in May, underlining the "temporary" nature of Article 370.

Last week the government told the court no "constitutional fraud" had been perpetrated in annulling Article 370. Attorney General R Venkataramani, opening the government's argument, told the five-member Constitution bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud that "due process was followed".

"There was no wrong-doing... there was no constitutional fraud as alleged by the other side. The step (revocation of Article 370) was necessary and their argument is flawed and inconceivable," he said.

However, the court told the government it would have to justify procedure adopted for abrogation of Article 370 as it could not postulate a situation "where the ends justify the means".

Petitioners opposing repeal of Article 370 have insisted the provision could not have been abrogated as the term of the J&K Assembly - the assent of which was required before taking such a step - ended in 1957, after which, it was argued, Article 370 acquired a "permanent" status.

Read full article