Express News Service
NEW DELHI: Judicial review must be confined to Constitutional violations, remarked the five-judge Supreme Court bench hearing petitions challenging the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution that granted special status to the state of Jammu and Kashmir.
The bench asked the petitioners whether the court was being invited to review the wisdom of the government’s decision in abrogating the law.
“Are you inviting the court to review the wisdom of the government’s decision on the abrogation of Article 370? Are you suggesting that judicial review should reassess the basis of the government’s decision that it was not in the national interest to continue Article 370? Judicial review should be limited to a Constitutional violation. We have to interpret the Constitutional provision as it stands,” said the bench.
These remarks were made as senior advocate Dushyant Dave pointed out BJP’s 2019 manifesto regarding the repeal of Article 370. Dave said the parliamentary exercise was a colourable use of power conducted after the dissolution of the J&K Assembly. Critiquing the exercise of powers by the Governor, Dave said Article 370 had served its purpose and the abrogation should have been carried out by exercising constituent power with the concurrence of the J&K government and Constituent Assembly.
The bench referred to various orders modifying the Constitution in relation to J&K and said Article 370 continued to operate even after these changes were made. “If your argument is correct, where is the power to alter the Constitution at all? Are you suggesting that after the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly in 1957, there was no power to make any changes pertaining to J&K?” asked the CJI.
NEW DELHI: Judicial review must be confined to Constitutional violations, remarked the five-judge Supreme Court bench hearing petitions challenging the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution that granted special status to the state of Jammu and Kashmir.
The bench asked the petitioners whether the court was being invited to review the wisdom of the government’s decision in abrogating the law.
“Are you inviting the court to review the wisdom of the government’s decision on the abrogation of Article 370? Are you suggesting that judicial review should reassess the basis of the government’s decision that it was not in the national interest to continue Article 370? Judicial review should be limited to a Constitutional violation. We have to interpret the Constitutional provision as it stands,” said the bench.googletag.cmd.push(function() {googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); });
These remarks were made as senior advocate Dushyant Dave pointed out BJP’s 2019 manifesto regarding the repeal of Article 370. Dave said the parliamentary exercise was a colourable use of power conducted after the dissolution of the J&K Assembly. Critiquing the exercise of powers by the Governor, Dave said Article 370 had served its purpose and the abrogation should have been carried out by exercising constituent power with the concurrence of the J&K government and Constituent Assembly.
The bench referred to various orders modifying the Constitution in relation to J&K and said Article 370 continued to operate even after these changes were made. “If your argument is correct, where is the power to alter the Constitution at all? Are you suggesting that after the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly in 1957, there was no power to make any changes pertaining to J&K?” asked the CJI.
