Express News Service
NEW DELHI: India’s top court on Tuesday said it will commence hearing of the pleas challenging the Abrogation of Article 370 of the constitution which granted a special status to the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir (J-K) from August 2.
A five-judge constitution bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud Justices SK Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai and Surya Kant will hear the petitions on a day-to-day basis. The apex court also fixed July 27 as the deadline for filing documents and written submissions by parties.
It appointed two lawyers — one from the petitioner’s side and the government side — to prepare a convenience compilation and file it before July 27 and made it clear that after the said date no documents will be accepted.
In the hearing that transpired on Tuesday, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta told the bench that centre’s affidavit which was filed ahead of the hearing only reflected the position post-August 5, 2020. CJI DY Chandrachud clarified that the Union government’s affidavit would have no bearing on the “constitutional question.”
On August 5, 2019, the Centre decided to strip the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir of special status and bifurcate it into two Union Territories (UT).
Notably, the Central government had told the top court that “this historic step” had brought unprecedented development, progress, security and stability to the region, “which was missing” during the old Article 370 regime.
“After the historic changes, the UTs of J-K and Ladakh has witnessed profound ameliorative, affirmative and progressive changes in the last four years encompassing its entire governance – including the developmental activities, public administration and security matters which has positively impacted every resident irrespective of caste, creed or religion,” the affidavit stated.
“The entire region since 2019 has witnessed an unprecedented era of peace, progress and prosperity, and life has returned to normalcy after over three decades of turmoil. Schools, colleges, universities, hospitals and other public institutions are functioning efficiently without any strikes or any kind of disturbances during the last three years. The earlier practice of daily hartals, strikes, stone pelting and bandhs are things of the past now,” the affidavit continued.
ALSO READ | Centre’s defence lacks logic: JK politicians on revocation of Article 370
The SC bench also granted two petitioners — IAS officer Shah Faesal and activist Shehla Rashid Shora — permission to delete their names from the list of petitioners and agreed on SGs suggestion to rename the case as “In re: Article 370 of the Constitution.”
The pleas were filed in the wake of the amendments praying for declaring the Presidential Orders issued under Article 370, repealing the special status of the erstwhile state and the Jammu and Kashmir (Reorganisation) Act, 2019 as “unconstitutional.”
Apart from seeking this declaration, the pleas had also challenged the Centre’s “unilateral” move unravelling the unique federal structure of India by dividing J-K “without taking consent from the people.”
Questioning Centre’s move, under cover of President’s Rule with the view to undermining crucial elements of due process and the rule of law, the pleas stated that what happened to J-K “goes to the heart of Indian federalism.”
It was also argued that the Presidential Order of August 5 substituted the concurrence of the Governor of the State government to change the very character of a federal unit.
The pleas were last listed on March 2, 2020, when the constitution bench had held that there was no need to refer the matter to a larger Bench. The hearing had commenced on December 10, 2019 – four months after the repeal of the J&K special status – before a Constitution Bench comprising Justices NV Ramana (now retired), SK Kaul, R Subhash Reddy (now retired), B R Gavai and Surya Kant.
Some of the petitioners during the course of the hearing had also sought for reference of the matter to a 7-judge Bench in light of the contrasting opinions expressed by two coordinate benches of the Supreme Court in the cases of Prem Nath Kaul and Sampath Prakash which was refused by March 2, 2020 order.
NEW DELHI: India’s top court on Tuesday said it will commence hearing of the pleas challenging the Abrogation of Article 370 of the constitution which granted a special status to the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir (J-K) from August 2.
A five-judge constitution bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud Justices SK Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai and Surya Kant will hear the petitions on a day-to-day basis. The apex court also fixed July 27 as the deadline for filing documents and written submissions by parties.
It appointed two lawyers — one from the petitioner’s side and the government side — to prepare a convenience compilation and file it before July 27 and made it clear that after the said date no documents will be accepted.googletag.cmd.push(function() {googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); });
In the hearing that transpired on Tuesday, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta told the bench that centre’s affidavit which was filed ahead of the hearing only reflected the position post-August 5, 2020. CJI DY Chandrachud clarified that the Union government’s affidavit would have no bearing on the “constitutional question.”
On August 5, 2019, the Centre decided to strip the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir of special status and bifurcate it into two Union Territories (UT).
Notably, the Central government had told the top court that “this historic step” had brought unprecedented development, progress, security and stability to the region, “which was missing” during the old Article 370 regime.
“After the historic changes, the UTs of J-K and Ladakh has witnessed profound ameliorative, affirmative and progressive changes in the last four years encompassing its entire governance – including the developmental activities, public administration and security matters which has positively impacted every resident irrespective of caste, creed or religion,” the affidavit stated.
“The entire region since 2019 has witnessed an unprecedented era of peace, progress and prosperity, and life has returned to normalcy after over three decades of turmoil. Schools, colleges, universities, hospitals and other public institutions are functioning efficiently without any strikes or any kind of disturbances during the last three years. The earlier practice of daily hartals, strikes, stone pelting and bandhs are things of the past now,” the affidavit continued.
ALSO READ | Centre’s defence lacks logic: JK politicians on revocation of Article 370
The SC bench also granted two petitioners — IAS officer Shah Faesal and activist Shehla Rashid Shora — permission to delete their names from the list of petitioners and agreed on SGs suggestion to rename the case as “In re: Article 370 of the Constitution.”
The pleas were filed in the wake of the amendments praying for declaring the Presidential Orders issued under Article 370, repealing the special status of the erstwhile state and the Jammu and Kashmir (Reorganisation) Act, 2019 as “unconstitutional.”
Apart from seeking this declaration, the pleas had also challenged the Centre’s “unilateral” move unravelling the unique federal structure of India by dividing J-K “without taking consent from the people.”
Questioning Centre’s move, under cover of President’s Rule with the view to undermining crucial elements of due process and the rule of law, the pleas stated that what happened to J-K “goes to the heart of Indian federalism.”
It was also argued that the Presidential Order of August 5 substituted the concurrence of the Governor of the State government to change the very character of a federal unit.
The pleas were last listed on March 2, 2020, when the constitution bench had held that there was no need to refer the matter to a larger Bench. The hearing had commenced on December 10, 2019 – four months after the repeal of the J&K special status – before a Constitution Bench comprising Justices NV Ramana (now retired), SK Kaul, R Subhash Reddy (now retired), B R Gavai and Surya Kant.
Some of the petitioners during the course of the hearing had also sought for reference of the matter to a 7-judge Bench in light of the contrasting opinions expressed by two coordinate benches of the Supreme Court in the cases of Prem Nath Kaul and Sampath Prakash which was refused by March 2, 2020 order.
