Centre to explain to Supreme Court legal aspects of Article 35A

Article 370 grants special status to Jammu and Kashmir, while Article 35A, added to Indian Constitution through a presidential order, empowers Jammu and Kashmir legislature to define the state's "permanent residents" and their rights and privileges.

By: PTI | New Delhi | Published:August 10, 2017 10:00 pm
Supreme Court news, Article 35A news, india news, indian express news The bench headed by CJI J S Khehar was requested to refer the matter to a larger bench as constitutional issues were involved in the case. (File/Photo)

As a debate raged over the special status to Jammu and Kashmir, the Centre will explain to the Supreme Court the legal aspects of Article 35A of the Constitution, which empowers the state legislature to define permanent citizens. Attorney General K K Venugopal is expected to explain before the Supreme Court the legal aspects of Article 35A, which gives special status to the state under Article 370, home ministry officials said.

Since the petition is focused on procedural issues, the Attorney General would be presenting the legal aspects as enumerated in the Constitution, the officials in the know of the development said.

The Supreme Court last month had asked the Centre to file a reply within three weeks to a writ petition filed by an NGO seeking that Article 35A be struck down.

The PIL said the state government, under the guise of Article 35A and Article 370, which grants special autonomous status to the state, has been discriminating against non-residents who are debarred from buying properties, getting a government job or voting in the local elections.

Article 35A was added to the Constitution by a presidential order in 1954.

Article 370 grants special status to Jammu and Kashmir, while Article 35A, added to the Indian Constitution through a presidential order, empowers the Jammu and Kashmir legislature to define the state’s “permanent residents” and their special rights and privileges.

While the Jammu and Kashmir government contested the petition saying the president had the power to incorporate a new provision in the Constitution by way of an order, the Centre recently expressed its reservations.

It filed a reply and requested the three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India J S Khehar to refer the matter to a larger bench as constitutional issues were involved in the case.

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App

  1. D
    Daya Sagar
    Aug 14, 2017 at 11:19 pm
    there exist all reasons for taking up this issue before the Apex Court for consideration by a larger Cons utional bench pleading that Clause (1) of Art 370 of Cons ution of India confers no power on President of India to amend the Cons ution of India simply with the concurrence of the Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir so as to add a new article in the Cons ution of India by the name Article35A after Article 35 of COI since such act is an amendment of the COI and only Parliament of India can do so by using the cons uent power vested in Art 368 of Cons ution of India. Hence before discussing good and bad of the text of Art-35A, the first need is to examine whether this Article even cons utionally exits? Apex Court has on 17th July 2017 already referred references in Writ Pe ions (Civil) 722/2014 to a larger 3 Judge Bench on validity of Article 35A. Hope cons utional technicalities will surely attract the attention of the apex court worth referring to
    Reply