Attorney General Tushar Mehta said J&K’s state will be restored in the future.
New Delhi:
The Supreme Court today asked the Center for a “time frame” to make Jammu and Kashmir a state again.
The court, headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, while hearing a series of petitions against the repeal of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir, said the “restore of democracy” is important.
The Supreme Court made this comment after Advocate General Tushar Mehta, appearing on behalf of the Centre, told the court that the move to split the state into the union territories of J&K and Ladakh was a “temporary measure” and that state status in the future will be restored. .
The Supreme Court also asked whether Article 370 can be used to amend Article 370 itself. “Article 370 can be used to change other provisions, but can it also be used to change Article 370 itself? That is the crux of the matter,” the court noted.
The court wanted to know how to revoke the provision in the absence of a Constituent Assembly. “Had section 367 been amended with the consent of the state (J&K) through section 370, the petitioners would not have challenged its demolition,” the court said.
Attorney General Tushar Mehta said due process was followed in withdrawing the provision. “As there was no council of ministers in Jammu and Kashmir at that time, the governor exercised those powers. The president used Article 370 with the consent of the governor,” said Mr. Mehta.
He said any amendment to the constitution that “aligns everyone can never be blamed.” “It was the people of the state who stood behind the integration of the state with the Union of India. Removing some provisions could also promote the basic structure of the constitution – brotherhood, equality – it is a basic structure, it is part of brotherhood,” said Mr. Mehta.
The petitioners opposing the repeal of Article 370 have insisted that the provision could not have been repealed as the term of office of the Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir, the assent of which was required before such a step could be taken, expired in 1957 ended after it drafted the constitution. former state constitution. With the Constituent Assembly dead, Article 370 has gained permanent status, they say.
In defiance of the agreement, the Center had previously argued that there was no “constitutional fraud” in the repeal of the provision. “There was no misconduct and no constitutional fraud as alleged by the other side. The step had to be taken. Their argument is flawed and unthinkable,” said Attorney General R. Venkataramanis.
