Supreme Court to hear petitions challenging validity of Art 35-A on August 16

The petitions challenging the validity of the Article 35-A of the Indian Constitution, which gives special rights to permanent residents of JK, will  be heard on August 16, the Supreme Court of India has said.

Four petitions have been filed, demanding scrapping of Article 35A in Jammu and Kashmir.

The main petition was filed by Delhi-based NGO, ‘We the Citizens’ in 2014. Subsequently, three more petitions challenged the provision and were filed and clubbed with the main one.

ALSO READ: There are no plans to abolish Articles 35A, 370: Centre

In October last year also, SC had deferred the hearing for three months after Center told the apex court that it had appointed an interlocutor for holding talks with various stakeholders in Jammu and Kashmir and requested it to adjourn the hearing over the politically contentious issue, claiming the court hearing may affect the dialogue process.

Article 35A empowers the J&K legislature to define permanent residents of the state. It was added through the Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 1954 issued under Article 370 of the Constitution. The J&K Constitution, which was adopted on November 17, 1956, defined a Permanent Resident as a person who was a state subject on May 14, 1954, or who has been a resident of the state for 10 years and has “lawfully acquired immovable property in the state”.

ALSO READ: Hearing on Article 35A: Is the State Govt’s defence ‘extremely weak’?

The J&K legislature can alter the definition of permanent residents only through a law passed by two-thirds majority.

The provision bars Indian citizens, other than those who are permanent resident of Jammu and Kashmir, from seeking employment, settling in the state, acquiring immovable properties or undertaking any trade or business if the state makes any law to that effect and it cannot be challenged before any court.

The NGO challenged the provision on the ground that it could only have been introduced through a Constitutional amendment under Article 368 and not through a Presidential Order under Article 370.

Click to comment
To Top