On August 21, the Supreme Court of India dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a declaration that the amendment of Article 370 of the Constitution of India and the deletion of Article 35A, abrogating the special status of the erstwhile State of Jammu & Kashmir, was valid and constitutional.
The Supreme Court’s three-judge bench, comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra, termed the PIL as “misconceived” and said that the court could not issue such a declaration, especially as a Constitutional Bench is hearing a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of amendment of Article 370.
“A declaration cannot be issued by this court regarding the constitutional validity of the action taken by the central government. The question of constitutional validity is pending before this court. This plea is misconceived,” CJI DY Chandrachud said while dismissing the plea.
Notably, the court’s Constitution Bench, comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice SK Kaul, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice BR Gavai and Justice Surya Kant, are hearing the batch of petitions challenging the amendment of Article 370.
Background
On August 5, 2019, the Government of India amended Article 370, scrapping J&K’s special status. The government further notified the J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019, which divided the erstwhile state into two Union Territories – J&K and Ladakh. The erstwhile J&K state was infamous for observing shutdowns, witnessing stone pelting and separatists delivering anti-national sermons.
The hearings against the amendment of Article 370 had commenced before the Constitution Bench in December 2019, four months after the Government of India’s notification. One of the issues before the court concerned whether the matter should be referred to a seven-judge bench in light of the alleged divergence of opinion by two coordinate benches of the court.
However, on March 2, 2020, a Constitution Bench held that there was no need to refer the matter to a larger bench. Of the last bench which heard the case, Justices NV Ramana and Subhash Reddy have retired. CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice Sanjiv Khanna are the new members of the Constitution Bench.
Several petitions have been moved before the Supreme Court, including those of private individuals, lawyers, activists and politicians and political parties challenging the J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019, which splits J&K into two Union Territories, J&K, and Ladakh.
Notably, one of the petitioners, IAS officer Shah Faesal, has said that the matter now is a “thing of the past.” The bureaucrat said he had withdrawn his petition challenging the Presidential Order to scrap Article 370 a long time back. “I have withdrawn the petition in the Supreme Court challenging the Presidential Order to scrap Article 370 long ago,” IAS officer Shah Faesal said. The court would also hear whether Faesal’s petition can be withdrawn.
“370, for many Kashmiris like me, is a thing of the past. Jhelum and Ganga have merged in the great Indian Ocean for good. There is no going back. There is only marching forward,” Shah Faesal said in his tweet. The 2010 batch IAS officer, Shah Faesal, resigned from service in January 2019, floating his party – Jammu Kashmir People’s Movement – with Shehla Rashid. However, he resigned from his political outfit in August 2020, after which the Government of India reinstated him in service.
