[ad_1]
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday will pronounce its verdict on the pleas challenging the Centre’s decision to revoke the special status of Jammu and Kashmir in 2019 and bifurcate the state into two Union Territories.
According to the cause list for December 11 (Monday), uploaded on the apex court’s website, a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud will deliver the verdict.
What is the case about?
● A batch of petitions have challenged the Centre’s landmark decision on August 5, 2019 to revoke Article 370 of the Constitution which bestowed special status on the erstwhile state of J&K.
● The pleas were referred to a Constitution bench of the top court in 2019, which held marathon hearings on the matter earlier this year.
● During the 16-day hearing, the lawyers dwelt on various issues, including the constitutional validity of revoking Article 370 and the validity of J&K Reorganisation Act which split the erstwhile state into two UTs.
● They also discussed the imposition of the governor’s rule in J&K on June 20, 2018 and the imposition of the President’s rule on December 19, 2018 and its extension on July 3, 2019.
What did SC say?
● The apex court had asked who can recommend the revocation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir when no constituent assembly, whose concurrence was required before taking such a step, exists there.
● The top court had also asked as to how can a provision (Article 370), which was specifically mentioned as a temporary provision in the Constitution, become permanent after tenure of the Jammu and Kashmir constituent assembly came to an end in 1957.
What did petitioners and Centre say?
● Some of the petitioners had argued that the provision could not have been abrogated, as the term of the Jammu and Kashmir Constituent Assembly ended in 1957 after it drafted the erstwhile state’s Constitution.
● With the constituent assembly having become extinct, Article 370 acquired a permanent status, they had said.
● The Centre had argued that there was no “constitutional fraud” in annulling the provision that accorded special status to the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir.
Who are the petitioners?
● The first petition challenging the presidential order scrapping Article 370 was filed by advocate M L Sharma, who was later joined by another lawyer from Jammu and Kashmir, Shakir Shabir.
● National Conference filed a petition on August 10. The petition was filed by Mohammad Akbar Lone and Justice (retd) Hasnain Masoodi, both Lok Sabha members of the NC.
● There are other petitions challenging the Centre’s decision to abrogate Article 370, including a plea filed by a group of former defence officers and bureaucrats.
J&K awaits verdict
Parties on both sides of the spectrum are keenly awaiting the SC verdict on Monday, with the authorities stepping up security in the UT.
Several parties from the Gupkar alliance have expressed hope that the provision will be restored.
The BJP said that there should not be any politics on the Supreme Court ruling and everyone should respect it.
National Conference leader Omar Abdullah said his party will not disturb the peace in Jammu and Kashmir even in case of an adverse verdict.
People’s Democratic Party (PDP) president and former chief minister Mehbooba Mufti said the court’s verdict should be clear that the decision taken by the BJP-led central government was “illegal”.
The NC and PDP are part of the People’s Alliance for Gupkar Declaration (PAGD), also called the Gupkar Alliance, which was formed by parties in J&K to fight for the restoration of Article 370.
(With inputs from PTI)
According to the cause list for December 11 (Monday), uploaded on the apex court’s website, a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud will deliver the verdict.
What is the case about?
● A batch of petitions have challenged the Centre’s landmark decision on August 5, 2019 to revoke Article 370 of the Constitution which bestowed special status on the erstwhile state of J&K.
● The pleas were referred to a Constitution bench of the top court in 2019, which held marathon hearings on the matter earlier this year.
● During the 16-day hearing, the lawyers dwelt on various issues, including the constitutional validity of revoking Article 370 and the validity of J&K Reorganisation Act which split the erstwhile state into two UTs.
● They also discussed the imposition of the governor’s rule in J&K on June 20, 2018 and the imposition of the President’s rule on December 19, 2018 and its extension on July 3, 2019.
What did SC say?
● The apex court had asked who can recommend the revocation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir when no constituent assembly, whose concurrence was required before taking such a step, exists there.
● The top court had also asked as to how can a provision (Article 370), which was specifically mentioned as a temporary provision in the Constitution, become permanent after tenure of the Jammu and Kashmir constituent assembly came to an end in 1957.
What did petitioners and Centre say?
● Some of the petitioners had argued that the provision could not have been abrogated, as the term of the Jammu and Kashmir Constituent Assembly ended in 1957 after it drafted the erstwhile state’s Constitution.
● With the constituent assembly having become extinct, Article 370 acquired a permanent status, they had said.
● The Centre had argued that there was no “constitutional fraud” in annulling the provision that accorded special status to the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir.
Who are the petitioners?
● The first petition challenging the presidential order scrapping Article 370 was filed by advocate M L Sharma, who was later joined by another lawyer from Jammu and Kashmir, Shakir Shabir.
● National Conference filed a petition on August 10. The petition was filed by Mohammad Akbar Lone and Justice (retd) Hasnain Masoodi, both Lok Sabha members of the NC.
● There are other petitions challenging the Centre’s decision to abrogate Article 370, including a plea filed by a group of former defence officers and bureaucrats.
J&K awaits verdict
Parties on both sides of the spectrum are keenly awaiting the SC verdict on Monday, with the authorities stepping up security in the UT.
Several parties from the Gupkar alliance have expressed hope that the provision will be restored.
The BJP said that there should not be any politics on the Supreme Court ruling and everyone should respect it.
National Conference leader Omar Abdullah said his party will not disturb the peace in Jammu and Kashmir even in case of an adverse verdict.
People’s Democratic Party (PDP) president and former chief minister Mehbooba Mufti said the court’s verdict should be clear that the decision taken by the BJP-led central government was “illegal”.
The NC and PDP are part of the People’s Alliance for Gupkar Declaration (PAGD), also called the Gupkar Alliance, which was formed by parties in J&K to fight for the restoration of Article 370.
(With inputs from PTI)
[ad_2]
Source link
More Stories
Congress replaces Kamal Nath, names an OBC as Madhya Pradesh chief | India News
Fire breaks out in ITBP camp in Srinagar; none hurt | India News
Parliament Security: Co-villagers give clean chit to Lalit Jha, parents to move court | India News