Article 370 Court Hearing
Article 370 Court Hearing: According to Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Article 35A of the Constitution has denied some important fundamental rights to those who do not reside in Jammu and Kashmir. The right to own land, employment in the state government, and equality of opportunity are all taken away from citizens by this clause. The non-residents were excluded because the residents (of Jammu and Kashmir) had unique rights, he claimed. He also agreed with the Centre that the Indian constitution is a document that is “on a higher platform than the J&K Constitution”.
Article 370 Court Hearing
He made these statements on the eleventh day of the hearings on the petitions opposing the repeal of Article 370, which gave Jammu and Kashmir its unique status. Along with Article 370, Article 35A authorized the legislature of the former state to define “permanent residents” and grant them exceptional rights and privileges in terms of public employment, immovable property, and settlement. Both articles were repealed in August 2019.
Also Read: Kerala Extends Support: Funding Education For Muslim Child Slapped In UP School
Article 19
“There is a direct right under Article 16(1) which was taken away was employment under the state government. Employment under the State Government is specifically provided under Article 16(1). So while on the one hand Article 16(1) was preserved, on the other hand, Article 35A directly took away that fundamental right and was protected from any challenge on this ground,” the Chief Justice said.
In the same way, Article 19 recognizes the freedom to reside and establish oneself wherever in the nation. “Hence all the three fundamental rights were essentially taken away by 35A… Power of judicial review was taken away,” he added.
Also Read: Sutlej Water Enters Pakistan’s Punjab, 6,000 People Evacuated In Last 24 Hours
Creating an even playing field
One of the primary justifications advanced by the Center for eliminating Jammu and Kashmir’s special status was the need to create an even playing field. Tushar Mehta, the Centre’s solicitor general, argued that the decision had brought the people of Jammu and Kashmir on level with those of the rest of the nation. It puts into effect all the welfare laws that Jammu and Kashmir has not previously done so. He gave the constitutional amendment that introduced the right to education as an illustration.
“Any amendment made to the Indian Constitution would not apply to Jammu and Kashmir until it was invoked through Article 370… So Right to Education was never implemented in Jammu and Kashmir till 2019, because this route was not followed at all,” he said. Justice Chadrachud referred to Mr. Mehta’s earlier example of the Preamble amendment. “That’s why secularism and socialism amendment was never adopted in Jammu and Kashmir,” he said.
