Article 35-A: CM Mehbooba calls on NC president Farooq Abdullah

Srinagar: Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti on Tuesday met opposition National Conference president Farooq Abdullah amid a debate on Article 35-A which grants special privileges to the state.

“MehboobaMufti called on JKNC President this evening to discuss the prevailing political situation in the state. It was a cordial meeting,” tweeted National Conference Working President Omar Abdullah.

Omar didn’t elaborate on the issues discussed by the two leaders, but reports said that a “significant part of the meeting was taken up discussing ways to protect Art 35-A.”

They said Abdullah suggested that the CM should consult other parties with an aim to create a wider consensus amongst like-minded parties to prevent abrogation of Article 35-A by the Supreme Court.


1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. daya sagar Sr journalist

    August 14, 2017 at 5:24 AM

    Comments( 1 )
    Start writing your comment..
    Daya Sagar 14 August, 2017 5:14 AM IST
    How can you put political pressures on supreme court of India ? No should not. J&K politicians who have held the reigns of power and those who have shared with them have been exposed after the very existence of Art 35A has been challenged. Those who are talking of J&K being a muslim majority state and ‘so called ‘ special provisions / special status to J&K was given for the muslim majority of Kashmir opting for India and Pakistan in 1947 are the enemies of the people of J&K and must be defeated in their game plans. Let people of all the three regions atleast now understand and defeat the divisive game plans that have been in practice for about 7 decades now. On one hand Kashmiri leadership boasts of having lead a freedom struggle against Dogra rule and on the other hand are now taking refuse under the State Subject Law of Maharaja Hari Singh , how funny.? Can you believe ‘they ‘ have so far used the provisions that have remained unchallenged so far for their very existence a s ‘distancing’ symbol , had it not been so they would not have carried on with anti woman provision even for the Women Permanent Residents of J&K what to talk of 1947 West Pakistan refugees, they would not have disowned even the 5300 known families of POJK DPs 1947 who are today staying in Indian states other than J&K… Will the likes of Abdullahs, Mufties, Ranas, Rashids, Shahs politically pursue for making such corrections rather than throwing challenges on supreme court ? People of J&K have already suffered a lot please do not stoop too low and now use the muslim majority state logic for pushing your concern. Art 35A has been added as a new article after Art 35 in the Constitution of India by an Order of the President (C.O 48 of 14 May 1954 ) said to have been issued by the President in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (1) of article 370 of the Constitution ( Temporary provisions with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir ) , with the concurrence of the Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. This article (Art 35A) is not available in the main body of constitution of India and is available in the text of Constitution ( Application to Jammu & Kashmir ) order 1954 dated 14 May 1954 C.O.1954 that is attached with Constitution of India as Appendix-I. This article has been described by ‘mainstream’ political leadership of J&K whose core leadership belongs to Kashmir Valley as special provision ( some say even Status ) granted to the State of Jammu & Kashmir by the Union under the provision of what the State can define the classes of persons who are, or shall be Permanent Residents of the State of Jammu and Kashmir or State can confer on such permanent residents any special rights and privileges or imposing upon other persons any restrictions as respects (i) employment under the State Government; (ii) acquisition of immovable property in the State; (iii) settlement in the State; or (iv) right to scholarships and such other forms of aid as the State Government may provide, and that shall not be void on the ground that it is inconsistent with or takes away or abridges any rights conferred on the other citizens of India by any provision of Part-III of COI. And some have even in 2017 said that it was done by Union in 1954 in recognition of the people of the State (that was a muslim majority state in 1947) having rejected the religion based two nation theory and opted for India Dominion and in the absence of such like provision the demography of the State could be changed. No doubt such claims do not stand to the technical aspects but surely reflects the mind set of those who couch for this article not for the good of their people but for keeping the issues of accession related controversies live to benefit their ambitions for remaining in the seat of governance ‘they’ prefer controversies directly or indirectly related to 1947 accession of J&K with India. People of J&K State will have take care of their values themselves. Questions have been raised on this article: Q1. The Presidential order says: (4j) After Article 35, the following new article shall be added, namely:— “35A : -.Saving of laws with respect to permanent residents and their rights.—…. .. Question is where the new article, namely 35A has been added? The answer that could be and should be is the New Article 35A has been added in the Constitution of India. Further Question is under what authority the President has added a new Article in Constitution of India which amounts to amending the Constitution of India ? The plea commonly given is that it has been under the powers conferred on the president by Clause- 1 ( to be specific Clause 1-d ) of Article 370 of COI. But this plea does not stand to technical test since Clause -1d of Article 370 refers to only the existing provisions of Constitution of India and hence adding a new article does come in the scope of said clause since that amounts to amending the constitution of India and that could be done only by Parliament of India exercising the constituent power as slated in Art-368 of Constitution of India. Hence, in that way this article 35A is non existent form constitutional point of view and can not give constitutional shelter to any law /act made in J&K that violate the fundamental rights of some citizens of India that are granted in Part III of COI. Q2. Questions have been raised by some people on the validity of the laws / acts /orders of State that discriminate amongst the citizens of India stating that such bad laws / orders { made in favour of Permanent residents of J&K giving them exclusive rights on owning land, joining state service , receiving aid from state, voting for and entering J&K legislature , studying in state government owned professional colleges and discriminating not only some Indian citizens in general but also amongst the Indian citizens who are classified as permanent residents of J&K ( denying rights to 5300 POJK DP Families of 1947 even their being Permanent Residents of J&K while granting much disputed one time settlement of a meagre amount of Rs.5.5 Lakh / family under PM Development package 2015 , denying fundamental rights of women permanent residents of J&K ) } are against the spirit of constitution of India. These allegations though have been appreciated in principle even by the Apex Court ( 1987) but courts have felt helpless for giving a relief for discriminations being under the shelter of the so called Art 35A. So, any challenge on this ground could become victim of political game plans. Only point worth challenging it before Apex courts could be genuineness of very existence of this article . Question before the courts is on very ‘existence’ of this article in the constitution of India and it is not of its abrogation / modification or retention. It is a question of very existence of Art35A that has been put to challenge now and has disturbed the Kashmir Valley centric leaders so much that they have started talking of J&K being a muslim majority state and Accession 1947 being a conditional agreement made by “Kashmiries”, kindly do not do this. Daya Sagar Sr. Journalist

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

To Top