The Union government on Tuesday, August 29 told the Supreme Court that “Union Territory is not a permanent feature”. This was after the Constitution Bench asked the Attorney General and Solicitor General to seek instructions from the Union government over the timeframe to restore statehood of the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir. The state was downgraded into two Union Territories (UTs) in 2019 — Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) and Ladakh.
“The instructions are that UT is not a permanent feature. But, I will make a positive statement the day after tomorrow [regarding Jammu and Kashmir],” said Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, adding that Ladakh would remain a UT. SG Mehta clarified that he will meet the high-level functionaries in the government along with the Attorney General (AG) to seek more instructions to make a statement before the court.
He submitted that Union Home Minister Amit Shah made a similar statement on the floor of Parliament. “This is not a permanent situation, after the situation returns to normalcy, we want it to become a state again,” said Mehta referring to the Home Minister’s speech.
Mehta apprised the Constitution Bench that for the first time in the history of J&K, local government elections took place in 2020 where around 34,000 people were elected, adding that no “hartal (strikes), stone pelting or curfew” had been there in the valley post revocation of Article 370.
During the hearing, Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud-led Constitution Bench remarked that the erstwhile state cannot be a “Union Territory in permanence", stressing that restoration of democracy was very important. “We understand that these are matters of national security. We understand that ultimately preservation of the nation itself is an overriding concern. But without putting you in a bind, both [SG] and Attorney General may seek instructions on the highest level — is there some time frame in view?” CJI Chandrachud orally inquired.
The Constitution Bench questioned whether the Union government cannot have control over a certain stipulated period to bring stability in a particular region. “Should we not permit Parliament to postulate that for a certain period, in interest of the preservation of the nation itself, for a certain stipulated period that this particular state should go into the fold of UT, on the clear understanding that this shall revert back to a position of state over a period of time,” remarked CJI Chandrachud. He said that the Union government will have to make a statement before the Constitution Bench about the progress that has taken place in J&K.
The Constitution Bench, also comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, and Surya Kant, has sought the Union government’s roadmap. Notably, a 5-judge Constitution Bench is hearing a clutch of petitions challenging the 2019 Presidential Order taking away the special status accorded to the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir and its bifurcation into two Union Territories.