news details |
|
|
SC notice to Centre, State Govt on validity of Article 35-A: First step towards abrogation of Article 370 | | | Early Times Report Jammu, Aug 19: Decision of the Supreme Court to issue notice to Centre and Jammu and Kashmir Government over validity of Article 35-A is a first step towards revocation of Article 370. If Article 35-A would be revoked, Article 370 would be automatically abolished because this Article provides powers to the Jammu and Kashmir Government to not to extend Central laws in the State. Instead of directly demanding abrogation of Article 370, some organisations have decided to focus on revocation of Article 35-A to make Article 370 defunct. Article 35-A of the Indian Constitution, which was made applicable to the State in 1954 is responsible for their not graNting citizenship rights to those West Pakistani refugees. The Government headed by Pt Jawahar Lal Nehru had amended Article 368 without taking the Indian Parliament into confidence to add to Article 35 the highly obnoxious Article 35-A which was enforced in Jammu and Kashmir through the Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, May 1954?. It was Article 35-A that enabled the Jammu and Kashmir Constituent Assembly to deny citizenship rights to the refugees from West Pakistan and all other Indians, barring Permanent Residents of the State. Armed with absolute power, the Jammu and Kashmir Constituent Assembly adopted Section 6 which said no persons who had crossed over to the State after May 1944 will be considered eligible for citizenship rights". Section 6 meant two things: Denial of citizenship rights to the Indians who were not permanent residents of the State as per the definition of permanent resident of the State and provision to grant citizenship rights to those who migrated from the state to Pakistan on or after 1st March, 1947 and adopted Pakistani citizenship in case they returned to Jammu and Kashmir. Important to mention here that The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice to Centre and Jammu and Kashmir Government over a plea challenging constitutional validity of Article 35 (A). The petitioner stated that this Article is unconstitutional because it violates the fundamental rights of other citizens who have a right to get employment and move freely otherwise. The plea also stated that this Article 35A should have been passed by the Parliament and not by the President, who enjoys the power under Article 370 to do so. The petitioner has challenged the President's power under Article 370 saying that President could not have added Article 35A. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
|
BSE
Sensex |
|
NSE
Nifty |
|
|
|
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|