news details |
|
|
| Article 370 bars other Indians from buying properties in J&K | | Cat is out of the bag | | Neha
JAMMU, Dec 7: Chief Minister Omar Abdullah says Article 370 has nothing to do with property and residency rights. He is right. It is the State Subject laws enacted in 1927 during the regime of Maharaja Hari Singh and amended from time to time after 1927 which have everything to do with property and residency rights in the state. However, it is a different story that the Kashmiri leadership, which had opposed the State Subject laws during the regime of Maharaja Hari Singh, adopted them and has been implementing them ruthlessly. That the Kashmiri leadership and it's supporters in Jammu, including the Congresswallas, have abused and misused the State Subject laws could be seen from the fact that the refugees from West Pakistan, who migrated to Jammu in 1947 to save their life and dignity from the fanatics or radical Islamists, do not exercise citizenship rights in Jammu & Kashmir even after their stay. Their only crime is that they profess a different faith.
However, yesterday in Jammu, in TV debate on Article 370 and its benefits or otherwise, two of the four panelists, one each from Kashmir and erstwhile Doda district, repeatedly insisted that Article 370 had benefited the state in several ways. But none of them was able to point out the benefits of this Article. They simply beat about the bush. When asked repeatedly by another panelist from Jammu to pinpoint the benefits of Article 370, the votaries of this Article said that the biggest benefit is that "no one from other parts of India could buy immovable property and acquire government job in the state". This was the lone instance that they referred to in defence of Article 370. It established two things. One, the votaries of Article 370 interpret it in the way it suits them. To counter Modi they would say that Article 370 has nothing to do with property and residency rights and to counter those who want citizenship rights for the refugees from West Pakistan, they would say Article 370 doesn't permit such a regime. This should expose the double-speak of the votaries of this Article and establish how parochial is their approach? It is strange that the votaries of Article 370 are exercising all rights, including the right to own immovable property, anywhere in the country, but they are opposing a regime that entitles their counterparts in the rest of the country to exercise similar rights in Jammu & Kashmir. This approach will not do. The people of rest of the country and the people of Jammu & Kashmir cannot be treated differently and to do so would be to negate the very Constitution of India which doesn't discriminate between man and man on any ground whatsoever. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
