New Delhi, Dec 07: A five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, will deliver one of the most awaited court verdicts on Monday, December 11, when it rules on the constitutionality of abrogation of the Article 370 and reorganization of Jammu & Kashmir into two Union Territories.
The landmark case, encompassing 23 petitions challenging government action, has been under review by the Supreme Court for an extended period. After 16 marathon days of hearings and persuasive arguments presented by both sides, the court reserved its judgment on September 5.
A five-judge Constitution bench, led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjeev Khanna, BR Gavai, and Surya Kant, iis expected to pronounce the verdict on Monday. Their decision will hold immense significance, determining whether the abrogation of Article 370 was carried out under the Constitution and legal principles.
Eighteen lawyers, including Kapil Sibal, Gopal Subramaniam, Dushyant Dave, and Rajiv Dhawan, presented arguments challenging the validity of the Centre's decision while the Centre, represented by Attorney General R Venkataramani, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, and other legal experts, defended its actions as being completely logical and appropriate.
On August 05, 2019, the Union Government had abrogated the Article 370 and reorganized Jammu & Kashmir into two UTs.
Several petitions challenging the abrogation of Article 370 were filed in the Supreme Court by different parties. Several political parties including the National Conference and Peoples Conference had also challenged the Centre's decision.
After hearing the matter for 16 days, the Supreme Court had reserved its verdict in the case on September 05.
The Centre argued that the dissolution of the Jammu and Kashmir Constituent Assembly automatically brought about the creation of the Legislative Assembly. This, they claim, empowers the Centre to take action with the consent of Parliament when the Legislative Assembly stands adjourned during periods of President's rule.
They further asserted that this process adheres to the Constitution and does not violate the federal structure between the central and state governments.
Petitioners' Argument
The petitioners have accused the Centre of arbitrarily disregarding the state's rights and constitutionally enshrined Legislative Assembly.
They argued that before dividing the state, obtaining the consent of the people, represented by their elected representatives in the Legislative Assembly, was a fundamental requirement. By bypassing this crucial step, the Centre has encroached upon the state's autonomy and undermined the fundamental principles of Centre-State relations.
The petitioners further argued that the people of Jammu and Kashmir have been “deprived of representation” in both the Legislative Assembly and Lok Sabha for four long years. This denial of their elected representatives amounts to a strangulation of democracy in the region, they argued.
