Gita Mit­tal sworn in as J&K HC chief jus­tice

Hindustan Times (Amritsar) - - News - Press Trust of In­dia let­ter­schd@hin­dus­tan­times.com

SRINAGAR: Jus­tice Gita Mit­tal was sworn in as the Chief Jus­tice of the Jammu and Kash­mir high court on Satur­day. Be­fore be­ing sworn in as the Chief Jus­tice, the court’s Reg­is­trar Gen­eral read out the war­rant of Mit­tal’s ap­point­ment. She was then ad­min­is­tered the oath of of­fice by gov­er­nor NN Vohra at a cer­e­mony at Raj Bhavan here. Mit­tal is the first fe­male Chief Jus­tice of the Jammu and Kash­mir high court.

THE FOR­MER CM SAID THAT WHILE HER GOVT HAD FOUGHT THE CASE LEGALLY IN THE SC, SHE “STOOD ALONE” IN THE PO­LIT­I­CAL BAT­TLE

SRINAGAR:For­mer chief min­is­ter Me­hbooba Mufti said on Satur­day that de­fend­ing the spe­cial sta­tus of Jammu and Kash­mir was not con­fined to a par­tic­u­lar re­gion or re­li­gion any­more as the peo­ple of the state have re­alised its im­por­tance and sanc­tity.

She was re­fer­ring to the re­ports of two of BJP MLAs from Jammu re­gion com­ing out in sup­port of Ar­ti­cle 35A, which is fac­ing a le­gal chal­lenge in the Supreme Court.

“Heart­en­ing to know that two MLAs from BJP, Ra­jesh Gupta fol­lowed by Dr Ga­gan (Bha­gat), have raised their voice in de­fence of Ar­ti­cle 35A. De­fend­ing the spe­cial sta­tus of J&K is not con­fined to a re­gion or re­li­gion any­more. Peo­ple of the state have re­alised its im­por­tance & sanc­tity,” Me­hbooba wrote on Twit­ter.

The for­mer CM said that while her gov­ern­ment had fought the case legally in the Supreme Court, she “stood alone” in the po­lit­i­cal bat­tle em­pha­sis­ing that any di­lu­tion of Ar­ti­cle 35A would set the state on fire.

“To­day I feel re­lieved that re­gard­less of po­lit­i­cal views or af­fil­i­a­tions, we are all on the same page as far as pro­tect­ing the spe­cial sta­tus of J&K is con­cerned,” Me­hbooba wrote.

The Supreme Court had, on Au­gust 6, said that a three-judge bench would de­cide whether the pleas chal­leng­ing Ar­ti­cle 35A should be re­ferred to a five-judge Con­sti­tu­tion bench for ex­am­in­ing the larger is­sue of al­leged vi­o­la­tion of the doc­trine of ba­sic struc­ture of the Con­sti­tu­tion.

The bench com­pris­ing chief jus­tice Di­pak Misra and jus­tice A Khan­wilkar had ad­journed the cru­cial hear­ing on as many as five pe­ti­tions “to the week com­menc­ing from Au­gust 27” on the grounds that they per­tained to the chal­lenge to a con­sti­tu­tional scheme and could not be heard as the third judge, jus­tice D Y Chan­drachud, was not present on that day.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.