NGO FILES PIL IN SC CHALLENGING VALIDITY OF ARTICLE 35A

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Tuesday asked the Centre and the J&K government to respond to a petition challenging the legality of special privileges given to the state subject on the ground they were done illegally by a Presidential order in 1954.

The special privileges relate to employment, right to residence, acquiring property and admission to colleges. According to Article 35A, no rights can be conferred on Indians if they are not subjects of J&K. It was an executively-inserted pursuant to Article 370.

A bench headed by Justice HL Dattu issued notices to the respondents on a PIL filed by Delhi based NGO We the Citizens, challenging the constitutionality of Article 35A. It contended that the Presidential notification introducing the Article was illegal as it could not have been done without necessary amendment to the Constitution.

“There cannot be a class within a class of Indian citizens. The citizens of India cannot be subjected to prohibition or restriction to get employment, trade & commerce or acquisition of property and assets in the state of Jammu & Kashmir in the garb of Article 35A, which is brought on statute book by the Presidential order exercising power under Article 370 (1) of the Constitution of India. It cannot override the fundamental rights contained for the citizen in Part III of the Constitution of India,” the PIL stated.

The petitioner’s counsel Barun Kumar Sinha told HT, “The Constitution has not vested the President with any such power to provide a special provision by way of an executive order which he had exercised under Article 370 (spl privileges to J&K).”

“Therefore, Article 35A is in conflict with Article 14 (equality), 19 (freedom of expression and speech) and 21 (liberty) of the Constitution of India,” the petition said.