Do J&K HC judges take oath under Constitution of India: Delhi HC

THE DELHI High Court on Monday asked the Advocate General for the government of Jammu & Kashmir, as well as the central government, to explain whether judges in the J&K High Court take oath under the Constitution of India. It also asked whether a plea challenging a provision of the Constitution of India that protects J&K from automatic application of all laws and constitutional amendments can be heard by the Delhi HC.

The bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal noted that it found it “appropriate” to get a response from the Centre and the J&K government since the petitioners alleged that the judges of the J&K HC “do not appear to be under oath to uphold the Constitution of India”.

Senior advocate Ravindra K Raizada, who was appearing for the petitioners, alleged that “Judges in J&K do not take oath to bear true allegiance to the Constitution of India as by law established,” and argued that a question regarding a Constitutional principle could therefore not be heard before the J&K HC.

The argument came up after the Delhi HC raised the question of why the plea was filed in Delhi and not before the J&K HC. The senior lawyer argued that under Article 219, a High Court judge is required to make an oath specified under the Third Schedule of the Constitution of India. However, due to the proviso under challenge, the requirement of oath to uphold the Constitution of India was not extended to the judges of the J&K HC.

The lawyer argued that the J&K HC judges take oath under the “Constitution applicable to the state of J&K”, and an issue of challenge to a provision of the Constitution of India cannot be heard before the J&K HC.

The Delhi HC has not yet issued formal notice on the PIL and is considering whether the plea is maintainable. The matter will now be heard on February 13.