In the ongoing hearings related to Article 370, the Union Government has clarified its stance before the Supreme Court, emphasizing that it has no intention to interfere with the special provisions applicable to North Eastern states or other parts of India. This statement was made in response to concerns raised about the potential implications of the Article 370 verdict on other regions with special provisions.
The Constitution Bench, led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud and comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, and Surya Kant, was hearing arguments presented by Senior Advocate Manish Tiwari. Tiwari, representing an applicant from Arunachal Pradesh, voiced concerns about the potential impact on the special provisions applicable to North Eastern states, drawing parallels with the manner in which Jammu and Kashmir’s special status was repealed. He highlighted provisions like Article 371 and the 6th Schedule, which cater to special provisions for North Eastern states. Tiwari remarked,
“Even a slight apprehension in the periphery of India can have serious implications. Your lordships are currently dealing with one such situation in Manipur.”
Solicitor General of India, Tushar Mehta, responded to these concerns, stating,
“I have instructions to say this. We must understand the difference between a temporary provision, which is Article 370, and special provisions with regards to the north east. The Central government has no intention to touch any part which gives special provisions to North East and other regions.”
He further added, emphasizing the clarity of the government’s position, “There is no apprehension and there is no need to create apprehension.”
CJI Chandrachud, echoing the Solicitor General’s sentiments, stated,
“Why should we go into apprehensions at all? When the Centre has said it has no such intention, why should we apprehend this at all? Apprehensions are allayed by the statement of the Central government.”
The Court subsequently disposed of the intervention application filed by Tiwari, recording the Solicitor General’s statement. The order noted,
“Solicitor General Mehta has submitted on specific instructions of the Centre that it has no intention to affect any of the special provisions… Reference of this case is to Article 370, and thus there is no commonality of interest in the IA and the case being heard. In any event, SG’s statement allays apprehension in this regard… This stands disposed of.”
This development underscores the government’s commitment to preserving the special provisions of North Eastern states, even as the debate around Article 370 continues to evolve.
