Central Government Assures Supreme Court: Jammu & Kashmir’s Union Territory Status Not Permanent
The Central Government has communicated to the Supreme Court that the Union Territory (UT) status of Jammu & Kashmir is not a permanent arrangement. This statement was made during a hearing before a Constitution Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, and Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, and Surya Kant.
CJI Chandrachud sought clarity from the Central Government regarding the future plans for Jammu & Kashmir. He stated,
“We need a statement from the Central government on this, that if there is a time frame in view? The restoration of democracy is a vital component of our nation. Please tell us what is the roadmap for this.”
Responding to the bench’s query, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta assured that a definitive statement on the matter would be provided shortly. He said,
“I have taken instructions and the instructions are that the UT is not a permanent feature and I will make a positive statement the day after tomorrow. Ladakh would remain a UT…but here we are only on Jammu & Kashmir.”
During the hearing, Justice Kaul posed a hypothetical question, inquiring if a part of Assam could be designated as a union territory. To this, the Solicitor General responded that such a scenario was too “extreme” and highlighted that states cannot be transformed into union territories under Article 3 without a distinct separation.
Drawing a parallel, CJI Chandrachud cited the example of Chandigarh’s formation post-independence. He reflected,
“On the creation of union territories post-independence, look at Chandigarh, how it was carved out to become a Union Territory to govern the two sister states as per the Punjab Reorganisation Act. So you make them as Union Territory now, but at a later point of time when it stabilizes, it is made into a state. Can the Union not have control over a stipulated period to bring stability? Whether it is a state or UT, if all of us survive, then the nation survives. Then should we not give that much leeway to Parliament that for some period a state is made into a UT and then after a period it becomes a state?”
The discussions surrounding Jammu & Kashmir’s status continue to be a focal point in the nation’s legal and political discourse, with stakeholders keenly awaiting further developments.