The Supreme Court has been moved seeking the restoration of the statehood of Jammu & Kashmir within a time bound period as the assembly elections in the Union Territory would be meaningless without the status of the state being restored that was directed by the top court and also assured by the Central government.

Seeking direction for the restoration of the statehood of Jammu & Kashmir, a senior college lecturer Zahoor Ahmed Bhat and activist Khursheed Ahmad Malik have in their plea stated that despite the direction of the top court for the restoration of statehood of Hill State “at the earliest and as soon as possible,” no steps have been taken by the Central government to give any timeline for their implementation.

Stating that not restoring the statehood was gravely affecting the rights of the citizens in the Valley, the petitioners have pointed out that the recently concluded assembly elections in the valley were conducted peacefully, without disturbance or any security concerns being reported, thus there would be “no security concerns” in case direction are issued to restore statehood within a time-bound period.

The plea further said that the General Elections too were held without any such incidence or violence from April 19, 2024 to May 20, 2024.

“The formation of the Legislative Assembly before the restoration of statehood would violate the idea of federalism, which forms the part of the basic structure of the Constitution of India,” states the plea by the two.

Pointing out that the Valley always had a federal relationship with the Union of India, the petitioners have said that it is of utmost importance that the status of statehood is restored “so that they can enjoy an autonomy in their individual identity and also play an important part in the overall development of the Country.”

The petitioners have also said that Jammu and Kashmir will also soon hold Panchayat elections, in the coming months which shall also be conducted smoothly and peacefully.

Therefore, there is no impediment, including security concerns, violence or any other disturbances, which would hinder or come in the way of the granting/restoring the Statehood to Jammu and Kashmir as had been assured by the Union of India in the proceedings which saw the top court upholding the abrogation of Article 370 of the constitution that granted special status to the hill state.

The Supreme Court on December 11, 2023, had unanimously uphold the scrapping of the Article 370 of the constitution that accorded a special status to erstwhile State of Jammu Kashmir, and stated that it was a temporary provision and the extension of the constitution of India in its entirety to the bifurcated Union Territory renders it “inoperative and redundant.”

While upholding the scrapping of the Article 370 of the constitution, a five-judge constitution bench on December 11, 2023, did not dwell into the question whether the reorganisation of the State and its bifurcating it into two Union Territories is permissible under Article 3 of the constitution, as it referred to a statement made by the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta in the course of the argument of the case that Statehood would be restored to J&K.

Having recorded the statement by the Solicitor General Mehta, the Supreme Court had directed the Central government that the statehood be restored “at the earliest as soon as possible.”

The top court said this while answering eight questions that it had framed to address all the issues that were raised and argued by the petitioners challenging the abrogation of Article 370 and the bifurcation of the State in two UTs before the constitution bench in the course of the hearing that had lasted for over 16 days.