LI Network
Published on: December 12, 2023 at 12:46 IST
The Supreme Court affirmed the Parliament’s authority to carve out a Union Territory from a State while upholding the repeal of Jammu and Kashmir’s special status under Article 370 of the Constitution.
The Constitution Bench, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, upheld the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act 2019, which established the Union Territory of Ladakh from the former state of J&K.
The Court did not, however, delve into the validity of converting the State of J&K into a Union Territory, considering the Union Government’s commitment to restoring statehood to J&K (excluding Ladakh) promptly.
The Court left open the question of whether Parliament can extinguish statehood by converting a State into one or more Union Territories, emphasizing that this issue needs examination in an appropriate case.
The decision considers the impact on autonomy, the historical context, and the principles of federalism and representative democracy. The Court also referred to Article 3(a) of the Constitution, asserting that a Union Territory can indeed be carved out of a State.
The judgment clarified that the views of the concerned State regarding proposed reorganization, as per the proviso to Article 3, are not binding on Parliament.
The Court highlighted that the views of the State Legislature are recommendatory and not obligatory under the first proviso to Article 3.
The ruling follows the precedent set in Babulal Parate v. State of Bombay (1959). Justice Sanjiv Khanna, in his concurring judgment, expressed caution about the conversion of a State into a Union Territory, emphasizing the need for strong and cogent grounds in strict compliance with Article 3.
This decision provides clarity on the Parliament’s authority in restructuring the administrative divisions of the country, particularly in the context of Union Territories.