<p>The Supreme Court today sought response from the Centre on a plea against a Delhi High Court order by which it had rejected a petition challenging validity of Article 370 of the Constitution giving special status to Jammu and Kashmir.<br /><br />A bench headed by Chief Justice J S Khehar issued notice to the Centre and sought its reply within four weeks.<br /><br />The Delhi High Court had on April 11 this year rejected the plea challenging the validity of Article 370, saying nothing survives in it as the Supreme Court has already dismissed a petition on the issue.<br /><br />The petitioner in high court, Kumari Vijayalakshmi Jha, had claimed that the issue raised before the high court was different from the matter which was put before the apex court.<br /><br />She had contended that Article 370 was a temporary provision that had lapsed with the dissolution of the state's Constituent Assembly in 1957.<br /><br />The petition had said that the continuance of the temporary provision of Article 370 even after dissolution of the state's Constituent Assembly and its Constitution which has never got the assent of the President of India or Parliament or the Government of India, "amounts to fraud on the basic structure of our Constitution".<br /><br />In July 2014, the Supreme Court had dismissed a plea challenging the special status granted to Jammu and Kashmir and had asked the petitioner to move the high court.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court today sought response from the Centre on a plea against a Delhi High Court order by which it had rejected a petition challenging validity of Article 370 of the Constitution giving special status to Jammu and Kashmir.<br /><br />A bench headed by Chief Justice J S Khehar issued notice to the Centre and sought its reply within four weeks.<br /><br />The Delhi High Court had on April 11 this year rejected the plea challenging the validity of Article 370, saying nothing survives in it as the Supreme Court has already dismissed a petition on the issue.<br /><br />The petitioner in high court, Kumari Vijayalakshmi Jha, had claimed that the issue raised before the high court was different from the matter which was put before the apex court.<br /><br />She had contended that Article 370 was a temporary provision that had lapsed with the dissolution of the state's Constituent Assembly in 1957.<br /><br />The petition had said that the continuance of the temporary provision of Article 370 even after dissolution of the state's Constituent Assembly and its Constitution which has never got the assent of the President of India or Parliament or the Government of India, "amounts to fraud on the basic structure of our Constitution".<br /><br />In July 2014, the Supreme Court had dismissed a plea challenging the special status granted to Jammu and Kashmir and had asked the petitioner to move the high court.</p>