'Art 370, 35A impeded integration of J&K with country'

The Union government has contended before the Supreme Court that Article 370 and 35A of the Constitution were abrogated as those impeded full integration of the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir with the country, created a separatist mindset and discriminated among residents.

In an affidavit, the Ministry of Home Affairs said that the existing regime under Article 370 of the Constitution was “neither in the national interest nor in the interest of Jammu and Kashmir.”

“The militants and separatist elements, with the support of foreign forces inimical to India, were taking advantage of the situation and sowing discord, discontent and even secessionist feelings among the populace of the state. What is more, the residents of the erstwhile state were also being denied all the benefits of the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to all other citizens of the country,” it said.

The Union government filed its 63-page response to the apex court's notice on a batch of petitions filed by J&K National Conference MPs Akbar Lone and Hasnain Masoodi and others that challenged validity of August 5 Presidential order subsequent constitutional amendment, taking away special status of Jammu and Kashmir granted under Article 370 and dividing the state into Union Territories.

The top court is to take up the matter on November 14.

Asserting that “justification, efficacy, desirability and the wisdom” of such decisions of the President as well as the Parliament are not amenable to judicial review, the Centre said the provisions “conceived to be merely temporary, prevented the people to receive the benefits of evolving legal systems as even the amendment of the Constitution and other law of the Parliament were not applicable, creating a separatist mindset.”

The amendment would thus act as a “catalyst” for enabling the state to achieve its development potential to the fullest, and to provide to its people the best possible standard of living in an atmosphere of peace, amity and tranquillity, it added.

With regard to Article 35A, the government said, it proved to be a serious obstacle to the socio-economic development of the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir, prevented investments and adversely impacted job creation, thereby resulting in a cascading effect on other developmental indicators.

“It has led to a discriminatory regime against citizens of the erstwhile state from the rest of the country as well as a large number of residents. Women were also discriminated against if they chose to marry a non-permanent resident,” it said.

Maintaining that despite the overwhelmingly disproportionate expenditure, the developmental benefits were not percolating to the citizens over there, the government pointed out from 2004 to 2019, the Union government spent Rs 2.77 lakh Crore.

During 2011 and 2012, only Rs 3,683 per person was given to rest of India, while Rs 14,255 per person was given to the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir.

Further, during 2017-18, an average amount of Rs 8,227 per person was spent to rest of India, whereas Rs 27,358 per person was spent in Jammu and Kashmir.