The Supreme Court, while hearing Zahoor Ahmed Bhat v. UT of J&K, has sought a detailed response from the Centre on the restoration of Jammu & Kashmir’s (J&K) statehood.
Background
- Supreme Court Direction: While upholding the abrogation of Article 370 in December 2023, directed the Union Government to restore statehood and conduct Assembly elections
- Government’s Commitment: The Indian government has stated on multiple occasions that statehood for J&K will be restored when the conditions allow, specifically when security and stability improve.
- Assembly elections: Although elections for the 90-member Assembly were held in October 2024, there has been no announcement of statehood restoration, triggering debates on federalism and constitutional propriety.
Mechanism of Creating or Reorganising States
India’s Constitution provides three pathways to confer statehood:
- Admission (Article 2): For admission of a new State into the territory of India, the entity should have its own organised political unit and such acquisition shall be guided by international law.
- Example: Jammu & Kashmir’s accession through the Instrument of Accession (1947).
- Establishment (Article 2): Acquired territories can be made States as per international law.
- Formation/Reorganisation (Article 3):
- Parliament may form new States, alter boundaries, increase/decrease area, or rename States.
- Example: Formation of Telangana from Andhra Pradesh in 2014, the bifurcation of the state of Bombay into Maharashtra and Gujarat in 1960, and the creation of Uttarakhand and Jharkhand in 2000 from Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, respectively
- Guardrail: Parliament can diminish a State’s area but cannot permanently convert a State into a Union Territory, such a move would dilute federalism.
India’s Federal Design: Balancing Unity and Diversity
- Union of States and indivisibility: Article 1 describes India as a Union of States with no right to secede. “India” denotes a unitary federation, and “Bharat” reflects composite culture and unity in diversity.
- Unitary Tilt with Welfare Federalism: Although India has a two-tier governance system, the framers chose “Union” instead of “Federation” to keep the Centre strong enough to safeguard unity and integrity.
- India’s federal character ensures an equitable distribution of resources to uphold its identity as a welfare state.
- Federalism as Basic Structure: Recognized by the Supreme Court as part of the basic structure.
- Continuous State Representation: Article 83(1) makes Rajya Sabha a permanent House, ensuring State participation at the national level.
Process of Restoring Statehood in J&K
- To restore statehood, Parliament would need to amend or repeal relevant provisions of the Jammu & Kashmir Reorganisation Act and bring a fresh Bill.
- Such a Bill must be introduced in both Houses of Parliament.
- Under Article 3 of the Constitution, the creation or reorganisation of states requires the President’s recommendation.
- Since the President acts on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister, the final authority lies with the Union Government.
Precedents of Statehood Restoration
- Himachal Pradesh (1971), Manipur and Tripura (1972), and Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram (1987) were all granted full statehood after functioning as Union Territories.
- Goa (1987) was carved out as a state from the Union Territory of Goa, Daman, and Diu.
|
Implications of Delay in Restoring Statehood
- Democratic Deficit: Prolonged UT status concentrates power in the Lieutenant Governor, weakening the mandate of elected representatives.
- Restoration of statehood would empower the elected government of J&K and substantially reduce the powers of the Lieutenant Governor (L-G)
- Federal Imbalance: Sets a precedent for downgrading States, eroding the spirit of cooperative federalism.
- Political Alienation: Extended central rule risks deepening alienation in a sensitive region.
- Constitutional Morality: Delaying statehood despite Supreme Court directions undermines constitutional trust and institutional credibility.
- Larger Federal Design Challenge: India’s federalism is often described as “quasi-federal,” combining strong central authority with regional autonomy.
- While this has enabled national unity, it has also led to tensions, especially when Union powers are exercised extensively, such as in J&K.
- Democratic Accountability: Jammu & Kashmir’s transition to a Union Territory without elected representation underscores the need for democratic accountability.
Way Forward
- Time-Bound Roadmap: The Centre should lay down a clear timeline for restoration, balancing security considerations with constitutional obligations.
- Strengthening Local Governance: Empower the elected Assembly to ensure responsive governance and reduce dependence on Union-appointed administration.
- Reaffirming Federal Commitment: Restoring statehood would reinforce India’s image as a Union of States with shared sovereignty, upholding cooperative federalism.
Conclusion
The restoration of J&K’s statehood is not merely a political promise but a constitutional imperative. India’s federal design thrives on a delicate equilibrium of a strong Union and empowered States.
- Any indefinite delay risks weakening this balance, undermining the basic structure of the Constitution.
- Reinstating J&K’s statehood would reaffirm India’s commitment to democratic representation, cooperative federalism, and constitutional morality, ensuring that unity does not come at the cost of diversity.
4 Sep 2025
.png)
GS Foundation
Optional Course
Combo Courses
Degree Program
