India News

J&K: Supreme Court fixes Nov 14 for hearing petitions challenging Centre’s order as latter sits on reply

Supreme Court fixed November 14 to commence hearing petitions challenging the Constitutional validity Centre’s decision revoking the special status for Jammu and Kashmir.

Published

6 years ago

October 1, 2019

In what is certain to attract stinging criticism, the Centre choosing not to file any counter-affidavits so far to petitions challenging its decisions in Jammu and Kashmir became a ground for the Supreme Court to postpone the much awaited hearing by another month and half.

The Supreme Court today – Tuesday, Oct 1 – fixed Nov 14 to commence hearing a batch of petitions challenging the Constitutional validity of the amendment to Article 370 revoking the special status for Jammu and Kashmir.

The five-judge Constitution bench – the ‘Kashmir bench – headed by Justice NV Ramana and also comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, R Subhash Reddy, Bhushan Gavai and Surya Kant also put an embargo on fresh petitions challenging the government’s decision.

The court refused the plea of petitioners that not more than two weeks be given to the Centre and J&K administration for filing counter-affidavits. It allowed Centre four weeks time to file counter-affidavits to the cases, and one week time for the petitioner to file a rejoinder.

The top court which is already seized of multiple petitions in the matter said it will not entertain any more petitions.

“We have to allow the Centre and the J&K administration to file counter-affidavit otherwise we can’t decide the matter,” the bench said.

On Monday, a bench headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi transferred all petitions pending before it to the Constitution Bench headed by Justice NV Ramana. It was decided over a month ago, on August 28, to refer them to a larger bench.

The bench was constituted especially to hear matters related to Article 370 starting today.

Several pleas have been filed in the top court challenging the Centre’s August 5 decision abrogating provisions of Article 370 and bifurcating the state into Union Territories of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh. The UTs will come into being on October 31.

The Presidential Order, according to the petitioners, used “a temporary situation meant to hold the field until the return of the elected government, to accomplish a fundamental, permanent, and irreversible alteration of the status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir without the concurrence, consultation or recommendation of the people of that State, acting through their elected representatives”.

This, they said, amounted to an “overnight abrogation of the democratic rights and freedoms guaranteed to the people of the State… upon its accession”.

As decided by the CJI headed bench on Monday, the petitions challenging govt order changing J&K’s status would be heard by the Kashmir bench, while others relating to human rights etc due to lockdown were referred to a three-judge bench.

The petitions

The first petition in the apex court challenging the presidential order on Article 370 was filed by advocate ML Sharma on August 6.

Several others followed. These include pleas by Anuradha Bhasin, executive editor of Kashmir Times newspaper; the habeas corpus petition by CPI(M) general secretary Sitaram Yechury questioning detention of party colleague Yusuf Tarigami; and Congress leader Ghulam Nabi Azad seeking permission to travel to J&K.

The National Conference (NC), the Sajjad Lone-led J&K Peoples Conference and CPI(M) leader Mohd Yousuf Tarigami also filed pleas in this regard in the top court.

The petition on behalf of NC was filed by Lok Sabha MPs Mohammad Akbar Lone and Justice (retd) Hasnain Masoodi. Lone is a former speaker of the J&K Assembly and Masoodi is a retired judge of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court.

In 2015, Justice (retd) Masoodi had ruled that Article 370 was a permanent feature of the Constitution.

Other pleas include the one filed by a group of former defence officers and bureaucrats. They have also sought directions declaring the presidential orders of August 5 “unconstitutional, void and inoperative”. The plea was filed by professor Radha Kumar, a former member of the Home Ministry’s Group of Interlocutors for Jammu and Kashmir (2010-11), former IAS officer of J&K cadre Hindal Haidar Tyabji, Air Vice Marshal (retd) Kapil Kak, Major General (retd) Ashok Kumar Mehta, former Punjab-cadre IAS officer Amitabha Pande and former Kerala-cadre IAS officer Gopal Pillai, who retired as the Union home secretary in 2011.

A plea has also been filed by bureaucrat-turned-politician Shah Faesal, along with his party colleague and former Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union (JNUSU) leader Shehla Rashid.

Petitions referred to three-judge bench

During the hearing on Monday, the bench headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, and also comprising Justices SA Bobde and SA Nazeer, said it has received a report from the Juvenile Justice Committee of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court on the allegations about illegal detention of minors in the Valley.

“The report has come. We will send this matter to the Kashmir bench (a three-judge bench headed by Justice Ramana),” the bench told the lawyer representing petitioners and child right activists Enakshi Ganguly and Shanta Sinha.

It also referred to the three-judge bench a separate plea filed by a doctor who claimed shortage of medical facilities in Kashmir due to the restrictions imposed there and also about restoration of internet facilities in the hospitals there.

The bench said that petition filed by Executive Editor of Kashmir Times Anuradha Bhasin, who has raised the issue of restrictions imposed on working of journalists in Kashmir following the abrogation of provisions of Article 370, would be heard by the three-judge bench.

It also referred the separate petitions, including those filed by CPI(M) general secretary Sitaram Yechury and senior Congress leader Ghulam Nabi Azad, to the three-judge bench.

While Yechury has filed a petition seeking permission to visit his party colleague Yousuf Tarigami in Kashmir, Azad has moved the top court in his personal capacity seeking its nod to visit his family members and relatives in Kashmir.

The apex court had earlier allowed Yechury to visit Kashmir to meet Tarigami while Azad was also permitted to visit four districts — Srinagar, Jammu, Baramulla, Anantnag — to meet people.

Petitions before the Constitution bench

Other pleas, which would be taken up for hearing by the Constitution bench, include the plea by advocate ML Sharma.

Another is one filed by a group of former defence officers and bureaucrats who have sought direction to declare the Presidential orders of August 5 “unconstitutional, void and inoperative”.

The plea was filed by professor Radha Kumar, a former member of the Home Ministry’s Group of Interlocutors for Jammu and Kashmir (2010-11), former IAS officer of J&K cadre Hindal Haidar Tyabji, Air Vice Marshal (retd) Kapil Kak, Major General (retd) Ashok Kumar Mehta, former Punjab-cadre IAS officer Amitabha Pande and former Kerala-cadre IAS officer Gopal Pillai, who retired as the Union home secretary in 2011.

The NC leaders have submitted that the Presidential Orders paved the way for application of entire provisions of the Constitution in Jammu and Kashmir and also have the effect of nullifying Article 35A and completely abrogating Article 370.

They have contended that the Presidential Orders and the new legislation unconstitutionally undermine the scheme of Article 370.

Centre’s delay in filing counter-affidavits

While the Centre’s move came on Aug 5 and it is two months since the lockdown and communication blockade was imposed in Jammu and Kashmir, the Centre is yet to file its counter-affidavits in the bunch of petitions filed in the Supreme Court questioning its actions.

The first of these petitions was filed on Aug 6, the day after the Centre’s move.

The government’s measures – which were termed a ‘collective punishment on people’ by the United Nations Human rights body – have impacted the civil liberties of the people of J&K. It is unusual for such a long time to lapse before matters relating to constitutionally guaranteed rights are addressed.

Unfortunately, even after several weeks, no such explanation is forthcoming from the government.

Up Next

UP Police to Identify and Deport Bangladeshis, Other ‘Foreigners’, DGP OP Singh says ‘nothing to do with NRC’

Don't Miss

Jaishankar clarifies Modi’s Abki baar Trump Sarkaar remark, Rahul asks him to teach PM diplomacy

India News

Manipur Assembly to meet at 4 pm today, floor test likely under new chief minister

The Manipur Legislative Assembly will convene at 4 pm today, with a floor test likely as the new chief minister seeks to prove his majority in the House.

Published

1 hour ago

February 5, 2026

[email protected]

The Manipur Legislative Assembly will convene at 4 pm on Thursday in Imphal, a day after Yumnam Khemchand Singh was sworn in as the chief minister. A floor test is likely to be held on the first day of the session to establish the majority of the newly formed government.

In the 60-member Assembly, the BJP holds 37 seats, while its ally National People’s Party has six members, giving the ruling combine a clear majority in the House.

Singh chaired the first Cabinet meeting of his government late Wednesday evening, shortly after taking oath as the 13th chief minister of Manipur. The meeting marked the formal start of administrative functioning under the new Council of Ministers.

His appointment came nearly a year after the resignation of former chief minister N Biren Singh, who stepped down following months of ethnic violence between the Meitei and Kuki communities in the state.

After taking oath, Singh thanked Prime Minister Narendra Modi and said he would work with “utmost diligence to advance development and prosperity in Manipur,” aligning the state’s efforts with the vision of Viksit Bharat.

He said the government’s focus would be on inclusive economic growth while preserving Manipur’s cultural heritage, adding that he would discharge his responsibilities with sincerity and dedication, mindful of the trust placed in him.

The summoning of the 12th Manipur Legislative Assembly by Governor Ajay Kumar Bhalla, along with the first Cabinet meeting, signals the resumption of legislative and administrative processes in the state, officially bringing President’s rule to an end.

The sixth session of the 12th Manipur Legislative Assembly was last held from July 31 to August 12, 2024.

India News

PM Modi skips Lok Sabha reply as protests force repeated adjournments

PM Modi did not deliver his Lok Sabha reply today after sustained Opposition protests led to repeated adjournments over a dispute involving Rahul Gandhi’s proposed speech.

Published

19 hours ago

February 4, 2026

[email protected]

Prime Minister Narendra Modi did not deliver his scheduled reply to the Motion of Thanks on the President’s address in the Lok Sabha today after sustained Opposition protests led to multiple adjournments of the House.

The disruption followed an escalation of tensions linked to Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s proposed speech and the suspension of eight Opposition MPs a day earlier. The situation worsened after remarks made by BJP MP Nishikant Dubey during the proceedings.

Dispute over references to books sparks fresh ruckus

The controversy intensified when Nishikant Dubey responded to Rahul Gandhi’s demand to speak on national security and references to the unpublished memoirs of former Army chief General MM Naravane. Dubey said that while Gandhi wanted to quote from an unpublished book, he himself had brought several books that, according to him, made claims about the Gandhi family.

As Dubey began listing these books and their contents, strong protests erupted from Opposition members. Krishna Prasad Tenneti, who was presiding over the House at the time, cited Rule 349, which restricts members from reading out books, newspapers, or letters unless directly related to parliamentary business. Despite repeated warnings, the matter remained unresolved, leading to another adjournment.

Rahul Gandhi accuses government of silencing debate

Earlier in the day, Rahul Gandhi alleged that he was being prevented from speaking on an issue of national importance. He claimed the government was uncomfortable with references to General Naravane’s memoirs, which he said discussed the handling of the 2020 China border crisis.

In a social media post, Gandhi said he intended to present the Prime Minister with a book authored by the former Army chief, adding that some cabinet ministers had even questioned the existence of the book. He also wrote to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla after the suspension of eight Opposition MPs, alleging that parliamentary debate was being curtailed.

After it became clear that the Prime Minister would not speak in the House today, Gandhi posted that PM Modi had avoided Parliament because he was “scared” to face the truth. Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra echoed the allegation, claiming the Prime Minister was unwilling to enter the House.

Proceedings disrupted throughout the day

Lok Sabha proceedings were first adjourned until 2 pm amid loud protests over the issue linked to Naravane’s memoirs. Even after the House reconvened, disruptions continued, preventing normal business from resuming.

Later, Congress MPs staged a demonstration outside the Parliament complex, demanding that Rahul Gandhi be allowed to speak on the President’s address.

India News

President’s Rule revoked in Manipur as NDA set to form new government

President’s Rule has been withdrawn in Manipur nearly a year after its imposition, paving the way for a new NDA-led government under Yumnam Khemchand Singh.

Published

23 hours ago

February 4, 2026

[email protected]

President’s Rule has been revoked in Manipur nearly a year after it was imposed, clearing the way for the formation of a new government led by the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA). The decision came hours before the scheduled oath ceremony of the new council of ministers.

Chief minister-designate Yumnam Khemchand Singh is set to take oath later this evening, along with other NDA legislators who will formally join the new government. The revocation brings an end to central rule that had been in place since February 2025, following the resignation of then chief minister N Biren Singh.

Assembly status during central rule

During the period of President’s Rule, the Manipur Legislative Assembly remained in suspended animation, meaning it was neither functioning nor dissolved. With the restoration of the elected government, legislative activity is expected to resume.

Khemchand Singh, 61, belongs to the Meitei community. Two deputy chief ministers have been named to reflect Manipur’s ethnic diversity. Nemcha Kipgen, from the Kuki community, and Losii Dikho, from the Naga community, are set to take charge as deputy chief ministers.

According to people with direct knowledge of the matter, Nemcha Kipgen is likely to take oath from a Manipur government guesthouse in Delhi.

Key portfolios and leadership choices

Seven-time MLA from Bishnupur district, Govindas Konthoujam, said he has been entrusted with the Home portfolio. Emphasising stability and law and order, he said he remains committed to serving the state with discipline and restraint.

Sources said Khemchand Singh is viewed within the party as a non-polarising leader who is acceptable across internal factions at a time of political transition. While he is yet to be tested in governance, he is seen as a steady administrative choice capable of providing organisational discipline and continuity amid uncertainty.

Uneasy peace continues in Manipur

The formation of the new government comes against the backdrop of continued tension in Manipur, nearly three years after violence erupted between the Meitei community in the valley areas and the Kuki tribes in several hill districts.

A section of Kuki groups has been demanding a separate administrative arrangement, with negotiations involving multiple insurgent groups operating under two umbrella organisations that are signatories to the suspension of operations agreement.

In recent weeks, some Kuki civil society organisations have stated they would not participate in the Manipur government and have distanced themselves from Kuki MLAs expected to join the new administration.

A day before the announcement of the new government, Kuki leader Paolienlal Haokip posted on X that representatives of the Kuki Zo people could not take part in leadership selection without justice and a written commitment for political settlement.

Diverging demands from communities

Meitei civil society groups have maintained that all internally displaced persons should be allowed to return home safely, even as dialogue continues. However, Kuki leaders have insisted that a political solution in the form of a separate administration must come first, before discussions on rehabilitation and return from relief camps.

Meitei leaders have countered this position, arguing that the demand reflects an ethnocentric territorial claim and that humanitarian issues should be addressed alongside negotiations, as no area is exclusively inhabited by a single community.