Omar warns against revoking Article 370

TrueSpirit

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
1,893
Likes
841
J&K Article 370 row: Advani hits back at Omar

NEW DELHI: Against the backdrop of Jammu and Kashmir chief minister Omar Abdullah slamming him on the issue of revocation of special status to the state, senior BJP leader L K Advani today advised him not to use words like "cheating and deceiving" and clarified that his party has always been opposed to Article 370.

In his latest blog posting, Advani said even the Congress party, other than Jawaharlal Nehru and a few other leaders, were strongly opposed to giving a special status to Jammu and Kashmir.

Advani quotes from a biography of Sardar Patel to argue that even he was against Article 370 but kept his views in the background out of his regard for Nehru.

"Omar Abdullah, chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir state, has every right to disagree with the BJP on matters relating to J&K."

"But I would advise him never to use offensive language and words like 'cheating' and 'deceiving' in that context," Advani said on his blog.

Advani had recently said Article 370 should be revoked. Abdullah had responded to this without naming Advani and slammed him for raising the "false boggy of revocation" of the provision.

Holding that it is "highly improper" for anyone to use offensive words like "cheating" in the context of BJP's stand on J&K, Advani said his party has "not only been unequivocal, forthright and consistent from the time Jana Sangh (BJP's predecessor) was born in 1951 till today, but it is an issue for which the party's founder-president laid down his own life".

Shyama Prasad Mookerjee, who founded the Jana Sangh was arrested in Jammu and Kashmir in 1952 when he tried to enter the state without a permit which was required then to go to there.

He died, allegedly under mysterious circumstances during his incarceration.

"Since our very first all India session at Kanpur, we have been championing complete integration of J&K State with India," Advani said.
J&K Article 370 row: Advani hits back at Omar - The Times of India

I feel its a good start atleast someone is talking about revoking article 370 in JK. homogeneous nature is the root cause of problems in J&K, revoke 370 & let other Indians to settle in Kashmir so that there is mix of everybody.
One question: What was Advani ji doing throughout 1998-2004 ?

They say that coalition politics tied their hands so they could not implement their manifesto which called out building of Shri Ramlala temple in Ayodhya, implementing Uniform Civil Code & repeal of Article 370. In order to cobble up NDA, BJP had to forego its core agenda. Wow..

So, what are they expecting us to believe now ? That, provided we deliver an absolute majority to BJP in 2014, BJP would walk the talk?

I doubt them. But then, what's the harm in giving them a chance...I am taking my chances, hoping against hope. But I still see, UPA-III on the horizon.
 

LalTopi

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2012
Messages
583
Likes
311
We will hold a referendum when the time suits us. Patience. It might take a few years or decades or a century. We are in no hurry.
My point being that is it feasible to hold referendums in Ladakh and Jammu without also holding a corresponding referendum in the Kashmir valley with all it's associated risks. Regardless of the timeframe - now or next decade or whenever, why should the vote in the valley be any different without a chage in demographics.
 

sayareakd

Mod
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
17,734
Likes
18,951
Country flag
well sir parliament can change it in future , dont you think so .

problem is that every Indian is busy they dont have time for nation
Arya problem is not we cant change it, it is our word given to the people of J&K and same word will be taken by any people who want to join our Union in future. You understand what i am saying, eg suppose tommorow Sindis want to break way from Pakistan and join India they will look at what we have done in past and according to our past treatment of people who have joined us.
 

TrueSpirit

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
1,893
Likes
841
Advani, Omar, and the cynical politics over Article 370

You know election season is upon us when old issues and talking points, which had been consigned to the periphery of politics, are reheated and served afresh. The ongoing 'war of words' between BJP leader LK Advani and Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah over Article 370 of the Constitution, which relates to Jammu and Kashmir, is the surest sign that ideological positions on this substantive issue, which had been corroded by time, are being sharpened again in the run-up to Election 2014.

This round of the debate was revived when Advani, in a blog post (here) urged Abdullah to exercise verbal restraint in his criticism of the BJP's long-held position for the abrogation of Article 370. Abdullah, he noted, "has every right to disagree with the BJP on matters relating to J&K. But I would advise him never to use offensive language and words like 'cheating' and 'deceiving' in that context."

Advani then cited historical accounts of the Constituent Assembly proceedings in the years immediately following India's independence to make the point that when the Article 370 provision – (it was initially numbered 306A) – was first proposed, it had met with vociferous criticism from practically the entire Congress party. He then narrates the back-channel negotiations that were then initiated, in which then Home Minister Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel was inducted, to get the proposal to be passed as "temporary provisions with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir."

Citing the then ICS officer V Shankar's reminiscences of his time as Patel's Private Secretary, Advani also drew attention to Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru's initial attempt to keep Patel out of the loop of the debate over Article 370 by entrusting Kashmir affairs to N Gopalaswami Ayyangar (who was Nehru's close aide and had served as Prime Minister of Kashmir in the 1930s). However, in 1952, two years after Patel's death, told Parliament, while making a statement on the Kashmir situation, that "Sardar Patel was all this time dealing with these matters."

In response to Advani's blog post, Omar Abdullah took to Twitter to suggest to Advani that rather than ask him (Omar) to observe restraint, the BJP leader should explain his silence on the repeal of Article 370 during the years when the BJP was in power from 1998 to 2004. "Perhaps he can also blog about what constitutional mechanism he plans to follow to repeal Article 370," Omar noted. "I might learn something from his wisdom."

It is of course true that the BJP, virtually the only party that takes a position demanding the repeal of Article 370 today, did put the issue – along with two other contentious issues (the Uniform Civil Code, and the issue of building a Ram temple at Ayodhya) – on the back-burner as a concession to alliance-building. To that extent, the party has momentarily compromised on its ideological position on the issue for the expedient of coming to power as the head of an alliance. If Omar Abdullah sees the play of cynical politics in that manoeuvre, he is not entirely wrong.

And yet, history is clearly on Advani's side when he points to the political hypocrisy that has dominated the debate on Article 370 for decades. For a start, Article 370 was always intended as "temporary provisions" (it says so right in the title). Even Nehru famously said on one occasion that "Samvidhan ki dhara 370 ghiste ghiste ghis jaayegi") – that the Article would over time be eroded and eventually disappear altogether.

Secondly, contrary to popular perception (and even Advani, in his blog post, makes the mistake), Article 370 was never intended to invest any "special status" on Jammu and Kashmir. It was, as Arun Shourie notes in A Secular Agenda, "a device for extending provisions of the Constitution of India a step at a time to Kashmir." It was to be used until a Constituent Assembly of the State could be constituted and could do that job in one go.

And even that provision was incorporated only in response to the situation on the ground in Jammu and Kashmir at that time. India had just fought a war with Pakistan, which has always burned with Kashmir lust, and the two countries had agreed on a ceasefire; but parts of the State were still under the control of tribal invaders from Pakistan. And India had, in another manifestation of Nehruvian naivete, become entangled in the United Nations with a pledge to hold a plebiscite in the State to determine its destiny.

But that near-universal consensus on the short-term nature of the provision has over time given way to shifting political positions by virtually every political party other than the BJP. To the point where the shibboleth persists today that Article 370 somehow represents a "solemn" commitment of an everlasting "special status for Jammu and Kashmir." In fact, it was always intended as a temporary measure that would erode over time.

It is nobody's case that the political atmosphere in Jammu and Kashmir is ripe for a repeal of Article 370. Nor does a viable Constitutional mechanism exist to carry out that project – given the cynical politics that virtually every party has played over the decades. To that extent, Omar Abdullah's Twitter rant against Advani is not entirely without merit.

But Omar Abdullah, who is doubtless doing a difficult job of administering a troubled border State in extremely difficult circumstances, could do better than grand-standing with fiery "over my dead body" rhetoric in the context of Article 370. Cynical politics over the decades has dragged Kashmir into a fine mess today; polemical politics such as his, without considering the historical narrative on the subject of Article 370, doesn't help heal Kashmir's wounds.
 

LalTopi

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2012
Messages
583
Likes
311
Arya problem is not we cant change it, it is our word given to the people of J&K and same word will be taken by any people who want to join our Union in future. You understand what i am saying, eg suppose tommorow Sindis want to break way from Pakistan and join India they will look at what we have done in past and according to our past treatment of people who have joined us.
Article 370 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What you say is important. But one also has to keep perspective on this 'our word' , it was given 65 years ago and things move on. indeed reading the text of the article it explicitly refers to the Maharaja of J&K, therefore 'our word' was given to someone who has long gone.
 

LalTopi

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2012
Messages
583
Likes
311
Correct me if I am wrong but the problem is not with Article 370 itself but with J&K's local state laws. Article 370 grants the ability for the state government to create its own set of laws for other than defence,foreign affairs etc. Therefore is it the local state laws preventing normal Indian citizens from acquiring property in the state?

if this is the case can pressure not be exerted on the local government to amend their local laws? I mean a quid-pro-quo - keep Article 370 in effect but the local state laws are changed to allow all Indian citizens full property rights.
 

ladder

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2013
Messages
7,255
Likes
12,207
Country flag
Arya problem is not we cant change it, it is our word given to the people of J&K and same word will be taken by any people who want to join our Union in future. You understand what i am saying, eg suppose tommorow Sindis want to break way from Pakistan and join India they will look at what we have done in past and according to our past treatment of people who have joined us.
The instrument of accession signed by the Maharaja of J&K did not give him or the state any special privileges which was not initially given to other large princely state which enjoyed considerable autonomy under British India.
All those provision were reversed with the process of Integration of them with India.
But, this process of Integration was partial in case of Kashmir because of article 370.

And this article 370 was enacted after the instrument of accession was signed.

This wiki article gives a good picture than the stand alone articles on Kashmir and article 370.
Political integration of India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article 370 may be a promise but it is not a promise made at the time of accession.

Though I am not of a opinion that article 370 alone is responsible for the state of alienation and its revoking would change the picture completely.
But, that is a different issue.
 

Voldemort

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2013
Messages
1,102
Likes
727
Country flag
Either Article 370 will exist, or J&K won't be a part of India- Omar A

NEW DELHI: A statement by minister of state in the Prime Minister's Office, Jitendra Singh, on Tuesday sparked the new government's first controversy when he said the Narendra Modi government was open to debate on Article 370 in Jammu & Kashmir,while making it clear that efforts would be made through this exercise to "convince" the "unconvinced".
Soon after, Jammu & Kashmir chief minister Omar Abdullah strongly objected to the minister's statement and tweeted, "So the new MOS PMO says process/discussions to revoke Art 370 have started. Wow, that was a quick beginning. Not sure who is talking."
He went on to add, "Mark my words & save this tweet - long after Modi Govt is a distant memory either J&K won't be part of India or Art 370 will still exist."
"Art 370 is the ONLY constitutional link between J&K & rest of India. Talk of revocation of not just ill informed it's irresponsible," he added.
Repeating the stand of Modi during his rally in December last year, Singh, a first time Parliament member and a surprise choice as minister of state in the PMO, said, "his (Modi's) intention and that of the government is that we have a debate so that we can convince the unconvinced about the disadvantages of Article 370, PTI reported.
"If we do not have debate and discussion how would you be able to tell those who have been unable to understand what they have been deprived of on account of Article 370," he said after taking over as minister of state in-charge of department of personnel and training, which has administrative control over the CBI.
READ ALSO: Govt open to debate on Article 370 in Jammu & Kashmir: PMO
57-year-old Singh said Article 370 was more of a psychological barrier than a physical one and added that the Modi-led government was open to debate with all stakeholders, including youths, pros and cons of retaining or withdrawing the Article.
Singh said Modi supports debate on Article 370 keeping in mind democratic values. "The Prime Minister had said we want to have a debate. This does not mean that we want to have a debate because certain section of media interpreted that Prime Minister deviated from its stand. It's not so. He said so with respect to the highest values of democratic system."
Singh, a doctor by profession, noted that BJP has won half of the six Lok Sabha seats from Jammu & Kashmir. "You see BJP has won half of the seats in Parliament from J&K. While BJP won three seats, PDP bagged the remaining three.
"If you take voter account, we have more that 50 per cent vote share, he said."
Singh said his party has been inviting all stakeholders to get on board and succeeded to a greater extent in the Valley particularly with the youth. He said people in J&K need to have an outlet. "A mainstream opposition outlet to dissent which we would not stifle because if you stifle that, that will lead them to an undemocratic outlet.
"But within that framework we also want to explain to them how they have been deprived of enormous advantage which the other states of this country have enjoyed because they were not under the constraint of Article 370. Please remember that Article 370 off late has been more of a psychological barrier than a physical barrier," he said.
Singh, who won from Udhampur constituency in Jammu & Kashmir, said the BJP has already gained considerable success through its discussion with all stakeholders on Article 370.
"We have tried to interact with them (stakeholders) through media, through discussion and through seminars. We have already gained considerable success in this," the minister said.
Asked whether discussions have been held with Kashmiri youths and separatists, Singh said the process is already on.
"No youth has separatist written on his forehead. We have tried to convince the youths of Kashmir that look here if you have a grievance against the Government of India, that does not necessarily make you a separatist and if it is done then it is unfair to them," said Singh.
Singh said J&K has come out of a difficult phase of militancy which was there for last 20-25 years and it appears that there is normalcy. "Our efforts will be to support it. The youth section there is demoralized due to unemployment and many other reasons, due to militancy.
"Our efforts would be to ensure sufficient opportunities of employment to them. For example, Narendra Modi has clearly said that he will take forward the initiatives started by the then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee with regard to J&K," he said.
So the new MOS PMO says process/discussions to revoke Art 370 have started. Wow, that was a quick beginning. Not sure who is talking 1/n— Omar Abdullah (@abdullah_omar) May 27, 2014
Mark my words & save this tweet - long after Modi Govt is a distant memory either J&K won't be part of India or Art 370 will still exist 2/n— Omar Abdullah (@abdullah_omar) May 27, 2014
 

vram

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
368
Likes
592
Country flag
Re: Either Article 370 will exist, or J&K won't be a part of India- Om

LOL! moron abdullah!! let him just try... could not even win a single seat and talking like a a***** . 3 seats for BJP and 3 for PDP. blow to the wind my Abdullah.....
 

boris

Regular Member
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
347
Likes
256
Country flag
Re: Either Article 370 will exist, or J&K won't be a part of India- Om

Article 370 has got to go. Special status for 67 years is quite a lot of time- special state citizenships,giving that same privilege to a Paki if he/she marries a JK resident, no land purchase for outsiders etc. It is good if they lose all these privileges, get the pandits back there first.

and Oh all liberal jhollawala type lawyers are discussing the ethics behind this decision all over FB. What else can you expect from them, they must be celebrating anyway since their leader got out of jail today.
 

Hari Sud

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
3,699
Likes
8,324
Country flag
Re: Either Article 370 will exist, or J&K won't be a part of India- Om

Omar Abdullah is daring India. He has the least concern about Pakistan sending terrorists across the LOC. That job he believes is for India. He really does not want any of the Kashmiri Pandits to return after 25 years and reclaim their homes and their living life style.
 

A chauhan

"अहिंसा परमो धर्मः धर्म हिंसा तथैव च: l"
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
9,507
Likes
22,493
Country flag
Re: Either Article 370 will exist, or J&K won't be a part of India- Om

BJP alone got much seats in J&K and art. 370 was there in its manifesto which proves that the people of J&K want that article be revoked. This separatism of Abdullah's has kept that state in undeveloped state, thankfully it's vanishing now.
 

tarunraju

Sanathan Pepe
Mod
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
9,080
Likes
40,077
Country flag
Re: Either Article 370 will exist, or J&K won't be a part of India- Om

Modi is an expert at having the cake and eating it. He will repeal 370, and it will remain a part of India. At the very most, J&K will get special provisions like some North-East states, which will prevent relatively affluent mainstream Indians from gobbling up lands.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Understanding Article 370

AMITABH MATTOO


Article 370 was and is about providing space, in matters of governance, to the people of a State who felt deeply vulnerable about their identity and insecure about the future.

At the Bharatiya Janata Party's recent Lalkar rally in Jammu, its prime ministerial candidate, Narendra Modi, called for a debate on Article 370. This is encouraging and suggests that the BJP may be willing to review its absolutist stance on the Article that defines the provisions of the Constitution of India with respect to Jammu and Kashmir. Any meaningful debate on Article 370 must, however, separate myth from reality and fact from fiction. My purpose here is to respond to the five main questions that have already been raised in the incipient debate.

Why it was incorporated

First, why was Article 370 inserted in the Constitution? Or as the great poet and thinker, Maulana Hasrat Mohini, asked in the Constituent Assembly on October 17, 1949: "Why this discrimination please?" The answer was given by Nehru's confidant, the wise but misunderstood Thanjavur Brahmin, Gopalaswami Ayyangar (Minister without portfolio in the first Union Cabinet, a former Diwan to Maharajah Hari Singh of Jammu and Kashmir, and the principal drafter of Article 370). Ayyangar argued that for a variety of reasons Kashmir, unlike other princely states, was not yet ripe for integration. India had been at war with Pakistan over Jammu and Kashmir and while there was a ceasefire, the conditions were still "unusual and abnormal." Part of the State's territory was in the hands of "rebels and enemies."

The involvement of the United Nations brought an international dimension to this conflict, an "entanglement" which would end only when the "Kashmir problem is satisfactorily resolved." Finally, Ayyangar argued that the "will of the people through the instrument of the [J&K] Constituent Assembly will determine the constitution of the State as well as the sphere of Union jurisdiction over the State." In sum, there was hope that J&K would one day integrate like other States of the Union (hence the use of the term "temporary provisions" in the title of the Article), but this could happen only when there was real peace and only when the people of the State acquiesced to such an arrangement.

Second, did Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel oppose Article 370? To reduce the Nehru-Patel relationship to Manichean terms is to caricature history, and this is equally true of their attitude towards Jammu and Kashmir. Nehru was undoubtedly idealistic and romantic about Kashmir. He wrote: "Like some supremely beautiful woman, whose beauty is almost impersonal and above human desire, such was Kashmir in all its feminine beauty of river and valley..." Patel had a much more earthy and pragmatic view and — as his masterly integration of princely states demonstrated — little time for capricious state leaders or their separatist tendencies.

But while Ayyangar negotiated — with Nehru's backing — the substance and scope of Article 370 with Sheikh Abdullah and other members from J&K in the Constituent Assembly (including Mirza Afzal Beg and Maulana Masoodi), Patel was very much in the loop. And while Patel was deeply sceptical of a "state becoming part of India" and not "recognising ... [India's] fundamental rights and directive principles of State policy," he was aware of, and a party to, the final outcome on Article 370.

Negotiations

Indeed, the synergy that Patel and Nehru brought to governing India is evident in the negotiations over Article 370. Consider this. In October 1949, there was a tense standoff between Sheikh Abdullah and Ayyangar over parts of Article 370 (or Article 306A as it was known during the drafting stage). Nehru was in the United States, where — addressing members of the U.S. Congress — he said: "Where freedom is menaced or justice threatened or where aggression takes place, we cannot be and shall not be neutral." Meanwhile, Ayyangar was struggling with the Sheikh, and later even threatened to resign from the Constituent Assembly. "You have left me even more distressed than I have been since I received your last letter "¦ I feel weighted with the responsibility of finding a solution for the difficulties that, after Panditji left for America ... have been created "¦ without adequate excuse," he wrote to the Sheikh on October 15. And who did Ayyangar turn to, in this crisis with the Sheikh, while Nehru was abroad? None other than the Sardar himself. Patel, of course, was not enamoured by the Sheikh, who he thought kept changing course. He wrote to Ayyangar: "Whenever Sheikh Sahib wishes to back out, he always confronts us with his duty to the people." But it was Patel finally who managed the crisis and navigated most of the amendments sought of the Sheikh through the Congress party and the Constituent Assembly to ensure that Article 370 became part of the Indian Constitution.

Third, is Article 370 still intact in its original form? One of the biggest myths is the belief that the "autonomy" as envisaged in the Constituent Assembly is intact. A series of Presidential Orders has eroded Article 370 substantially. While the 1950 Presidential Order and the Delhi Agreement of 1952 defined the scope and substance of the relationship between the Centre and the State with the support of the Sheikh, the subsequent series of Presidential Orders have made most Union laws applicable to the State. In fact today the autonomy enjoyed by the State is a shadow of its former self, and there is virtually no institution of the Republic of India that does not include J&K within its scope and jurisdiction. The only substantial differences from many other States relate to permanent residents and their rights; the non-applicability of Emergency provisions on the grounds of "internal disturbance" without the concurrence of the State; and the name and boundaries of the State, which cannot be altered without the consent of its legislature. Remember J&K is not unique; there are special provisions for several States which are listed in Article 371 and Articles 371-A to 371-I.

Fourth, can Article 370 be revoked unilaterally? Clause 3 of Article 370 is clear. The President may, by public notification, declare that this Article shall cease to be operative but only on the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the State. In other words, Article 370 can be revoked only if a new Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir is convened and is willing to recommend its revocation. Of course, Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution to change this provision. But this could be subject to a judicial review which may find that this clause is a basic feature of the relationship between the State and the Centre and cannot, therefore, be amended.

Gender bias?

Fifth, is Article 370 a source of gender bias in disqualifying women from the State of property rights? Article 370 itself is gender neutral, but the definition of Permanent Residents in the State Constitution — based on the notifications issued in April 1927 and June 1932 during the Maharajah's rule — was thought to be discriminatory. The 1927 notification included an explanatory note which said: "The wife or a widow of the State Subject "¦ shall acquire the status of her husband as State Subject of the same Class as her Husband, so long as she resides in the State and does not leave the State for permanent residence outside the State." This was widely interpreted as suggesting also that a woman from the State who marries outside the State would lose her status as a State subject. However, in a landmark judgement, in October 2002, the full bench of J&K High Court, with one judge dissenting, held that the daughter of a permanent resident of the State will not lose her permanent resident status on marrying a person who is not a permanent resident, and will enjoy all rights, including property rights.

Finally, has Article 370 strengthened separatist tendencies in J&K? Article 370 was and is about providing space, in matters of governance, to the people of a State who felt deeply vulnerable about their identity and insecure about the future. It was about empowering people, making people feel that they belong, and about increasing the accountability of public institutions and services. Article 370 is synonymous with decentralisation and devolution of power, phrases that have been on the charter of virtually every political party in India. There is no contradiction between wanting J&K to be part of the national mainstream and the State's desire for self-governance as envisioned in the Article.

Separatism grows when people feel disconnected from the structures of power and the process of policy formulation; in contrast, devolution ensures popular participation in the running of the polity. It can be reasonably argued that it is the erosion of Article 370 and not its creation which has aggravated separatist tendencies in the State. Not surprisingly, at the opposition conclave in Srinagar in 1982, leaders of virtually all national parties, including past and present allies of the BJP, declared that the "special constitutional status of J&K under Article 370 should be preserved and protected in letter and spirit." A review of its policy on Article 370, through an informed debate, would align today's BJP with the considered and reflective approach on J&K articulated by former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee. Only then would the slogans of Jhumuriyat, Kashmiriyat and Insaniyat make real sense.

(Amitabh Mattoo is Director, Australia India Institute, Professor of International Relations, University of Melbourne and Jawaharlal Nehru University.)

Understanding Article 370 - The Hindu
 
Last edited:

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Article 370 {Temporary provisions with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir}

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Constitution,—

(a) the provisions of article 238 shall not apply in relation to the state of Jammu and Kashmir;
(b) the power of Parliament to make laws for the said state shall be limited to—
(i) those matters in the Union List and the Concurrent List which, in consultation with the Government of the State, are declared by the President to correspond to matters specified in the Instrument of Accession governing the accession of the State to the Dominion of India as the matters with respect to which the Dominion Legislature may make laws for that State; and
(ii) such other matters in the said Lists as, with the concurrence of the Government of the State, the President may by order specify.
Explanation: For the purpose of this article, the Government of the State means the person for the time being recognised by the President as the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir acting on the advice of the Council of Ministers for the time being in office under the Maharaja's Proclamation dated the fifth day of March, 1948;

(c) the provisions of article 1 and of this article shall apply in relation to that State;
(d) such of the other provisions of this Constitution shall apply in relation to that State subject to such exceptions and modifications as the President may by order specify:
Provided that no such order which relates to the matters specified in the Instrument of Accession of the State referred to in paragraph (i) of sub-clause (b) shall be issued except in consultation with the Government of the State:
Provided further that no such order which relates to matters other than those referred to in the last preceding proviso shall be issued except with the concurrence of that Government.

(2) If the concurrence of the Government of the State referred to in paragraph (ii) of sub-clause (b) of clause (1) or in the second proviso to sub-clause (d) of that clause be given before the Constituent Assembly for the purpose of framing the Constitution of the State is convened, it shall be placed before such Assembly for such decision as it may take thereon.

(3) Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this article, the President may, by public notification, declare that this article shall cease to be operative or shall be operative only with such exceptions and modifications and from such date as he may specify:
Provided that the recommendation of the Cobe necessary before the President issues such a notification.

Constitution of India/Part XXI - Wikisource, the free online library
 

PredictablyMalicious

Punjabi
Banned
Joined
Jan 2, 2013
Messages
1,715
Likes
648
These kashmiri lolay will destroy Jammu and Ladakh. Duggar Pradesh - a separate Jammu state, is the need of the hour. Dogras don't want to be part of ghatiya Kashmiris. Dogri speaking areas of Himachal and the entire Jammu region should be merged to form a Duggar Pradesh.
 
Last edited:

abhi_the _gr8_maratha

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2014
Messages
2,193
Likes
609
Country flag
These kashmiri lolay will destroy Jammu and Ladakh. Duggar Pradesh - a separate Jammu state, is the need of the hour. Dogras don't want to be part of ghatiya Kashmiris. Dogri speaking areas of Himachal and the entire Jammu region should be merged to form a Duggar Pradesh.
I think you have a acute dogra symptom , why you always keeps dongra-ing in every thread, keep the caste and all away from this
 
Last edited:

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top