Supreme Court adjourns hearing of Article 35 A till 27th August

Supreme Court decision comes amid Jammu and Kashmir witnessing shutdown over a batch of petitions challenging the validity of the Article 35-A.

140

New Delhi, Aug 06 (KNB): Amid exemplary shutdown in the length and breadth of Jammu and Kashmir state, the Supreme Court of India on Monday deferred adjourned the hearing on a batch of pleas challenging the constitutional validity of Article 35-A till 27th August 2018.
The Supreme Court today adjourned hearing on a batch of pleas challenging the constitutional validity of Article 35-A, which gives special rights and privileges to people of Jammu and Kashmir, saying its three-judge bench has been hearing the case and will consider whether it has to be referred to a larger bench.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice A M Khanwilkar said the matter has to be heard by a three-judge bench and Justice D Y Chandrachud, who is also a part of the bench, was not present. The court has listed the matter for hearing in the week commencing August 27.
Supreme Court decision comes amid Jammu and Kashmir witnessing shutdown over a batch of petitions challenging the validity of the Article 35-A.
Earlier, cutting across the ideological lines, all the political, religious, social and traders organizations have called for public uprising to in case there is some ‘trampling’ with the Article 35 A with gives Jammu and Kashmir state a special status. The Hurriyat had asked its constituent parties to gear up for the agitation if situation arises.
Not only the Kashmir based political personalities and organizations, several prominent faces including politicians and activists have warned of consequences.
Meanwhile soon after the news that Supreme Court has adjourned the hearing of case came into limelight the people of Kashmir breathed a sigh of relief.
Pertinently, the debate with respect to the constitutionality of Article 35A started after an NGO ‘We The Citizens’ filed a petition in the Supreme Court in 2014, saying the provision was only supposed to be a temporary one. (KNB)