Article 35A of Indian Constitution, Definition, Removal of Article 35A

Article 35A

Article 35A of the Indian Constitution was an article that empowered the Jammu and Kashmir state legislature to define “permanent residents” of the state and provide special rights and privileges to them. It was added to the Constitution through a presidential order, i.e., The Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 1954 – issued by the President of India under Article 370. The special rights and privileges that were granted to permanent residents of Jammu and Kashmir included the following:

1. The right to acquire property in the state.
2. The right to settle in the state.
3. The right to government jobs in the state.
4. The right to scholarships and other educational benefits.
5. The right to certain other benefits, such as health care and transport.

What is Article 35A?

• Article 35A was a provision in the Indian Constitution that granted authority to the legislature of Jammu and Kashmir to identify the state’s “Permanent Residents” and grant them specific rights and advantages. This addition to the Constitution was introduced via a presidential directive, known as The Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 1954, which was issued by the President of India under the framework of Article 370.
• Article 35A was a controversial article, with supporters arguing that it was necessary to protect the unique culture and demographics of Jammu and Kashmir, while opponents argued that it was discriminatory and violated the fundamental rights of non-permanent residents of the state.
• In August 2019, the Government of India revoked Article 35A along with Article 370, which granted Jammu and Kashmir its special status. This decision was met with mixed reactions, with some people supporting the move and others opposing it.
• The revocation of Article 35A has had a significant impact on the people of Jammu and Kashmir. Non-permanent residents of the state are now able to acquire property, settle in the state, and get government jobs. This has led to concerns that the demographic balance of the state could be altered and that the unique culture and identity of Jammu and Kashmir could be threatened.
• The long-term implications of the revocation of Article 35 are still unclear. It is possible that the decision could lead to increased economic development and prosperity in Jammu and Kashmir. However, it is also possible that the decision could lead to increased social unrest and conflict. Only time will tell what the ultimate impact of the decision will be.

Article 35A of the Indian Constitution

• Article 35A was a special provision enshrined within the Indian Constitution that held significance in relation to the state of Jammu and Kashmir. This article granted the state’s legislature the unique authority to define and confer the status of “permanent residents” upon individuals within the state’s jurisdiction. As a result, these permanent residents were granted certain distinct rights, privileges, and benefits, differentiating them from non-permanent residents.
• Article 35A was incorporated into the Constitution through a presidential order, namely The Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 1954. This order was issued by the President of India under the framework of Article 370, which granted a special autonomous status to the state of Jammu and Kashmir.
• The provision aimed to preserve the demographic and cultural identity of the region and safeguard the interests of its permanent residents. It allowed the state government to enact laws that pertained to permanent residents’ ownership of property, access to public services, and employment opportunities. However, Article 35A also sparked debates and controversies over time, as some argued that it could lead to discrimination and hinder integration with the rest of the country.
• Article 35A remained a topic of debate and legal challenges until August 2019, when the Indian government, through a presidential order, effectively abrogated the special status of Jammu and Kashmir by revoking Article 370 and Article 35A. This move led to the reorganization of the state into two union territories: Jammu and Kashmir, and Ladakh.
• The revocation of Article 35A brought about significant changes to the legal and political landscape of the region, sparking discussions about the implications for governance, identity, and the relationship between the region and the rest of India.

Article 35A in Kashmir

Read here are some of the arguments for and against Article 35A:

• Arguments in favor of Article 35A:
  -It protected the unique culture and demographics of Jammu and Kashmir.
  -It ensured that the benefits of government jobs and education were available to the people of Jammu and Kashmir first.
  -It prevented outsiders from buying up property in Jammu and Kashmir and driving up prices.

• Arguments against Article 35A:
  -It was discriminatory and violated the fundamental rights of non-permanent residents of Jammu and Kashmir.
  -It prevented people from moving freely within India and seeking employment wherever they wanted.
  -It was a relic of the past and no longer necessary in the 21st century.

The revocation of Article 35A has been a major political issue in India, and it is likely to continue to be debated for many years to come.

Article 35A Removal

• Article 35A in the Indian Constitution was a provision that granted authority to the legislative body of Jammu and Kashmir to identify individuals as “permanent residents” of the state and bestow upon them distinct rights and advantages. This article was included in the Constitution through a presidential decree called The Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 1954, which was issued by the President of India under the provisions of Article 370.
• On 5 August 2019, the Government of India revoked Article 35A along with Article 370, which granted Jammu and Kashmir its special status. This decision was made by the Narendra Modi government and was met with mixed reactions, with some people supporting the move and others opposing it.
• The revocation of Article 35A has had a significant impact on the people of Jammu and Kashmir. Non-permanent residents of the state are now able to acquire property, settle in the state, and get government jobs. This has led to concerns that the demographic balance of the state could be altered and that the unique culture and identity of Jammu and Kashmir could be threatened.
• The lasting effects of the Article 35A repeal remain uncertain. This move might foster economic growth and well-being in Jammu and Kashmir, but it could equally instigate heightened social tensions and turmoil. The true consequences of this choice will only become evident over time.

Here are some of the arguments for and against the removal of Article 35A

• Arguments in favor of the removal of Article 35A:
  -It was discriminatory and violated the fundamental rights of non-permanent residents of Jammu and Kashmir.
  -It prevented people from moving freely within India and seeking employment wherever they wanted.
  -It was a relic of the past and no longer necessary in the 21st century.

• Arguments against the removal of Article 35A:
  -It protected the unique culture and demographics of Jammu and Kashmir.
  -It ensured that the benefits of government jobs and education were available to the people of Jammu and Kashmir first.
  -It prevented outsiders from buying up property in Jammu and Kashmir and driving up prices.

The removal of Article 35A has been a major political issue in India, and it is likely to continue to be debated for many years to come.

Difference between Article 35A and 370

Article 35A and Article 370 were both provisions within the Indian Constitution that pertained to the state of Jammu and Kashmir. However, they addressed different aspects and carried distinct implications:

• Article 370:
  a. Article 370 granted special autonomous status to the state of Jammu and Kashmir within the Indian Union.
  b. Under Article 370, Jammu and Kashmir had its own constitution, a separate flag, and considerable autonomy in various matters except defense, foreign affairs, finance, and communications.
  c. This article allowed the state to have its own laws and regulations, and it required the central government’s consent for applying Indian laws in the state.
  d. It was considered a temporary provision, included to provide a framework for integrating Jammu and Kashmir into the Indian Union after its accession to India in 1947.

• Article 35A:
  a. Article 35A was inserted into the Constitution through a presidential order and empowered the Jammu and Kashmir state legislature to define “permanent residents” of the state and provide them with special rights and privileges.
  b. This article allowed the state government to make laws regarding property ownership, employment, and public services exclusively for permanent residents, preventing non-residents from enjoying these privileges.
  c. It aimed to protect the demographic and cultural identity of the state by safeguarding the interests of its permanent residents.
  d. Article 35A was often criticized for potentially leading to discrimination and limiting integration.

In summary, Article 370 provided a special autonomous status to Jammu and Kashmir, while Article 35A granted specific rights to the state’s permanent residents. Both articles were closely interconnected, as Article 35A was added through a presidential order under the framework of Article 370. The revocation of Article 370 in August 2019 led to the nullification of Article 35A as well, resulting in significant changes to the legal and political landscape of the region.

Sharing is caring!