Controversy around Art 35A

Why in news?

The Supreme Court is hearing a PIL petition challenging the constitutional validity of Article 35A.

What is the controversy in Art 35A?

Article 35A allows the Jammu and Kashmir legislature to define the list of ‘permanent residents’ of the state, who -

Non-permanent residents are denied all these rights.
This article is being challenged on the ground of gender discrimination.
This is because a male resident will not lose the right of being a permanent resident even after marriage to a woman from outside.
A woman from outside the state shall became a permanent resident on marrying a male permanent resident of the state.
However, a daughter who is born state subject of J&K will loss the right of being a permanent resident on marrying an outsider.
It discriminates against women who marry outside the State from applying for jobs or buying property.
This is said to be against the spirit of Article 14 of the Constitution which provides for equality before the law and the equal protection of the laws.

Why is the case significant?

Art 35A was added to the constitution through the Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 1954, a presidential order not yet ratified by the Parliament.
It is being challenged that the provision was “unconstitutional” and approved without any debate in the parliament.
The J&K government sees Art 35A as offering the state a special position.
On the other hand, the Centre differs on the grounds that it discriminates against women and is calling for a larger debate.
The issue is now getting a political tone leading to tensions between the state and the central government.
There are also apprehensions that any adverse order against the provision could give the state's separatists a chance to stir up violence in the state.
It is high time that the governments place the rights and privileges of the people of the state above political motives and deal it accordingly.

Source: The Hindu