Statehood for J&K: 6 years on and waiting
Most people in Jammu and Kashmir felt hurt by the constitutional changes announced on 05.08.2019, but felt more hurt by the demotion of a full-fledged semi-autonomous state to the status of a union territory (UT). The lone silver lining was the assurance by the Prime Minister and the Home Minister in the parliament that statehood would be restored. People like me with many years of experience in government thought that it should not take more than one or two years for the statehood to be restored as this period of one or two years will be sufficient to ground the changes and complete the transition from the pre-Article 370 abrogation status to post abrogation status. Now, although transition to post abrogation status is complete, the statehood is no where in sight which is rather surprising, but most importantly annoying and distressing for the people of Jammu and Kashmir.
In their open letter (June 2025) to the Chief Justice of India the group of five eminent persons (who are also petitioners in the Article 370 case), namely Dr Radha Kumar, former member of Interlocutors for Jammu and Kashmir, Sh. Gopal Pillai, former Union Home Secretary, Ashok K. Mehta, former Major General, Kapil Kak, former Air Vice Marshal and Sh. Amitabha Pande, former Union Secretary, Inter-State Council, have written as under:
‘We write to express our concern that the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir has not yet regained the statehood that was seized from it in August 2019, despite repeated promises by the Union Home Minister, including on the floor of parliament in November 2019, that it would be restored soon. This was the first time in the 75 years of independent India that an existing state had been demoted to Union Territory status. In our petition as well as oral representations, we argued that this demotion contravened the Constitution and the basic structure doctrine that India is a federal democracy in which states’ rights must be respected, which has been a bedrock for Indian unity for the past 52 years.
In its verdict, the honourable bench of the Supreme Court stated that it was not ruling on the constitutionality or unconstitutionality of demoting an existing state in its entirety to two Union Territories, because the Solicitor-General had assured it that statehood would be restored at an appropriate time. In his oral remarks, the then Chief Justice of India, D.Y. Chandrachud, urged the Union administration to restore statehood at the soonest, while setting a deadline for assembly elections to be held by end September 2024. In a separate note attached to the judgement, Justice Sanjay Khanna expressed the view that the demotion of the state to two Union Territories was unconstitutional and should be summarily reversed.
The Union administration’s repeated assurances that statehood will be restored, both in parliament and through the Solicitor-General eighteen months ago, suggest a tacit recognition that the removal of statehood is unconstitutional. However, not only is the Union administration dragging its feet, despite renewed calls by Jammu and Kashmir’s legislators and political parties, the Solicitor-General also said before the bench in December 2023 that statehood would only be restored in stages – i.e., the grant of limited powers one at a time over an undefined period. This is a policy that nullifies the constitutional issue that no state can be demoted to a Union Territory in its entirety. If that demotion was unconstitutional, then it follows that statehood must be restored in toto.’
No good grounds for delay in restoration of statehood
Coming to the point of discussion as to whether restoration of statehood should continue to wait, frankly there are no good grounds for delay unless the union government has some other plans which are not known to the public as of now. Going by the assurances in the parliament by the PM and HM in August 2019 and later on a few occasions in public meetings as well and of the Solicitor General before the Supreme Court, there is no reason for the people of Jammu and Kashmir to think otherwise. Those who think that statehood should be restored immediately argue that the law and order situation in Jammu and Kashmir is presently peaceful and has been so for a long time now and barring the highly condemnable terrorist attack on tourists at Pahalgam in April this year, terrorist incidents have also been fewer.
Jammu division has also been incident free, by and large, after the spurt last year and year before in certain parts of the division. That civil administration has been functioning without any obstruction on ground in any part of the UT and legislators are moving freely in their assembly constituencies is a reality. What is lacking, they argue, is the impact on ground of the elected government and that is because the elected government is not adequately empowered in the UT framework. Lack of control over transfer and posting and service matters of All India Service officers (IAS, IPS, IFoS), no authority over the anti-corruption bureau and having no role in policing, law and order and security has not only weakened the elected government’s capacity and confidence to govern but also reduced their prestige in the eyes of the public.
In their letter to the Chief Justice, the five eminent persons (group of petitioners) have also written:
‘we are concerned that the Union administration will again argue that the time is not appropriate for restoration of Jammu and Kashmir’s statehood, given the Pahalgam terrorist attack of April 2025. Not only is that argument not tenable, it can be argued that this is exactly the time to do so. The high turnout in the October 2024 assembly elections with no violence, and the absolute majority electors gave the National Conference, a regional party, indicated the people had voted for an elected administration with the strength to govern according to public aspirations. In its first sitting, the newly elected assembly passed a resolution for speedy restoration of statehood. According to newspaper reports, Lieutenant-Governor Manoj Sinha forwarded the resolution to the Honourable President of India, Shrimati Draupadi Murmu. Eight months have passed, and no action to restore statehood has been taken, despite repeated requests by the Chief Minister.’
Another group of citizens (over hundred) comprising retired civil servants and many eminent persons from other professions and different walks of life and three reputed NGOs have addressed a letter sssto the MPs attending the ongoing session of the Parliament (petition to MPs regarding statehood for Jammu and Kashmir) part of which reads as under:
‘We are heartened to note that the session has had a full discussion on the Pahalgam terrorist attack and its aftermath, including Operation Sindoor. Several critical and appropriate questions have been raised in the public domain in this matter on a wide range of issues. They relate to national security, to strategic affairs, to policing and administration, and the failure to find a political resolution to the problems of Jammu and Kashmir. We hope many of these problems will be addressed during the session, with a view to evolve a bipartisan political consensus on Pahalgam and the threat posed by terrorism, as well as the future of democracy in a deeply troubled region, where a large number of people continue to feel alienated and poorly treated.
In this context, we urge that a very critical question, the loss of Statehood and the diminution of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories, is not lost sight of during the discussions. A powerful plea by you and your party colleagues for restoring statehood with the utmost urgency is required. We enclose a note outlining the arguments in favour of immediate restoration of statehood to strengthen the legal, as well as the political basis for this demand. You will agree that the restoration of Statehood for Jammu and Kashmir, something to which the Union Government is already committed, is important not just for peace-building in Jammu and Kashmir, but for restoring faith in the federal architecture of our Constitution.’
Statehood will put J&K on the path of sustainable development, peace, progress and prosperity
Jammu and Kashmir is facing many serious problems right now pertaining to unemployment of the youth and inadequate entrepreneurship opportunities, imbalance in reservations, poor state of own financial resources at the government level, issues in education and health sectors, marketing issues for its horticulture produce, environmental protection, conservation and climate change but the solutions are not coming in full measure from the elected government. For now they have an alibi of lack of powers but when full statehood is restored, they will have no such alibi. Even the opposition parties in Jammu and Kashmir feel weakened and emaciated in the overall political and administrative situation prevailing in the UT. It will be counter productive if the statehood offered is truncated or sought to be restored in stages. That approach will create more problems than solve because it will force people here to think that they are not being trusted and not being treated as equal citizens. It is therefore best to place power in the hands of those who have been elected with great hope by the people and make them accountable. This is critical as any further delay will not only make people lose faith in elections and democracy in Jammu and Kashmir but also place Jammu and Kashmir behind in sustainable development, progress and prosperity by many years.
Khurshid Ahmed Ganai is a retired IAS officer of the erstwhile J&K cadre and a former Advisor to the Governor, J&K.
