Articles 370 and 371 of the Indian Constitution provided special provisions for certain states, acknowledging their unique circumstances and needs. Article 370 granted special autonomy to Jammu and Kashmir, while Article 371 encompasses provisions tailored for various other states to address their distinct requirements.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF ARTICLE 370

Article 370 originated from the Instrument of Accession signed by Maharaja Hari Singh of Jammu and Kashmir in 1947, allowing the state to accede to India under specific terms. This article permitted Jammu and Kashmir to have its own constitution and limited the Indian Parliament’s legislative powers over the state to matters of defense, external affairs, and communications. The state’s Constituent Assembly was empowered to decide on the extension of other constitutional provisions. Article 370 was intended as a temporary provision, pending the state’s Constituent Assembly’s decision on the state’s relationship with India.

ABROGATION OF ARTICLE 370

On August 5, 2019, the Government of India abrogated Article 370, revoking Jammu and Kashmir’s special status. This was achieved through Presidential Orders C.O. 272 and C.O. 273, along with the passage of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, which bifurcated the state into two Union Territories: Jammu and Kashmir, and Ladakh.

SUPREME COURT VERDICT ON ARTICLE 370 ABROGATION

In December 2023, the Supreme Court of India upheld the abrogation of Article 370, stating that the provision was indeed temporary and that the President had the authority to revoke it. The Court emphasized that the move was part of a long-term exercise to integrate Jammu and Kashmir into the Union of India.

ARTICLE 371: SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR OTHER STATES

Articles 371 to 371J in Part XXI of the Constitution contain special provisions for various states to meet the aspirations of the people, protect cultural and economic interests, and address law and order conditions. These provisions recognize the unique needs of different regions, particularly those with significant tribal populations or distinct cultural identities.

KEY PROVISIONS UNDER ARTICLE 371

• Article 371A (Nagaland): Parliamentary acts related to Naga religious and social practices, customary law, administration of civil and criminal justice, and ownership and transfer of land and resources do not apply to Nagaland unless approved by the state Legislative Assembly.

• Article 371B (Assam): Provides for the creation of a committee of the Assam Legislative Assembly consisting of members from the state’s tribal areas to ensure the protection of their interests.

• Article 371C (Manipur): Similar to Assam, it provides for a committee of the Legislative Assembly consisting of members from the Hill Areas to safeguard their interests.

• Article 371D (Andhra Pradesh and Telangana): Ensures equitable opportunities and facilities in public employment and education across different regions of the states.

• Article 371E: Provides for the establishment of a central university in Andhra Pradesh.

• Article 371F (Sikkim): Protects the rights and interests of various sections of the Sikkimese population, ensuring legislative representation and safeguarding existing laws and customs.

• Article 371G (Mizoram): Similar to Nagaland, it restricts the application of parliamentary acts related to Mizo religious and social practices, customary law, and ownership and transfer of land unless approved by the state Legislative Assembly.

• Article 371H (Arunachal Pradesh): The Governor has special responsibility for law and order in the state, and acts of Parliament related to religious or social practices of the tribes, customary law, and ownership and transfer of land apply only if the Legislative Assembly so decides.

• Article 371I (Goa): Provides for a Legislative Assembly of not less than 30 members.

• Article 371J (Karnataka): Grants special status to the Hyderabad-Karnataka region, providing for equitable allocation of funds for development, reservation in state government jobs, and educational institutions.

LEGAL DOCTRINES AND PRINCIPLES

The special provisions under Articles 370 and 371 reflect the constitutional doctrine of asymmetric federalism, where different states have varying degrees of autonomy based on their unique circumstances. This approach acknowledges the diversity within the nation and aims to provide tailored governance structures to meet specific regional needs.

CASE LAWS AND JUDICIAL INTERPRETATIONS

• Prem Nath Kaul v. State of Jammu and Kashmir (1959): The Supreme Court held that the concurrence given by the state government under Article 370(1) was provisional and required ratification by the state’s Constituent Assembly. Once the Constituent Assembly was dissolved, no further extension of powers was possible without its recommendation.

• Sampat Prakash v. State of Jammu and Kashmir (1969): The Supreme Court upheld the continuation of Article 370, stating that it would remain operative until the President, upon the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir, declares otherwise.

AMENDMENTS AND REPEAL

The abrogation of Article 370 in 2019 marked a significant constitutional change, leading to the reorganization of Jammu and Kashmir into Union Territories. This move was accompanied by debates on its constitutional validity and its implications for federalism.