Express News Service
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday sought a response from the Central authorities and the state of Jammu & Kashmir administration on a writ petition difficult the federal government notifications for the delimitation of meeting constituencies for the union territory of Jammu and Kashmir.
The petition filed by Haji Abdul Gani Khan and one other seeks instructions for declaration of the rise of variety of seats from 107 to 114 claiming that it’s violative of the constitutional provisions corresponding to Articles 81, 82, 170, 330 and 332 and statutory provisions notably Section 63 of the Jammu & Kashmir Re-organisation Act 2019.
The plea raises questions as to the delimitation train in J&Ok when article 170 of the Constitution of India offered that the following delimitation in India will probably be taken up after 2026.
“According to Election Laws, it is only the Election Commission that must carry out the process of delimitation (necessary updation) after the Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies Delimitation Order, 2008 is notified. Nobody is competent to carry out the delimitation process since the delimitation has been completed and the Delimitation Commission itself has become inappropriate. Issuance of Notification by the Law and Legislative Department appointing the Delimitation Commission is without jurisdiction, unconstitutional and ultra vires to the election laws apart from J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019,” the petition contended.
ALSO READ | Plea moved in SC difficult delimitation train in J&Ok
“It is submitted that conducting delimitation just for Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir is unconstitutional because it quantities to additional Classification as held in Subramanian Swamy case …..”
The classification could also be based on totally different bases; particularly, geographical, or based on objects or occupations or the like. What is critical is that there have to be a nexus between the idea of classification and the thing of the Act into account.
“It is also well-established by the decisions of this Court that Article 14 condemns discrimination not only by a substantive law but also by a law of procedure,” the plea reads.
The courtroom will now hear the matter on August 30.
