Satya Prakash
New Delhi, February 14
Asserting that Parliament has the power to convert an existing state into a union territory, the Supreme Court has said that such law can’t be considered as an amendment to the Constitution.
“By the same law, a provision can be made as to the representation in Parliament and in the legislature of the Union Territory created by such law,” said a Bench led by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul – which on Monday dismissed a petition challenging notifications for delimitation of assembly constituencies in the newly created Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir for being bereft of any merit.
On August 5, 2019, the special status of Jammu and Kashmir under Article 370 was done away with and on October 31, 2019, Parliament enacted the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act which provided for reorganisation of the State of Jammu and Kashmir by dividing it into two union territories—Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh.
“On a conjoint reading of Articles 3, 4 and 239A, the Court found that “Parliament by making a law can convert an existing State into one or more Union territories,” the top court said.
Explaining the constitutional scheme, the Bench said, “Article 3 provides that Parliament may by law form new States and alter the areas, boundaries or names of the existing States. The explanation I provides that in clauses (a) to (e) of Article 3, a “State” includes “Union Territory”.
“Thus, Explanation I makes it amply clear that the power of Parliament under Clause (a) of Article 3, to make a law to form a new State or to alter a boundary of a State includes a power to make a law to form a new Union Territory.
“Explanation II clarifies that the power conferred by clause (a) on Parliament to enact the law to form a new State includes a power to form a Union Territory by uniting parts of any State or Union Territory to any other State or Union Territory.
“Clause (1) of Article 4 provides that any law made by Parliament as provided in Article 3 shall contain such provisions for the amendment of the First Schedule (containing the list of States and Union Territories) and Fourth Schedule (containing allocation of seats in the Council of States) as may be necessary for the purposes of giving effect to the provisions of the law.
“Such a law may also contain such supplemental, incidental and consequential provisions including provisions as to representation in Parliament and in the Legislature or Legislatures of the State or States affected by such law as Parliament may deem necessary,” it said, adding “Clause (2) of Article 4 clarifies that no such law made by Article 3 shall be deemed to be an amendment of the Constitution for the purposes of Article 368.”