Open Letter to CJI: Restore J&K Statehood, Warns of Threat to India’s Federal Structure
 |
| Source: India Today |
Open Letter to CJI Gavai: Demand for Restoration of Jammu & Kashmir’s Statehood Gains Momentum
New Delhi: Barely days after Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai referred to Article 370 in a public speech, praising the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment on the matter, a new and highly sensitive demand has been placed before him. This time, the debate is not about the abrogation of Article 370, but about restoring the statehood of Jammu & Kashmir, which was stripped away in August 2019.
An open letter addressed to the CJI has emerged as a powerful appeal. This is not a letter from ordinary citizens—it comes from some of the country’s most respected and responsible figures:
- Gopal Pillai, former Union Home Secretary
- Maj. Gen. Ashok K. Mehta (Retd.)
- Air Vice Marshal Kapil Kak (Retd.)
- Radha Kumar, former interlocutor for J&K
- Amitabh Pande, former Union Secretary
Interestingly, all five were also petitioners in the Supreme Court in the Article 370 case earlier. Now, they have once again knocked on the apex court’s doors, urging it to intervene.
What Does the Letter Say?
The letter alleges that the Central Government intends to retain full control over Jammu & Kashmir indefinitely, despite repeated assurances that statehood would be restored. It points out that in December 2023, when the Supreme Court upheld the abrogation of Article 370, it deliberately avoided ruling on the constitutionality of converting an existing state into a Union Territory—a question that remains unresolved.
This omission was based on the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s assurance that statehood would be restored “at an appropriate time.” Then CJI D.Y. Chandrachud, in oral remarks, even urged the Union Government to expedite the process. Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, in his separate opinion, went further—observing that converting the entire state into a Union Territory was “unconstitutional” and must be reversed immediately. CJI B.R. Gavai was also part of this bench.
However, seven months after that judgment, no roadmap has been announced. Instead, the government has reiterated that statehood will return in “stages”—without any timeline.
Why Does This Matter?
The signatories argue that if an existing state can be downgraded to a Union Territory without clear constitutional backing, it sets a dangerous precedent for India’s federal structure. Tomorrow, any state could face the same fate, undermining the very foundation of federalism and the principle of “Unity in Diversity”.
They also raise a provocative point: If statehood is indeed constitutional to revoke, why did the government repeatedly promise its restoration? These promises themselves, the letter says, are an acknowledgment that the action was legally questionable.
The People’s Mandate and Political Reality
In October 2024, Jammu & Kashmir witnessed peaceful Assembly elections with a high voter turnout, signaling the people’s desire for democratic governance. The National Conference secured an absolute majority, and the new Chief Minister passed a resolution demanding speedy restoration of statehood. This resolution was forwarded to President Droupadi Murmu by Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha. Eight months later—no action.
Instead, the government has reportedly cited the recent Pahalgam terror attack as a reason for delaying the process. But the letter dismisses this as an excuse, noting that the first and strongest condemnation of the attack came from J&K’s civil society, which organized candlelight marches, business shutdowns, and protests—even religious leaders like Mirwaiz Umar Farooq expressed solidarity with the victims.
Concerns Over Governance and Human Rights
Despite having an elected Chief Minister, the letter claims:
- The CM is not included in security briefings
- No role in transfers or postings
- Police remain answerable to New Delhi, not the local government
This, the authors argue, violates the Supreme Court’s own ruling in the Delhi governance case, which upheld the primacy of elected governments in administrative control.
Adding to concerns, there is no functioning Human Rights Commission in J&K, leaving citizens without any grievance mechanism. The letter also condemns mass arrests (1,500–2,000 people) and bulldozer demolitions without legal sanction following the terror attack, even as the NIA later clarified that the attackers were Pakistani nationals and that local support, if any, was under duress.
What Does the Letter Demand?
- The Supreme Court should take suo motu cognizance of the issue.
- Constitute a new bench to examine the constitutional validity of converting a state into a Union Territory—a question deferred in December 2023.
- Set a clear deadline for restoration of J&K’s statehood.
- Ensure that no future government can arbitrarily revoke statehood of any state.
The authors warn: “This is not just about J&K; it is about the future of India’s federal democracy.”
The Larger Question
When CJI Gavai recently spoke about Article 370, his tone reflected a commitment to constitutional balance and a unified India. But the challenge before him now is both moral and constitutional: Will the Supreme Court reaffirm the federal principles enshrined in the Constitution, or allow India to slide towards a unitary model of governance?
As the letter concludes:
“Jammu & Kashmir is not just a territory; it is an essential part of India’s democratic existence. Its voice must be heard.”
Readers, what’s your view? Should the Supreme Court intervene? Should statehood be restored immediately? Share your thoughts in the comments.