Article 370 was a self-extinguishing, temporary provision: Centre to SC
Article 370, which gave special status to Jammu and Kashmir, was a «self-extinguishing» and a «temporary» provision.
Appearing on behalf of the central government, solicitor general Tushar Mehta argued that a «mistake of the past should not befall upon the future generations», adding that the mistake has been «rectified» by the Centre by abrogating Article 370.
Mehta further contended that the Constitution of India lies on a higher platform than that of the J&K Constitution which now stands repealed. The Solicitor General added that Article 370 was used in a «floating way» and any word in Article 370 which became «otiose» was replaced by its successor.
Strongly defending the abrogation of Article 370, the solicitor general added that Article 370 could have been abrogated through «an administrative exercise» and that the Parliament committed no illegality, as alleged by the petitioners, by abrogating the Article.
Reiterating that the abrogation of Article 370 has brought the people of Jammu and Kashmir on a par with their «brothers and sisters (natives)» of India, Mehta argued that it acted as a barrier in providing welfare legislations to the people of the region.
He further contended that the «unfortunate and troubling» part is that till now people of Jammu and Kashmir were convinced by people «who were supposed to advise» them that Article 370 was their «right» and that it will never be abrogated.
Defending the abrogation, Mehta added that «investments» are pouring in, tourism in J&K has resumed and over 16 lakh tourists have visited J&K after abrogation of Article 370. Recalling one of the speeches made by a member in the Parliament, Mehta said that Article 370 acted as a «mountain» between the welfare and residents
