Hearing on Article 35-A adjourned because of Amarnath yatra: Separatists

Separatists today claimed that the hearing of the petitions challenging Article 35-A of the constitution in the Supreme Court was deferred till last week of August in view of the ongoing Amarnath yatra, but vowed to continue protests against any "tinkering" with the provision on permanent residency law of the state.

"Hearing of the case regarding the hereditary state subject law of J&K has been simply deferred from today till last week of August by the Supreme Court when the Amarnathji yatra ends. The protest programmes against tinkering with the law will continue as leadership deliberates upon it," the Joint resistance leadership (JRL), which is spearheading the protests, said.

The JRL, comprising Syed Ali Geelani, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq and Mohammad Yasin Malik, said the deferment of the case by a few weeks was an indication about the intentions of the court which entertained the "mischievous petitions backed by the RSS, as part of RSS' well known agenda on Jammu and Kashmir".

"A strict vigil will be maintained on the situation as we will continue to devise and follow a collective strategy in consultation with all segments of society, including traders, lawyers, civil society members, transporters and others," the separatists added.

The JRL had called for a two-day shutdown in the valley, beginning yesterday, to protest against the legal challenge to validity of Article 35-A before the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court today said a three-judge bench would decide whether the pleas challenging Article 35A, which provides special rights and privileges to the people of Jammu and Kashmir, should be referred to a five-judge Constitution bench for examining the larger issue of alleged violation of the doctrine of basic structure of the Constitution.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice A Khanwilkar adjourned the crucial hearing on as many as five petitions "to the week commencing from August 27" on the grounds that they pertained to the challenge to a Constitutional scheme and could not be heard as the third judge, Justice D Y Chandrachud, was not present today.