CJI pulls up petitioner over plea on Article 370

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday refused to intervene to lift the communication jam in Jammu and Kashmir imposed after the scraping of Article 370 and bifurcation of trouble torn State in two Union Territories as government assured the court that the curbs were being lifted as and when sitiation warranted and things would settle down in next few days.

“Let’s give it a bit of time,” said the bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice S.A. Bobde and Justice S. Abdul Nazeer with CJI referring to media reports suggesting that the landlines and broadband would be restored by evening.

Indicating that landlines were operational, Justice Bobde said that he had received a call from the Chief Justice of J&K high court from the landline.

At the outset of the hearing, CJI Gogoi took exception to the petition filed by the petitioner advocate M.L. Sharma, observing that it did not make heads or tails of what he wanted to say or what was his prayer and could have been dismissed on technical grounds itself. “What kind of petition is this? It could have been dismissed but there are five other pleas with the registry which are under defect”, CJI Gogoi said.

The bench had a dig at another lawyer hailing from Kashmir Shakil Sabeer who said that his plea has not been listed.

CJI Gogoi pointed out that there were defects in his petition which he cured on Wednesday evening and Thursday (August 15 was) holiday.

How did you expect the listing of his petition today?, CJI asked wondering “Why did you file a defective petition in the matter of this importance.”

Taking exception to the lackadaisical approach of the lawyers in moving the court on serious and important matters, CJI Gogoi said, “We broke the Ayodhya bench to accommodate the bar and this is the situation.”  

The two Lok Sabha members of National Conference Mohammad Akbar Lone and former judge of J&K High Court Hasnain Masoodi have already moved the top court challenging the abrogation of Article 370 granting special status to the State and its bifurcation into two Union Territories – Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh.

Both Lone and Masoodi have contended that the Central government under the President’s rule could not have unilaterally alter the “unique federal scheme” without taking recourse to  “due process and the rule of law” involving the consent of the J&K assembly.

The abrogation of Articlec370 and bifurcation of J&K in two Union territories, the two NC law makers have contended goes to the “heart of the Indian federalism, democratic processes and the roll of Supreme Court as the guardian of the federal structure.”