Article 370, gives special powers to Jammu and Kashmir, has been scrapped by the

Narendra Modi government today. Here's a look at the article's provisions.

The Article 370 of Indian Constitution had �temporary provisions with respect to
the State of Jammu and Kashmir� which gave special powers to the state allowing it
to have its own Constitution.

Also read: Centre scraps Article 370, bifurcates J&K into two Union Territories

According to it, the provisions of only Article 1 and Article 370 applied to the
state. If the Centre wanted to extend in the state a central law on subjects
included in the Instrument of Accession (IoA) � Defence, External Affairs and
Communications � it needed �consultation� while for extending laws on remaining
subjects, �concurrence� of the state government was mandatory.

The IoA signed on October 26, 1947 by the then ruler Raja Hari Singh had mentioned
in Clause 5 that accession terms cannot be varied by any amendment of the Act or of
Indian Independence Act unless such amendment is accepted by him by a supplementary
instrument.

Article 35A of the Indian Constitution, which stemmed out of Article 370, gave
powers to the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly to define permanent residents of the
state, their special rights and privileges.

The Jammu and Kashmir Constitution adopted on November 17, 1956 defines a
�permanent resident� as a person who was a state subject as of May 14, 1954, or has
been a resident in the state for 10 years on that date, with a legally acquired
property.

Non-permanent residents cannot acquire immovable property, get government

employment, scholarships or other aid provided by the state government. The unique
Article was inserted in the Constitution through a Presidential order in 1954
instead of an Amendment moved through Parliament. Article 35A does not appear in
the main body of the Constitution and is listed in Appendix I.

Clause (J) of the Appendix states after Article 35, a new Article 35A shall be
added.

Article 35A states: Saving of laws with respect to permanent residents and their
rights � Notwithstanding anything contained in this Constitution, no existing law
in force in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, and no law hereafter enacted by the
Legislature of the State:

(a) defining the classes of persons who are, or shall be, permanent residents of
the State of Jammu and Kashmir or

(b) conferring on such permanent residents any special rights and privileges or
imposing upon other persons any restrictions as respects � (i) employment under the
State Government; (ii) acquisition of immovable property in the State; (iii)
settlement in the State;

or (iv) right to scholarships and such other forms of aid as the State Government
may provide, shall be void on the ground that it is inconsistent with or takes away
or abridges any rights conferred on the other citizens of India by any provision of
this Part.

The premise of this special Article emanates from residency laws issued by the then
Maharaja Hari Singh to prevent migration of people from neighbouring Punjab during
the British rule. Such restrictions on non-permanent residents to purchase lands
are not unique to Jammu and Kashmir as Himachal Pradesh and several North Eastern
states too have this provision.

In 2002, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court had struck down the provision of women
losing their permanent resident status if they married a non-permanent resident.
Their children still cannot have succession rights. Article 35A is under challenge
in the Supreme Court as it was not added through a Constitutional amendment and
other related issues.

Under Article 370(3): Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this

article, the President may, by public notification, declare that this article shall
cease to be operative or shall be operative only with such exceptions and
modifications and from such date as he may specify:... Provided that the
recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the State referred to in clause (2)
shall be necessary before the President issues such a notification.

In the State bank of India vs Santosh Gupta and Others case, the Supreme Court had
ruled that Article 370, though was intended to be temporary or transitional, has
become a permanent feature of the Constitution for the reasons mentioned in Article
370(3) that says that without recommendations of the State Constituent Assembly, it
could not be abrogated.

The notification issued by President Ram Nath Kovind abrogating Article 370 on
Monday declared: in proviso to clause (3) of article 370 of this Constitution, the
expression �Constituent Assembly of the State referred to in clause (2)� shall read
�Legislative Assembly of the State�.