Supreme Court of India granted the Central government a four-week deadline to respond to a series of petitions demanding the restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir, intensifying the spotlight on a politically charged issue. The bench, led by Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran, was addressing pleas from petitioners, including academician Zahoor Ahmad Bhat and socio-political activist Ahmad Malik, who urged the Court to enforce the Centre’s earlier commitment to reinstate statehood “at the earliest.”

The petitions stem from the Supreme Court’s landmark December 2023 verdict, which upheld the Centre’s 2019 decision to abrogate Article 370, stripping Jammu and Kashmir of its special status and reorganizing it as a Union Territory. In that ruling, the Court had directed the Centre to restore statehood as soon as possible and ensure assembly elections by September 2024. While elections have since been conducted, the delay in restoring statehood has fueled frustration among petitioners and residents, prompting legal action to hold the government accountable.

During Friday’s hearing, the petitioners’ counsel emphasized the Centre’s “solemn undertaking” in the 2023 judgment, arguing that the prolonged delay undermines the democratic aspirations of Jammu and Kashmir’s people. They pressed for a clear timeline, with one plea from 2024 even seeking a Court directive to complete the restoration within two months.

Also Read: BJP Leader Moves Supreme Court for CBI Probe in Karur Stampede

Representing the Centre, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta described the issue as “sui generis,” highlighting its unique complexity and the need to consider multiple factors. He informed the bench that discussions with the Jammu and Kashmir administration were ongoing but alleged that certain individuals were attempting to project a “distorted and negative image” of the region, complicating the process. Mehta’s remarks underscored the delicate balance between political, administrative, and social considerations in restoring statehood.

The abrogation of Article 370 in August 2019 was a historic move, ending decades of special constitutional provisions for Jammu and Kashmir. It led to the bifurcation of the erstwhile state into two Union Territories—Jammu and Kashmir, and Ladakh—governed directly by the Centre. While the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling validated this decision, it also set expectations for the swift restoration of statehood to ensure democratic governance. The delay has sparked debates about the Centre’s commitment to its promise, with activists and locals arguing that prolonged Union Territory status limits regional autonomy.

The petitioners contend that restoring statehood is not just a legal obligation but a step toward addressing the aspirations of Jammu and Kashmir’s people for self-governance. They argue that statehood would empower the region’s elected representatives to address critical issues like development, security, and cultural preservation more effectively.

As the Supreme Court awaits the Centre’s response, the case has reignited discussions about the future of Jammu and Kashmir. With the four-week deadline looming, all eyes are on whether the government will outline a concrete plan to fulfill its commitment or if further delays will deepen the region’s sense of uncertainty. The outcome of this legal battle could shape the political landscape of Jammu and Kashmir for years to come, making it a pivotal moment in India’s federal framework.

Also Read: TVK Seeks Supreme Court-Led Independent Investigation Over Karur Stampede