The Supreme Court on Wednesday adjourned till tomorrow the hearing on a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Centre's decision to abrogate Article 370 of the Constitution.
Senior advocate Raju Ramachandran, representing bureaucrat-turned-politician Shah Faesal, sought its judicial reversal from a five-judge Constitution.
"Only judicial reversal is possible in this case. Now we are seeking the Court to reverse it," he told the bench headed by Justice N V Ramana.
He argued, "The power to recommend succession under Article 370 lies with the constituent assembly. Under Article 356, the power cannot be transferred to the President."
He said that Article 356 is an "emergency provision" and that its power should be used in exceptional circumstances to preserve and protect the constitution. "It should not be used where it is not needed," Ramachandran added.
The counsel stated that there are many "issues and facts" in the public domain that the people of Jammu and Kashmir were denied the opportunity to express their views on Article 370.
Ramachandran said that the basic rights have been denied to the people of Jammu and Kashmir, after the abrogation of Article 370. "This is not temporary; let me clarify it to this honorable court.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
