The Supreme Court has asked the central government to clarify its position on several petitions demanding a time-bound plan to restore statehood to Jammu and Kashmir. The matter was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran, where petitioners argued that the prolonged delay in reinstating statehood is infringing on the constitutional rights of residents and undermining the principle of federalism.

Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing the petitioners, stressed that nearly 21 months have passed since the landmark Article 370 verdict without any concrete steps toward restoring statehood. He reminded the bench that during the hearing of the Article 370 case, the Centre had given an oral assurance that statehood would be reinstated, which the Constitution Bench accepted in good faith.

However, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta questioned the admissibility of the petitions and urged the court to delay proceedings by at least eight weeks. Emphasizing the unique situation in Jammu and Kashmir, Mehta maintained that the current stage is not suitable for addressing the issue and stated that elections would precede the restoration of statehood, as previously assured by the government.

Following the arguments, the court agreed to list the matter after eight weeks. In its Article 370 judgment, a five-judge Constitution Bench led by then CJI D.Y. Chandrachud had upheld the bifurcation of the state and conversion of Ladakh into a Union Territory. While the Bench directed the Election Commission to conduct legislative assembly elections in Jammu and Kashmir by September 30, 2024, it also emphasized that the restoration of statehood should happen “at the earliest.”

In May 2024, the Supreme Court rejected review petitions challenging the Article 370 verdict, citing no apparent errors and declined to re-open the case for public hearing.