Discuss the constitutional status of Jammu and Kashmir after the abrogation of Article 370. What are the implications of continued Union Territory status for federal governance?

On 5 August 2019, Parliament abrogated Article 370 and Article 35A, and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 converted a full-fledged State into two Union Territories [1]. Seven years on, J&K has an elected government but not statehood — a constitutional halfway house with real federal consequences.

Constitutional status after abrogation

• Bifurcation: J&K became a UT with a legislature and Ladakh a UT without one, effective 31 October 2019 [1].
• End of special status: permanent-resident privileges under Article 35A lapsed, and about 170 central laws earlier inapplicable were extended to J&K [3].
• Restricted competence: as a UT, J&K is administered through a Lieutenant Governor, with police and public order outside the Assembly's law-making domain [1].
• Judicial seal: in December 2023 the Supreme Court upheld the abrogation, directed early Assembly elections and restoration of statehood "at the earliest" — without a binding deadline [2].
• Representative revival: the October 2024 Assembly election, the first since 2014, restored an elected government [4].

Implications for federal governance

• Precedent concern: a State reduced to a UT by ordinary legislation unsettles the Union–State equilibrium and raises questions about federalism as basic structure.
• Dual power centres: an elected Chief Minister coexisting with an LG invites Delhi- and Puducherry-style jurisdictional friction over land, services and policing.
• Accountability deficit: voters hold accountable a government whose powers do not match its mandate, weakening democratic responsiveness.
• Integrative gains: uniform application of central welfare and rights legislation and direct Union funding have widened entitlements [3].
• Legitimacy dividend: restoring statehood would convert a security-driven arrangement into consent-based federalism.

J&K today is constitutionally integrated but federally incomplete. A time-bound, phased restoration of statehood — with security safeguards retained by the Union — would honour the Supreme Court's direction and reaffirm cooperative federalism as the surest route to durable normalcy.