Examine whether the Sixth Schedule or a special provision like Article 371 is better suited to safeguard tribal land and culture in Ladakh.

Ladakh, an overwhelmingly tribal region turned into a Union Territory without a legislature by the J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019 [1], now seeks entrenched safeguards. Two constitutional routes compete: Sixth Schedule autonomy under Article 244(2) and a tailored special provision on the Article 371 model, recently floated as "Chapter K" [5].

The Sixth Schedule case

• Vests Autonomous District Councils with direct law-making power over land, forests, inheritance and customary law — precisely the levers behind Ladakhi fears of land alienation [3].
• A tested template in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram, with elected councils and financial devolution under Article 275(1) [3].
• It is the demand jointly pressed by the Leh Apex Body and Kargil Democratic Alliance, alongside statehood [4].

Its limitations

• Article 244(2) covers tribal areas within States; extending it to a UT requires an amendment in any case, and would overlap the existing Hill Development Councils of Leh and Kargil.
• Council legislation depends on the Governor's/LG's assent, yielding district-level, fragmented protection rather than a UT-wide identity guarantee.

The Article 371 case

• Being bespoke, it can create an elected UT-level body with competence over land, culture, language, forest, environment and natural resources, displacing the President's regulation-making power under Article 240 [5].
• Article 371A (Nagaland) and 371G (Mizoram) already shield customary law and land ownership; twelve States enjoy such provisions [2].
• The Centre has conceded allied cultural safeguards — ST reservation raised to 84% and Bhoti and Purgi as official languages [4].

Its limitations

• It needs an Article 368 amendment, and no draft text has been shared with stakeholders, deepening the trust deficit [5].

On balance, a Ladakh-specific Article 371 provision is the more feasible and comprehensive instrument, provided it internalises the Sixth Schedule's substance — an elected body with entrenched control over land and culture. Such calibrated asymmetric federalism, negotiated transparently with LAB and KDA, would honour both Ladakh's aspirations and the Constitution's promise of protecting tribal identity.