Article 35A of the Indian Constitution

Article 35A was a unique provision in the Indian Constitution that provided special rights and privileges to the residents of Jammu and Kashmir. This

Article 35A of the Indian Constitution

When we talk about the special status of Jammu and Kashmir, two terms always come up — Article 370 and Article 35A. While Article 370 gave Jammu and Kashmir autonomy in its relationship with India, Article 35A gave special privileges and rights to its permanent residents.

For decades, Article 35A played a major role in defining who could own property, get government jobs, or receive welfare benefits in Jammu and Kashmir. But at the same time, it became one of the most controversial and debated provisions in India’s constitutional history.

Supporters said it protected Kashmir’s unique identity, while critics argued it violated equality and discriminated against other Indian citizens.

This article will explain everything you need to know about Article 35A — its origin, purpose, features, criticisms, and what happened after it was finally abolished in 2019.

---

The Background — How It All Started

To understand Article 35A, we need to go back to 1947, the year of India’s independence and partition.

At that time, Jammu and Kashmir was one of the princely states ruled by Maharaja Hari Singh. It was a Muslim-majority region, but the ruler was Hindu.

When India was partitioned into India and Pakistan, every princely state had three options:

1. Join India

2. Join Pakistan

3. Remain independent

Maharaja Hari Singh initially wanted to remain independent. But when tribal raiders from Pakistan invaded Kashmir in October 1947, he asked India for military help.

India agreed, but on one condition — the Maharaja had to sign the Instrument of Accession, joining Jammu and Kashmir to India.

He signed it on 26 October 1947, giving India control over only three subjects:

• Defence

• Foreign Affairs

• Communications

All other powers remained with the state.

This special arrangement between India and Jammu & Kashmir later took shape as Article 370, giving the state a special constitutional status.

A few years later, under the powers of Article 370, Article 35A was added to the Constitution through a Presidential Order in 1954.

---

What Is Article 35A?

Article 35A was a special provision that empowered the Jammu and Kashmir Legislature to define who were the “permanent residents” of the state and to grant them special rights and privileges.

It was not part of the original Constitution of India (1950). It was added later by the President of India through the Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 1954 — issued under the authority of Article 370(1).

In simple terms, Article 35A gave the Jammu & Kashmir government the power to decide:

• Who could live permanently in J&K,

• Who could own land there,

• Who could get state government jobs, and

• Who could access state scholarships or welfare schemes.

This meant that people from other states of India, even though they were Indian citizens, could not enjoy these rights in J&K unless they were classified as permanent residents.

---

The Text of Article 35A

Here’s what Article 35A said (simplified for better understanding):

“No law defining the classes of persons who are, or shall be, permanent residents of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, or conferring on such permanent residents any special rights and privileges, or imposing upon other persons any restrictions, shall be invalid on the ground that it is inconsistent with the rights conferred on other citizens of India by the Constitution.”

In short, it meant that J&K could make laws giving special rights to its permanent residents, and these laws could not be challenged for violating fundamental rights like equality (Article 14) or freedom (Article 19).

---

The Origin — Presidential Order of 1954

Article 35A came into existence through the Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 1954, issued by President Dr. Rajendra Prasad with the concurrence of the J&K Government.

This order extended several provisions of the Indian Constitution to Jammu and Kashmir but also inserted Article 35A in the process.

So technically, Article 35A was not passed by Parliament like other constitutional amendments — it was added directly through a Presidential Order, making it constitutionally unique.

---

Who Were the “Permanent Residents”?

The Jammu and Kashmir Constitution (1957) defined who qualified as a permanent resident.

According to it:

• Anyone who was a state subject on 14 May 1954, or

• Who had been a resident of the state for 10 years, and

• Had legally acquired immovable property in J&K,

was considered a permanent resident.

Only these permanent residents were entitled to certain exclusive rights.

---

Rights and Privileges Under Article 35A

Article 35A gave the state government the power to grant special privileges to permanent residents. Here’s what they got:

1. Right to Own Land:
   Only permanent residents could buy or own immovable property (land or houses) in J&K. Non-residents could not purchase property there.

2. Government Jobs:
   Only permanent residents were eligible for jobs under the J&K government. Outsiders could not apply for these positions.

3. Right to Settle Permanently:
   Non-residents could not settle in Jammu and Kashmir. They could visit or work temporarily but couldn’t become permanent residents.

4. Education Benefits:
   Permanent residents were given special treatment in educational institutions and scholarships.

5. Welfare Schemes:
   State welfare schemes, like housing or social benefits, were reserved for permanent residents.

These provisions made J&K different from all other states in India, where every Indian citizen enjoys equal rights to property, jobs, and residence.

---

Article 35A and Fundamental Rights

Normally, the Fundamental Rights (Articles 14–18) guarantee equality before the law to all Indian citizens.

But under Article 35A, Jammu and Kashmir could legally discriminate between permanent residents and other Indians — and no one could challenge it in court.

This created a kind of constitutional contradiction.

For example:

• An Indian citizen from Delhi or Tamil Nadu couldn’t buy land in J&K.

• A Kashmiri woman who married a non-resident lost her property rights (until 2002).

• Refugees who had settled in J&K after partition were denied full citizenship and voting rights.

This raised serious questions about equality and fairness, which eventually led to widespread criticism.

---

The Connection Between Article 35A and Article 370

Article 35A was not an independent article — it existed because of Article 370.

Article 370 gave the President of India the power to make special constitutional orders for Jammu and Kashmir. Using this power, Article 35A was added in 1954.

This means Article 35A was entirely dependent on Article 370.

So, when Article 370 was abrogated on 5 August 2019, Article 35A automatically became void.

In short:

Article 370 gave special status, and Article 35A gave special rights.
When the status ended, the rights ended too.

---

Criticism of Article 35A

Over time, Article 35A faced growing criticism from various quarters — political parties, social activists, and legal experts.

1. Violation of Equality (Article 14)

Critics argued that it went against the idea of one nation, one law. It treated Indians from other states as outsiders in their own country.

2. Gender Discrimination

Before 2002, if a Kashmiri woman married someone from outside J&K, she lost her permanent resident status — and her children also lost inheritance rights.

The J&K High Court later struck down this discrimination, but it remained a controversial point.

3. Economic Isolation

By stopping outsiders from buying land or investing, Article 35A limited industrial and economic growth in the state.

4. Political Misuse

It allowed local politicians to maintain control by portraying outsiders as a threat to J&K’s identity.

5. Refugee and Minority Exclusion

Refugees from West Pakistan, who had been living in J&K since 1947, were not considered permanent residents and were denied basic rights.

---

Support for Article 35A

On the other hand, supporters defended Article 35A as essential for preserving the identity and culture of Jammu and Kashmir.

They Argued That:

1. It was a constitutional promise made at the time of J&K’s accession.

2. It protected local demography and land ownership.

3. Without it, outsiders could flood the region and alter its cultural and social fabric.

4. It maintained the spirit of federalism, allowing states some degree of autonomy.

Thus, while one side viewed it as protection, the other saw it as discrimination.

---

Legal Challenges Against Article 35A

Several petitions were filed in the Supreme Court of India challenging the constitutional validity of Article 35A.

The main argument was that it was added without Parliament’s approval, violating the procedure of Article 368 (which governs constitutional amendments).

The Supreme Court, however, never struck it down — and the issue remained pending until August 2019, when the Government of India abrogated Article 370, automatically rendering Article 35A void.

---

Abrogation of Article 35A — The 2019 Decision

On 5 August 2019, the Indian government, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah, made a historic move.

Through a Presidential Order under Article 370(1) and a Parliamentary resolution, the government:

• Applied all provisions of the Indian Constitution to Jammu & Kashmir,

• Revoked its special status under Article 370, and

• Automatically removed Article 35A.

The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 followed, dividing the state into two Union Territories —

1. Jammu and Kashmir (with a Legislative Assembly)

2. Ladakh (without a Legislative Assembly)

From that day, Article 35A ceased to exist, and all Indian citizens became equal in rights across the Union Territory.

---

What Changed After the Removal of Article 35A

After Article 35A was repealed, several big changes took place in Jammu and Kashmir:

1. Equal Rights for All Indians

Now, any Indian citizen can buy land, get jobs, or settle in J&K — just like in any other part of India.

2. Central Laws Apply Fully

All central laws — like Right to Education, RTI Act, and SC/ST reservation — now apply in Jammu and Kashmir.

3. No More Dual Citizenship

Residents are now only Indian citizens. There’s no separate “state citizenship.”

4. Boost to Investment

With property ownership open to all, industries and businesses can now invest in J&K, boosting employment and growth.

5. Women’s Equal Rights

Women now retain property rights even if they marry non-residents — ending decades of gender bias.

6. Political and Administrative Changes

Jammu & Kashmir is now governed as a Union Territory, with greater central oversight and uniform laws.

---

Reactions and Impact

The abrogation of Article 35A (and 370) triggered strong reactions — both in support and opposition.

Supporters Said:

• It ended 70 years of inequality and separation.

• It strengthened India’s unity.

• It opened new doors for development and integration.

Opponents Said:

• It was unconstitutional and undemocratic.

• It violated the promise made at accession.

• It could lead to unrest and alienation in the region.

Regardless of opinion, the decision marked a turning point in Indian constitutional history.

---

Difference Between Article 370 and Article 35A

Basis	Article 370	Article 35A
Type	Constitutional provision	Presidential Order
Introduced	1950	1954
Purpose	Granted special autonomous status to J&K	Granted special privileges to permanent residents
Scope	Covered India–J&K relationship	Defined internal rights within J&K
Authority	Created by Constituent Assembly	Added under Article 370(1)
Repeal	Abrogated on 5 August 2019	Automatically ceased after Article 370’s abrogation

---

Importance of Article 35A in India’s Constitutional Debate

Article 35A has become one of the most discussed constitutional provisions in Indian history — not just because of what it did, but because of how it was added and how it ended.

It raises important questions about:

• The balance between autonomy and equality,

• The limits of presidential powers, and

• The meaning of federalism in a diverse nation like India.

Its removal has created a new constitutional reality — where every Indian citizen now has equal rights across all parts of the country, including Jammu and Kashmir.

---

Conclusion

Article 35A was a unique and controversial provision that gave Jammu and Kashmir the power to define its own citizens and grant them special privileges.

It was born out of history — a product of the delicate political situation after independence — but over time, it became a symbol of division and inequality.

For decades, it stood as a wall separating Jammu & Kashmir from the rest of India — limiting property ownership, opportunities, and even the sense of belonging.

When it was finally removed in August 2019, along with Article 370, it marked the beginning of a new era — one where all Indians are equal before the law, with no special barriers or privileges based on region.

Supporters see it as the completion of India’s integration; critics call it the loss of a special identity. But one thing is certain — Article 35A will always remain a historic chapter in India’s constitutional story, reminding us how a single clause can shape the destiny of an entire region.

In simple words — Article 35A was the power that defined who belonged to Jammu & Kashmir, and its end redefined who belonged to India.