Source: https://m.greaterkashmir.com/news/opinion/article-35a-is-beyond-challenge/194167.html
Timestamp: 2018-11-14 19:48:24
Document Index: 782181642

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 371', 'Art. 371', 'Art. 371', 'Art. 371', 'Art. 371', 'Art. 371']

Srinagar | Posted : Aug 14 2015 1:13AM | Updated: Aug 13 2015 9:51PM
Article 371A of the Constitution of India clearly says: “Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, - (a) no Act of Parliament in respect of – (i) religion or social practices of the Nagas, (ii) Naga customary law and procedure, (iii) administration of civil and criminal justice involving decisions according to Naga customary law, (iv) ownership and transfer of land and its resources, shall apply to the State of Nagaland unless the legislative Assembly of Nagaland by a resolution so decides.” This provision inserted in 1962 explicitly bars the Parliament of India from making any law in respect of “ownership and transfer of land” in Nagaland and also “its resources”. If some people single out Kashmir for hostile attention because of Article 370 and 35A of the Constitution of India, it is for reasons not hard to seek.
This is not all. Article 371G on Mizoram says the same thing. It reads: “Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, - (a) no Act of Parliament in respect of – (i) religious or social practices of the Mizos, (ii) Mizo customary law and procedure, (iii) administration of civil and criminal justice involving decisions according to Mizo Customary law, (iv) ownership and transfer of land, shall apply to the State of Mizoram unless the Legislative Assembly of Mizoram by a resolution so decides.” The Constitution of India is studded with special provisions which thus confer “special status” on certain States; of course in very in degrees for historical reasons. For example Assam, (Art. 371B), Manipur (Art. 371C), Andhra Pradesh (Art. 371D), Sikkim (Art. 371F), Arunachal Pradesh (Art. 371H), and Goa (Art. 371I).