Connect with us

Law

What is Article 370?

Published

3 years ago

on

What is Article 370?

The government then surprised everyone by saying it was withdrawing nearly all of Article 370, which 35A is part of and which has been the basis of Kashmir’s complicated relationship with India for some 70 years.

Tens of thousands of new Indian troops were stationed, a major Hindu pilgrimage was canceled, schools and colleges were shut, tourists were ordered to leave, telephone and internet services were suspended and regional political leaders were placed under house arrest.

But most of the speculation was that Article 35A of the Indian constitution, which gave some special privileges to the people of the state, would be scrapped.

The article permitted the expression a definite measure of independence – its own constitution, a different banner, and opportunity to make laws. International concerns, protection, and messages stayed the safe of the local government. 

Advertisement

Accordingly, Jammu and Kashmir could make their own standards identifying with super durable residency, responsibility for, and essential rights. It could likewise banish Indians from outside the state from buying property or settling there.

Kashmir will soon don’t have a different constitution yet should comply with the Indian constitution similar to some other state. All Indian laws will be consequently relevant to Kashmiris, and individuals from outside the state will actually want to obtain property there. 

The public authority says this will carry improvement to the area.

As registered by the constitution, Article 370 must be modified with the arrangement of the “state government”. Yet, there hasn’t been a very exceptional state government in Jammu and Kashmir for longer than a year at this point. 

Advertisement

In June last year, India forced bureaucratic standards after the public authority of the then chief minister, Mehbooba Mufti, was diminished to a minority. This implied the central government simply needed to look for the approval of the lead representative who forces its standard. 

The public authority says it is in a good place to acquire the progressions and that comparative choices have been taken by central governments before.

AASTHA SINGH

Advertisement
Related Topics:
Continue Reading

In News

No separate license needed by LMV license holder to drive transport vehicles: SC

Published

2 weeks ago

on

November 6, 2024

By

No separate license needed by LMV license holder to drive transport vehicles: SC

The judgement is a jolt to insurance companies which had been rejecting claims if accidents involved transport vehicles of a particular weight and if the drivers were not authorised to drive them

The Supreme Court on Wednesday held that a person holding a driving licence for a light motor vehicle (LMV) will now be able to drive a transport vehicle weighing less than 7,500 kg.

The decision by a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud came on a clutch of petitions filed by insurance companies challenging a 2017 decision by a three-judge bench which made it possible for LMV license holders to drive transport vehicles.

The insurance firms claimed that the decision required to be reversed as it would allow a person with LMV license to drive a bus, truck or a road roller, jeopardising the lives of citizens and increasing the burden on insurance companies to pay compensation.

Advertisement

The bench, also comprising justices Hrishikesh Roy, PS Narasimha, Pankaj Mithal, and Manoj Misra said, “Road safety is a serious public issue” as it noted that in 2023 alone, road accidents claimed over 1.7 million lives.

“Parties have not brought any empirical data that LMV license holder driving transport vehicles were causing accidents”, the bench said.

Also Read:Chandigarh: Insurance firms ask SC to reverse 2017 ruling on LMV licences for transport vehicles

Acting on the appeals by upholding its 2017 decision in Mukund Dewangan case, the court said that for licensing purpose, LMV and transport vehicles are not separate categories.

Advertisement

It added that the additional training and eligibility criteria specified under Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act) will apply to persons who wish to drive transport vehicles exceeding 7,500 kg. These will include medium goods and passenger vehicles and heavy goods and passenger vehicles.

The top court considered the issue of livelihoods as it said that the 2017 decision allowed a driver of a common man to even drive a transport vehicle. As this involved the livelihood of these drivers, the court had, during the proceedings, asked the Centre to consider a way out by bringing amendments to the law.

Attorney General R Venkataramani had informed the court that the amendments are yet to be finalised as the same is pending with the ministry of road transport and highways (MoRTH) piloting the amendments.

The bench did not comment anything on the said process as the AG had assured the court that the amendments will be notified in due course.

Advertisement

“We hope the comprehensive amendments will address the issue”, the bench said.

The insurance companies submitted that the 2017 decision had serious implications for road safety as it would permit an auto rickshaw driver to drive a road roller, a school bus or a contract carriage without going through the stringent checks meant for transport vehicle drivers, for whom a rigorous 30-day training course is mandated before acquiring a license.

The bench also heard arguments from individuals who benefited by the 2017 decision as it was pointed out that private vehicles falling in the category of LMV are increasingly being used as cabs and taxis.

Group Media Publications
Entertainment News Platforms – anyflix.in      
Construction Infrastructure and Mining News Platform – https://cimreviews.com/
General News Platform – https://ihtlive.com/

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Anyskill-ads

Facebook

Trending