"Centre Proposes Article 371(K) Sui Generis Governance Model for Ladakh UT"
Article 371(K)
Proposed new constitutional provision under Part XXI to grant Ladakh a bespoke elected legislative body.
Sui generis model
A unique governance arrangement that does not fit existing UT-with-legislature or full-state categories.
Ladakh's current status was created by the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, passed under Article 3 of the Constitution. The Act bifurcated the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories. Jammu and Kashmir became a UT with a legislature. Ladakh became a UT without a legislature, effective 31 October 2019. This reorganisation was accompanied by the effective abrogation of Article 370, which had given J&K special autonomous status since 1949. Ladakh now sends one member to the Lok Sabha but has no elected body at the UT level with legislative, executive, or financial powers.
Before reorganisation, Ladakh had sub-state governance through Autonomous Hill Development Councils (AHDCs), established under the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council Act, 1997. LAHDC-Leh was established in 1995 and LAHDC-Kargil in 2003. These bodies hold executive powers over land, local development, and local taxation. However, AHDCs are creatures of parliamentary statute, not the Constitution itself. This makes them weaker than Sixth Schedule Autonomous District Councils (ADCs) under Articles 244(2) and 275(1), which apply to tribal areas of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, and Mizoram and draw authority directly from the Constitution. Ladakh's civil society groups, the Leh Apex Body and the Kargil Democratic Alliance, have long demanded Sixth Schedule status and full statehood because constitutional protection is harder to dilute than a parliamentary statute.
Article 371 falls under Part XXI of the Constitution, titled "Temporary, Transitional and Special Provisions." It currently provides special provisions for twelve states through sub-clauses A to J, protecting land, culture, employment, and customary law in specific regions. A new Article 371(K) would extend this framework to Ladakh for the first time.
A Union Territory without a legislature, like Ladakh, has no elected law-making body at the UT level. Administration is carried out by bureaucrats under a Lieutenant Governor (LG) appointed by the Centre. Parliament retains the power to legislate on all subjects for such a UT under Article 240. The LG exercises independent authority that a Governor in a full state does not. This structural democratic deficit is the core grievance driving current negotiations.
The constitutional distinction between a state and a UT matters greatly. States exercise legislative authority over State List subjects and share power with the Union over the Concurrent List. A UT without a legislature has neither of these powers. Residents of Ladakh therefore lack an elected body to make laws on local matters, control local finances, or hold the executive accountable at the UT level. …
Consider the following statements:
1.Union Territories are not represented in the Rajya Sabha.
2.It is within the purview of the Chief Election Commissioner to adjudicate the election disputes.
3.According to the Constitution of India, the Parliament consists of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha only.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
'While the national political parties in India favour centralisation, the regional parties are in favour of State autonomy.' Comment.
Consider the following statements regarding the proposed governance model for Ladakh:
1.The proposed Article 371(K) would be the first extension of Article 371 to a Union Territory.
2.Article 371 currently provides special provisions for ten states under Part XXI of the Constitution.
3.Enacting Article 371(K) would require a two-thirds majority in Parliament under Article 368.
4.The Sixth Schedule under Article 244(2) currently applies to tribal areas of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, and Mizoram.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
With reference to Article 371 of the Indian Constitution, which of the following statements is/are correct?
1.Article 371 falls under Part XXI of the Constitution, titled 'Temporary, Transitional and Special Provisions'.
2.Article 371A provides special protections for Nagaland, including that Parliament cannot legislate on Naga customary law without the state assembly's concurrence.
3.Article 371 provisions currently apply to Union Territories as well as states.
Select the correct answer using the code below:
Which of the following correctly describes the difference between the Autonomous Hill Development Councils (AHDCs) in Ladakh and the Autonomous District Councils (ADCs) under the Sixth Schedule?
Consider the following statements about Union Territories and their representation in Parliament:
1.Union Territories are not represented in the Rajya Sabha.
2.Parliament acts as the legislature for Union Territories without a legislature under Article 240 of the Constitution.
3.Ladakh sends one member to the Lok Sabha but has no elected legislative body at the UT level.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
With reference to the Sixth Schedule of the Indian Constitution, consider the following pairs:
Region — Applicable State
1.Bodoland Territorial Council — Assam
2.Garo Hills Autonomous District Council — Meghalaya
3.Chakma Autonomous District Council — Tripura
4.Mara Autonomous District Council — Mizoram
How many of the above pairs are correctly matched?
Want the full note, Prelims Facts & MCQ answers?
Create a free account — takes less than a minute.
Create free account