Extension Of President’s Rule In Kashmir Was Not Delayed: Mha Says In Reply To Sc Lawyer’s Article scroll.in

The ministry said the original provisions of Article 356 apply to the state. Hence, the proclamation would have expired on July 3 and not June 18 as claimed. The Ministry of Home Affairs on Wednesday dismissed an article published in The Indian Express earlier in the day claiming that the Centre’s delay in extending President’s rule in Jammu and Kashmir in June could put its decision to change the state’s constitutional status on shaky ground. In the article, Supreme Court lawyer Gopal Sankaranarayanan said that the government moved a resolution in the Lok Sabha to extend President’s rule on June 28, which was 10 days after it should have ceased to operate. The lawyer cited Article 356(4) to make his point. According to it, A proclamation so approved [by both Houses of Parliament] shall, unless revoked, cease to operate on the expiration of a period of six months from the date of issue of the Proclamation.