Revision summary
Article 370 is labelled temporary in Part XXI and can cease under clause (3), but the State Constituent Assembly never recommended that before it dissolved in 1957. Presidential orders, especially 1954, extended the Union Constitution while keeping the special gateway. Court practice treated the article as continuing, so it was temporary in name and durable in fact until 2019. C.O. 272, C.O. 273 and the J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019, made it inoperative; the 2023 judgment upheld that path and spoke of restoring statehood. Prospects in polity are now about statehood and ordinary federalism, not about reviving the old Article 370 as a living special status.
Model answer
Introduction
Article 370 sits in Part XXI under the heading of temporary, transitional and special provisions, and its own marginal note calls it a temporary provision with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir. Temporariness was real in the text of 1949, but for seven decades practice made it a durable special status, until the President and Parliament in 2019 used Article 370(3) and related orders to end that status. A discussion of extent and prospects must hold both the original design and that later political-legal settlement.
Body
How far it was temporary in the text
- Article 370(1) limited the application of the Union Constitution to Jammu and Kashmir to Article 1, Article 370 itself, and such other provisions as the President specified by order, with the State government’s concurrence on matters in the Instrument of Accession and beyond.
- Article 370(2) tied certain concurrence to a decision of the State’s Constituent Assembly.
- Article 370(3) allowed the President to declare that Article 370 shall cease to be operative or shall operate only with exceptions, but only on the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the State.
- That Assembly adopted the State Constitution and dissolved itself in 1957 without recommending abrogation, which is why “temporary” in the margin did not, by itself, put an expiry date on the article.
- A chain of Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Orders, especially the 1954 Order, extended Union lists, fundamental rights with modifications, and later Article 35A (through the 1954 Order), so integration grew while the special gateway of Article 370 remained.
How practice made it durable
- Supreme Court rulings such as Prem Nath Kaul and Sampat Prakash treated Article 370 as still alive after 1957 and allowed continued Presidential orders, which converted a wartime accession clause into a long-running special federal arrangement.
- Separate flags, residency rules, and a State Constitution sat beside the Union Constitution; that was special status in daily polity, not a sunset clause waiting to lapse.
- Politically, Article 370 became a symbol: for some a promise of autonomy after accession, for others an incomplete national integration. Temporariness was therefore a legal label and a political argument at the same time.
- In 2016, when this question was asked, the provision was temporary in constitutional classification and permanent in operational fact, unless a political majority found a lawful path through Article 370(3) or a constitutional amendment.
Future prospects in Indian polity
- One prospect, later chosen, was to end the special application of the Constitution: in August 2019 the President issued C.O. 272 and C.O. 273, Parliament passed the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, and the State was reorganised into two Union Territories, with Article 370 declared inoperative.
- The Supreme Court in In Re: Article 370 (2023) upheld the constitutional path of those orders while asking that statehood be restored, which shows that “future prospects” were not only academic.
- A second prospect, argued before 2019, was gradual erosion through more Presidential orders without a formal cease-to-operate declaration, which had already been the method since the 1950s.
- A third prospect was a political settlement restoring greater autonomy inside the Union, which remains a live federal demand even after 2019, especially around statehood, Assembly powers, and local jobs.
- For Indian polity the larger lesson is that Part XXI “temporary” clauses can last for generations, and that their end, when it comes, is a high-stakes Union decision tested in the Supreme Court, not an automatic lapse.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD T[Part XXI temporary heading] --> A[Article 370 gateway] A --> O[Presidential orders to 2019] A --> C[Constituent Assembly dissolved 1957] C --> D[No automatic expiry] O --> E[C.O. 272 and 273 of 2019] E --> U[Special status inoperative]
Conclusion
Article 370 was temporary in its Part XXI heading and in Article 370(3), but not self-expiring after the State Constituent Assembly vanished. Practice made it a long special status. Its future, as actually written in 2019 and tested in 2023, was inoperativeness plus reorganisation, with statehood still an open federal promise. Temporariness was therefore a legal possibility that politics finally used, not a calendar date printed in 1950.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
"The Indian party system is passing through a phase of transition which looks to be full of contradictions and paradoxes." Discuss.
Next question in the 2016 paper (Q3). View answer →
-
Did Article 370 expire by itself in 1957?
No. The Constituent Assembly of the State ended without a recommendation under Article 370(3). The article continued until the 2019 Presidential orders.
-
Is Article 370 still a living special status?
It remains in the constitutional text as a historical clause, but C.O. 273 declared it inoperative. Day-to-day special status under the old order has ended.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2020 · Q2 · GS II · 10 marks
"Recent amendments to the Right to information Act will have profound impact on the autonomy and independence of the Information Commission". Discuss. -
2019 · Q5 · GS II · 10 marks
What can France learn from the Indian Constitution's approach to secularism? -
2018 · Q2 · GS II · 10 marks
Whether National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) can enforce the implementation of constitutional reservation for the Scheduled Castes in the religious minority institutions? Examine. -
2018 · Q3 · GS II · 10 marks
Under what circumstances can the Financial Emergency be proclaimed by the President of India? What consequences follow when such a declaration remains in force? -
2017 · Q11 · GS II · 15 marks
Explain the salient features of the constitution(One Hundred and First Amendment) Act, 2016. Do you think it is efficacious enough 'to remove cascading effect of taxes and provide for common national market for goods and services'? (250 words). -
2016 · Q6 · GS II · 12 marks
What was held in the Coelho case? In this context, can you say that judicial review is of key importance amongst the basic features of the Constitution? -
2015 · Q6 · GS II · 12 marks
What are the major changes brought in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1966 through the recent ordinance promulgated by the President? How far will it improve India's dispute resolution mechanism? Discuss. -
2015 · Q7 · GS II · 12 marks
Does the right to clean environment entail legal regulation on burning crackers during Diwali? Discus in the light of Article 21 of Indian Constitution and judgements of the apex in this regard.
More from this paper
Q1 · UPSC Mains 2016 · GS II · 12 marks
Discuss the essentials of the 69th Constitutional Amendment Act and anomalies, if any, that have led to recent reported conflicts between the elected representatives and the institution of the Lieutenant Governor in the administration of Delhi. Do you think that this will give rise to a new trend in the functioning of the Indian federal politics?
Federal Structure and Devolution
The 69th Amendment inserted Article 239AA and created Delhi’s Assembly and Council of Ministers, excluding police, public order and land. Ministers aid and advise the Lieutenant Governor, but a difference may be sent to the President, which became the legal hook for file delays. The GNCTD Act, 1991, and control over services widened the gap between the voters’ government and the Administrator. The clash is structural to a national-capital Union Territory, not a new model for the States. Court cases and the 2021 Amendment show competitive, litigated federalism in Delhi rather than a nationwide federal mutation.
Q3 · UPSC Mains 2016 · GS II · 12 marks
"The Indian party system is passing through a phase of transition which looks to be full of contradictions and paradoxes." Discuss.
Governance and Policy
The party system moved from Congress dominance to coalitions and then to a new national majority, without erasing State-level regional parties. Presidential campaign style collides with parliamentary collective responsibility. The Tenth and 91st Amendments curb defection and cabinet size but strengthen high commands. National and state party labels under the Symbols Order do not match the mixed federal reality. The transition is therefore full of legal and political paradoxes, not a clean model change.
Q4 · UPSC Mains 2016 · GS II · 12 marks
Exercise of CAG's powers in relation to the accounts of the Union and the States is derived from Article 149 of the Indian Constitution. Discuss whether audit of the Government's policy implementation could amount to overstepping its own (CAG) jurisdiction.
Constitutional Bodies
Article 149 and the DPC Act, 1971, give the CAG power over Union and State accounts, including value-for-money examination. Policy choice belongs to the executive and the legislature; implementation of that policy with public funds is auditable. 2G, coal and CWG-type reports sit on process and loss, not on a right to rewrite the manifesto. Overstepping would be a binding policy direction or an audit with no accounts trail. PAC scrutiny, not a narrower reading of Article 149, is the proper check on a bold CAG report.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.