A five-judge Constitution bench presided by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud took up the batch of petitions to issue directions for completing the procedural formalities before the start of actual hearing.
The court also directed deletion of the name of yet another petitioner Hindal Haidar Tyabji after it was informed that he had died.
The bench said hearing of the petitions “shall commence on August 2 at 10.30 am and shall thereafter continue day to day except on miscellaneous days (when SC hears miscellaneous matters), namely Mondays and Fridays”.
During the hearing, some of the petitioners requested that they should be allowed to file additional affidavits.
Justice S K Kaul pointed out that the matter was heard substantively in the past, before it was referred to the present bench, and wondered what the need is to file further additional affidavits.
The petitioners then referred to the Centre’s additional affidavit filed on Monday. In the affidavit, the Centre termed the changes made to Article 370 in August 2019 as “historic” and said it has “brought unprecedented development, progress, security and stability to the region, which was often missing during the old Article 370 regime”.
This was “testament to the fact that Parliamentary wisdom…” was “exercised prudently”, it stated.
Senior advocate Dushyant Dave urged the court not to take the affidavit on record.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted, “Our affidavit only reflects the post-August 5 position, to which nobody would be required to reply”.
The CJI then said that the affidavit “really has no bearing on the Constitutional question”.
Mehta said it can come on record and sought to assure the court that it will not be relied upon for deciding the question of constitutionality.
The bench, also comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, S K Kaul, B R Gavai and Surya Kant, accordingly recorded in its order that the “Solicitor General has informed that though the Union of India has filed an additional affidavit, setting out the Union government’s perspective with regard to post-notification developments, the contents of the affidavit have no bearing on constitutional issues raised in petitions and shall hence not to be relied upon for that purpose”.
One of the petitions in the matter was filed by IAS officer Shah Faesal and activist Shehla Rashid. On their request, the bench allowed their names to be deleted from the list of petitioners.
Pursuant to a request by the counsel on both sides, the SC also modified the cause title of the case as “In Re: Article 370 of the Constitution”. It earlier was titled “Shah Faesal and Ors Vs Union of India and Ors”.
The court directed the parties to submit written submissions on or before July 27.
The court also directed deletion of the name of yet another petitioner Hindal Haidar Tyabji after it was informed that he had died.
Senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy urged the court to issue notice on a fresh petition but Mehta pointed out that there is a judicial order passed, stating that the SC Registry will not entertain any other writ petitions in the matter. He said entertaining one more petition would encourage many others to approach the court and there will be no end to the petitions.
Mehta also said Guruswamy should accordingly file an intervention application.
The bench then told Guruswamy that it will treat the plea as an intervention application.
Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan said out of 23 petitions, eight are prior in time and challenged Article 35A of the Constitution. He said these can await the outcome of the Article 370 petitions and would need to be heard only if the latter petitions succeed.
