‘No statehood or legislature, but sui generis model; proposed framework requires constitutional amendment’
Srinagar, Sep 10: The Ladakh administration on Thursday said the proposed governance model in the Union Territory would neither be a state nor a Union Territory with a legislature, but some other body vested with powers.
Speaking to media persons, as per news agency—Kashmir News Observer (KNO), Chief Secretary Ladakh Ashish Kundra said a sui generis model, which does not exist anywhere else in the country, will be carved out for Ladakh.
“It is not going to be a state, for sure. It is not a UT with legislature, but it is some other body which will have these powers,” he said, adding that its nomenclature was yet to be finalised and discussions were underway.
Kundra, who is also part of the sub‑committee constituted on Ladakh, said the Sixth Schedule had certain limitations in the context of the region.
“It was subsequently explained that this model has its limitations. Therefore, the Central Government is willing to go ahead and offer something more. That ‘more’ is coming through Article 371,” he said.
He added that the proposed framework would be provided to Ladakh through a constitutional amendment, which would require a two‑thirds majority in Parliament for approval, and stressed that political consensus across parties would be necessary.
During the sub‑committee meeting on Wednesday, Kundra said members of the LAB and KDA were asked a set of questions about the powers of the proposed UT‑level body and the LAHDC.
“There are certain questions regarding the relationship between the UT‑level body and the LAHDC – for instance, what powers will come under the jurisdiction of the LAHDCs and what powers will come under the UT‑level body,” he said.
He added that there was a discussion yesterday regarding the UT‑level body to be constituted under Article 371 of the Constitution.
“In the previous meeting, which was held on July 3, it was decided that a UT‑level body should be constituted under Article 371, and the discussion moved forward in the same direction,” he said, adding that there was consensus on direct elections for the UT‑level body.
“The issue that came up for discussion was whether there should be direct elections from constituencies or indirect elections through the LAHDC. The view of everyone from the Apex Body and the KDA was that there should be direct elections from constituencies, and there was consensus on this issue,” he said. (KNO)
