Dhavan : A full, frank, and complete disclosure to the parliament and the people was necessary. The entire exercise of president's rule needs to be examined.
Dhavan: In Nagaraj, your lordships laid down conditionalities for exercise of 356. All the documents must be made publically available and placed before parliament. In this case, even the Governor's report wasn't placed before Parliament.
Dhavan: One of my arguments, whether it is done by transformational morality because of the antecedents or whether it is done by basic structure of which transformational morality is a part-
Dhavan: 370 to that extent is a part of the basic structure - as a substitute for the merger agreement, as an interpretation
Dhavan: 370 is the repository of merger agreement read with the IoA.
Dhavan: There was no merger agreement. So either we continue sovereignty as said in Premnath Kaul or we say that this is the essential step by which internal sovereignty and internal arrangements are worked out.
Dhavan: It says that it must be done by the government of J&K. In CO 272 says "with the council of ministers". Can you do it how it was done by introducing it by Amit Shah? That we're doing it?
Dhavan: While president's rule was in operation, you couldn't use Art 3 because you can't substitute one legislature for another. And you can't do away with 370 because mandatory provisions of Constitution do not say that parliament can do this and the president can do this.
Dhavan: And it cannot be done in President's rule because it states that state government is required.
Dhavan: 370 is far from a relic...this is part and parcel of the multi symmetrical federalism that exists.
Dhavan: You can't say that we wiped out the constitution, we wiped out all treaties so that 370 is gone. Amend it, go through that process, but mandatory provisions which survive 370(1) are violated.
Dhavan: The reason why I said that 370 couldn't be tinkered with during president's rule is because there is a mandatory requirement as it was in Art 3.