Article 370 UPSC Notes: Prelims Facts, Mains PYQ & Key Cases

Last updated: October 2026

Where Article 370 Fits in the Syllabus

GS Paper II (Polity): federalism and asymmetric federalism, Part XXI (temporary, transitional and special provisions), Presidential orders, judicial review, Union Territories.
GS Paper I (Modern History): integration of princely states, the Instrument of Accession.
Prelims: dates, Articles 370, 35A and 367, the J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019, and case names. Coaching resources commonly pair these with the 2023 verdict (SuperKalam).

These notes are a revision aid. For full explanations, use the linked pages, such as Article 370 text and clauses and the FAQs.

Prelims Quick Facts

Article 370: facts to remember
Item	Fact	Source
Location in Constitution	Part XXI; marginal note "Temporary provisions with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir"	constitutionofindia.net
Adopted	17 October 1949 by the Constituent Assembly of India (moved as draft Article 306A by N. Gopalaswamy Ayyangar)	constitutionofindia.net; Ayyangar profile
Instrument of Accession	Signed by Maharaja Hari Singh on 26 October 1947	SCO
First order under Article 370	Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 1950, issued 26 January 1950	SCO
Article 35A	Introduced by the Presidential Order of 14 May 1954, which implemented the Delhi Agreement (1952)	SCO
J&K Constituent Assembly	Sought in a National Conference resolution of 27 October 1950; 75 members elected in 1951; first sat 31 October 1951 in Srinagar; sat for 56 days over five years	SCO
J&K Constitution	Adopted 17 November 1956; in force 26 January 1957. Declared J&K "is and shall be an integral part of the Union of India"	SCO
Constituent Assembly dissolved	25 January 1957, without recommending that Article 370 cease to operate	SCO
2019 orders	C.O. 272 (5 August 2019) and C.O. 273 (6 August 2019)	SCO
Reorganisation Act	Act 34 of 2019; Presidential assent 9 August 2019; Union Territories formed 31 October 2019	India Code
2023 verdict	In Re: Article 370 of the Constitution, 2023 INSC 1058, decided 11 December 2023 by a five-judge bench	SCO; bench

Article 370 still appears in the text of the Constitution. After C.O. 272 and C.O. 273 it was rendered inoperative except for clause (1) as modified. It was not deleted by a constitutional amendment (see Constitutional Orders).

Compact Timeline (1947–2026)

Accession 26 Oct 1947

Maharaja Hari Singh signs the Instrument of Accession (details).

Article 370 adopted 17 Oct 1949

Adopted as draft Article 306A, then in force with the Constitution on 26 January 1950.

Delhi Agreement and 1954 Order 1952–1954

The 1954 Presidential Order extends more of the Constitution and inserts Article 35A (Delhi Agreement).

J&K Constitution 1956–1957

Adopted 17 November 1956; in force 26 January 1957; the Constituent Assembly dissolves 25 January 1957.

Abrogation 5–9 Aug 2019

C.O. 272 and C.O. 273; Reorganisation Act passed by the Rajya Sabha (5 Aug) and the Lok Sabha (6 Aug), and assented to (9 Aug) (sequence).

Union Territories formed 31 Oct 2019

J&K (with legislature) and Ladakh (without legislature).

Delimitation final order 5 May 2022

Assembly seats rise from 83 to 90 (details below).

Supreme Court verdict 11 Dec 2023

Hearings ran from 2 August to 5 September 2023 (16 days). Review petitions were dismissed on 1 May 2024 (review).

Elected government 16 Oct 2024

Omar Abdullah sworn in as Chief Minister of the Union Territory (2024 elections).

Statehood still pending 2025–2026

Supreme Court pleas for time-bound restoration were heard on 14 August and 10 October 2025, and the Assembly passed a full statehood resolution on 28 September 2026 (statehood tracker).

Landmark Cases

Supreme Court cases on Article 370 (summaries per Supreme Court Observer unless noted)
Case (year)	Point to remember
Prem Nath Kaul v Union of India (1959)	Presidential orders needed the Constituent Assembly's approval under Article 370(3).
Sampat Prakash v State of J&K (1968)	Article 370 continued to operate after the J&K Constituent Assembly was dissolved.
Maqbool Damnoo v State of J&K (1972)	Upheld an order replacing "Sadar-i-Riyasat" with "Governor".
State Bank of India v Santosh Gupta (2016)	Held that Article 370 had not ceased to operate, since the Constituent Assembly never recommended its cessation.
Shah Faesal v Union of India (2020)	A five-judge bench declined to refer the Article 370 challenge to a larger bench.
Haji Abdul Gani Khan v Union of India (2023 INSC 124, 13 Feb 2023)	Upheld the constitution of the Delimitation Commission under the Delimitation Act, 2002 as amended by the Reorganisation Act. It did not rule on the validity of the 2019 changes to Article 370 (Deccan Herald; The Leaflet).
In Re: Article 370 of the Constitution (2023 INSC 1058, 11 Dec 2023)	Upheld the abrogation. See holdings.

Source for the first five rows: Supreme Court Observer timeline. For a fuller discussion, see Supreme Court & Judicial Review.

2019: How Article 370 Was Made Inoperative

C.O. 272 (5 August 2019): applied the whole Constitution of India to J&K through Article 370(1)(d). Paragraph 2 of the order used Article 367 to read "Constituent Assembly" in Article 370(3) as "Legislative Assembly" (SCO; Article 367 modification).
Parliamentary resolution and C.O. 273 (6 August 2019): declared under Article 370(3) that the Article's clauses would cease to operate, except clause (1) as modified.
J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019: split the State into two Union Territories. Section 3 formed Ladakh "without Legislature" (India Code; Act explained).

2023 Verdict: Holdings to Remember

Upheld: C.O. 273 and the abrogation of Article 370, and the application of the whole Constitution through Article 370(1)(d) (SCO).
Struck down: paragraph 2 of C.O. 272, the use of Article 367 to substitute "Legislative Assembly" for "Constituent Assembly" (SCO). Do not write that the Court accepted the Article 367 route.
Not decided: whether converting the State into a Union Territory was valid, given the Solicitor General's statement that statehood would be restored. The creation of the Union Territory of Ladakh was upheld (IANS).
Directions: Assembly elections by 30 September 2024. Statehood to be restored "at the earliest and as soon as possible", with no deadline (IANS).

More detail: Core Holdings and Supreme Court Case.

Post-2019 Facts

Delimitation (final order 5 May 2022, chaired by Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai): Assembly seats went from 83 to 90, with Jammu 43 (from 37) and Kashmir 47 (from 46). Twenty-four seats for Pakistan-occupied areas remain vacant. Seven seats are reserved for Scheduled Castes and nine for Scheduled Tribes (six in Jammu, three in Kashmir), the first ST reservation in J&K's Assembly. A parliamentary constituency now combines Anantnag with Rajouri and Poonch (The Week; Delimitation outcomes).
Nominated members: The Lieutenant Governor may nominate up to five members. These are two women if women are not adequately represented (under the original Act), plus, after the J&K Reorganisation (Amendment) Act, 2023, two members of the Kashmiri migrant community (one a woman) and one person displaced from Pakistan-occupied J&K (PRS; The Week).
Statehood: not restored as of 17 October 2026 (tracker).
Ladakh: a Union Territory without a legislature. Its groups seek statehood and Sixth Schedule safeguards (Ladakh page).
Domicile: Article 35A ceased to apply in 2019, and a domicile regime replaced the Permanent Resident Certificate (PRC and domicile; 370 vs 35A).

Mains Previous-Year Question

To what extent is Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, bearing marginal note "Temporary provision with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir", temporary? Discuss the future prospects of this provision in the context of Indian polity.

UPSC Civil Services (Main) 2016, General Studies Paper II, 12.5 marks (SuperKalam PYQ archive; Edukemy). Check the wording against the official UPSC question paper before quoting it in an answer.

Answer Framework (Headings Only)

Introduction: placement in Part XXI and the "temporary" marginal note.
Arguments for "temporary": the text of the marginal note; clause (3) allowed the President to declare it inoperative on the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly.
Arguments for "permanent" in effect: the Constituent Assembly dissolved in 1957 without such a recommendation; Sampat Prakash (1968) and SBI v Santosh Gupta (2016).
Developments since the question was set: C.O. 272/273 (2019) and the 2023 verdict, which upheld the abrogation. Note that the Court rejected the Article 367 route (holdings).
Future prospects: statehood restoration, asymmetric federalism through Article 371-type provisions, and Ladakh's demands. Present each as an attributed position.
Conclusion: balanced and constitutional, citing the cases.

For related comparisons that examiners often expect, see Article 370 vs Article 371 series and Asymmetric Federalism.

Self-Check Questions

Each answer comes from the facts and sources above.

1. On which date did the Constituent Assembly of India adopt Article 370 (as draft Article 306A)?

17 October 1949.

2. Which Presidential Order introduced Article 35A?

The Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order of 14 May 1954.

3. When did the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir come into force?

26 January 1957 (adopted 17 November 1956).

4. Which case held that Article 370 continued after the J&K Constituent Assembly was dissolved?

Sampat Prakash v State of J&K (1968).

5. Which part of C.O. 272 did the Supreme Court hold invalid in 2023?

Paragraph 2, which used Article 367 to read "Constituent Assembly" as "Legislative Assembly" in Article 370(3).

6. After the 2022 delimitation, how many seats does the J&K Assembly have (excluding the vacant PoJK seats), and how many are reserved for Scheduled Tribes?

90 seats; 9 reserved for Scheduled Tribes (and 7 for Scheduled Castes).

7. Which Union Territory was created "without Legislature" by Section 3 of the 2019 Act?

Ladakh (Kargil and Leh districts).

8. Did the 2023 verdict set a deadline for restoring J&K's statehood?

No. It set a deadline of 30 September 2024 for Assembly elections, and recorded that statehood should be restored "at the earliest and as soon as possible".

Sources

Revision notes for study purposes. They are not legal advice and are not endorsed by UPSC. Always check against the official texts.