By Sakal Bhushan, Advocate
In what is being seen as a significant flashpoint in the evolving administrative framework of Jammu and Kashmir, the recent transfer of 48 Jammu and Kashmir Administrative Service (JKAS) officers by the Lieutenant Governor has sparked a heated political and constitutional debate.
Issued vide Government Order No. 421-JK(GAD) dated 1st April, 2025, and followed by additional transfer orders, the unilateral action by the Lieutenant Governor has been defended by Raj Bhavan as being within the bounds of the J&K Reorganization Act, 2019. However, this has been strongly contested by the elected government led by Chief Minister and the National Conference (NC), which claims the action violates both the spirit and letter of the law.
Reacting sharply, the Chief Minister convened an emergency meeting of the JKNC legislative party along with Congress and other allies. A resolution was passed calling the move “unconstitutional” and a “breach of democratic norms,” demanding that the mandate of the people be respected.
The situation has escalated further following fresh political resolutions passed after the conclusion of Operation Sindoor, adding fuel to the ongoing friction between the Lieutenant Governor and the Council of Ministers.
At the heart of the controversy lies the interpretation of Sections 32 and 53 of the J&K Reorganization Act, 2019. The provisions state that:
The Legislative Assembly of J&K has authority over State List subjects, excluding ‘Public Order’ and ‘Police’. Entry 41 of the State List, which pertains to ‘State public services’, thus falls within the legislative scope of the Assembly. The Lieutenant Governor is mandated to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers in matters where the Assembly has legislative competence. Only in specific matters – including ‘public order’, ‘police’, All India Services, and the Anti-Corruption Bureau – can the Lieutenant Governor exercise independent discretion.
This legal framework finds affirmation in the landmark 2023 Constitution Bench judgment in Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India, which held that the Lieutenant Governor must act on the advice of the elected government in matters within its legislative scope – particularly in relation to ‘services’. Though the Centre later amended the law in Delhi via the GNCTD (Amendment) Act, 2023, no such amendment has been made in the context of Jammu and Kashmir.
Therefore, in J&K, unlike Delhi post-2023, the Lieutenant Governor is still bound to act on the advice of the Council of Ministers for ‘services’ – including JKAS officers – unless those services are directly related to ‘police’ or ‘public order’.
Given the clear legal provisions and judicial pronouncements, the transfer of JKAS officers without the involvement of the elected government appears to be beyond the scope of the Lieutenant Governor’s constitutional authority.
While some of these officers may perform roles that touch upon public order, their service as a cadre does not fall into that exception. Hence, their transfers and postings must constitutionally flow from the aid and advice of the Chief Minister-led Council of Ministers.
This episode not only raises questions about administrative propriety but also sets the stage for a potential constitutional confrontation in the courts – and perhaps a broader discussion on the democratic structure in Union Territories with legislatures.
(Sakal Bhushan is an advocate who practices at the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court).