PrepLiberty.
Updated · Today
Polity & Governance July 03, 2026 7 min read Daily brief · #1 of 20

Customised model suitable for Ladakh will be adopted under Article 371, says Home Ministry draft

The Union Home Ministry released the draft minutes of a meeting agreed upon by the Centre and representatives of the Leh Apex Body (LAB) and Kargil Democrati...

GS Paper 2 (Indian Constitution Governance Centre-State Relations)

What Happened

  • The Union Home Ministry released the draft minutes of a meeting agreed upon by the Centre and representatives of the Leh Apex Body (LAB) and Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA) — the two major civil society coalitions representing Ladakh's Leh and Kargil districts.
  • The draft minutes formally record that a "customised model suitable for Ladakh" will be adopted under Article 371, creating a sui generis (unique/of its own kind) constitutional framework for the UT.
  • This is the first time the Centre has put in writing its agreement to extend Article 371-type protections to a Union Territory — a constitutional novelty, since Article 371 and its sub-articles (371A through 371J) have historically applied only to states, not UTs.
  • The agreed framework covers constitutional safeguards for land, employment, and cultural identity — the three core concerns of Ladakh's communities — along with the establishment of a UT-level elected legislative body.
  • The release of the draft minutes marks formal progress in a series of talks that began after Ladakh's communities demanded restoration of representative governance following the region's conversion to a legislature-less UT in 2019.

Static Topic Bridges

The Constitutional Architecture of Article 371 and its Sub-Articles

Article 371 of the Constitution falls within Part XXI, which contains "Temporary, Transitional and Special Provisions" (Articles 369 to 392). The provisions in this Part reflect India's approach to asymmetric federalism — the recognition that uniform constitutional arrangements cannot always accommodate the diverse historical, ethnic, geographic, and cultural realities of different regions. Over time, sub-articles 371A through 371J have been added by constitutional amendment to extend tailored protections to specific states.

  • Article 371 (original): Special responsibility for the Governors of Maharashtra and Gujarat for balanced regional development.
  • Article 371A (7th Amendment, 1963, then 13th Amendment, 1962): Nagaland — Parliament cannot legislate on Naga religious or social practices, customary law, ownership and transfer of land, or administration of civil and criminal justice per customary law, without the Nagaland Legislative Assembly's resolution. The Governor has special powers regarding law and order.
  • Article 371B (Assam): Special committee of hill area MLAs.
  • Article 371C (Manipur): Special committee of hill area MLAs; Governor has special responsibility for hill districts.
  • Article 371D & E (Andhra Pradesh and Telangana): Equitable opportunities and facilities in public employment and education; establishment of administrative tribunals.
  • Article 371F (Sikkim, 36th Amendment, 1975): Comprehensive constitutional arrangement post-merger — protects existing laws, rights of Sikkim's people, and ensures Sikkim's representation in Parliament.
  • Article 371G (Mizoram): Parliament cannot legislate on Mizo customary law and social practices, land ownership, or justice per customary law without the Mizoram Legislative Assembly's resolution.
  • Article 371H (Arunachal Pradesh): Governor has special responsibility for law and order.
  • Article 371I (Goa): Minimum strength of Goa Legislative Assembly fixed at 30 members.
  • Article 371J (Karnataka, 98th Amendment, 2012): Special development board for Hyderabad-Karnataka region; reservation in education and state government posts for persons from that region.

Connection to this news: The Centre's formulation of a "customised model" for Ladakh explicitly draws from Articles 371A, 371F, and 371G as the closest analogues — all three protect indigenous land rights, customary practices, and local identity for tribal or geographically distinct communities. Ladakh's model will need a new constitutional amendment (or creative application of existing provisions) since no sub-article of 371 currently covers a UT.

Constitutional Amendment Process — Adding a New Sub-Article

Extending Article 371-type protections to Ladakh as a UT would require either (a) a new sub-article (e.g., Article 371K for Ladakh) introduced via constitutional amendment under Article 368, or (b) a statutory-level protection through Parliament without amending the Constitution, which would offer lesser entrenched protection. A constitutional amendment under Article 368 requires a special majority of Parliament — a majority of the total membership of each House and a two-thirds majority of members present and voting.

  • Article 368: Amendment procedure — special majority in both Houses (no state ratification required for most amendments, though certain amendments affecting federal structure require ratification by at least half the state legislatures).
  • Constitutional amendments extending special provisions to states (e.g., Article 371J for Karnataka in 2012) have precedent — but none have been made for UTs.
  • A separate approach being considered is empowering the UT-level elected body through a law under Article 239A (which allows Parliament to create legislatures for UTs) or an amendment specific to Ladakh's circumstances.

Connection to this news: The draft minutes' reference to a "customised model under Article 371" sets up the legal pathway — but the precise constitutional mechanism (amendment vs. statute) will determine the depth and permanence of the protections.

Sixth Schedule vs. Article 371 — Two Paths for Tribal/Regional Protection

Ladakh's communities had initially sought inclusion under the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution, which provides for autonomous district councils (ADCs) for tribal areas in the Northeast. The Sixth Schedule (under Articles 244(2) and 275(1)) establishes ADCs with legislative, judicial, and executive powers over specified subjects (land management, forests, social customs, money-lending, etc.). However, the Centre has now pivoted to Article 371-style protections, which are applied at the state/UT level rather than at the district level.

  • Sixth Schedule applies to tribal areas of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, and Mizoram — all in the Northeast.
  • ADCs under the Sixth Schedule can make laws on land allotment, management of forests, regulation of shifting cultivation, establishment of village administration, and regulation of money-lending.
  • Article 371-type protections operate at the state or UT level and do not require a separate district-level institutional structure.
  • Ladakh's demand for Sixth Schedule inclusion was rejected by the Centre; the Article 371 framework is the alternative on offer.
  • The key difference: Sixth Schedule = district-level autonomy institutions; Article 371 = constitutional ring-fencing of specific subjects at state/UT level.

Connection to this news: The Home Ministry's draft minutes formalise the shift from Sixth Schedule discussions to Article 371 customisation as the operative constitutional framework.

Sui Generis Constitutional Models in India

India has created several sui generis (unique, of its own kind) constitutional arrangements for territories with special circumstances. Delhi (NCT) is governed by Article 239AA — inserted by the 69th Constitutional Amendment (1991) — which gives it a legislature and Council of Ministers but with limits on subjects (law, police, and land reserved for the Centre). Puducherry has a legislature under Article 239A. The proposed Ladakh model would create another unique arrangement — a UT with an elected body carrying powers of both executive and legislature, combined with Article 371-style subject-matter protections.

  • Article 239AA (Delhi): Legislature for Delhi with subjects limited by Constitutional provision; Centre retains law and order; LG's role subject to Supreme Court clarifications (NCT of Delhi v. Union of India, 2018 and 2023).
  • Article 239A (Puducherry): Parliament empowered to create a legislature for UTs by law.
  • Ladakh's proposed model: Elected body with executive, legislative, and financial powers; all bureaucrats (including Chief Secretary) under the elected head; Article 371-type subject protections on land, employment, and culture.

Connection to this news: The Home Ministry's draft is the first formal document laying out Ladakh's sui generis governance model — distinct from both the Delhi/Puducherry UT-with-legislature model and the state models covered by Articles 371A–371J.

Key Facts & Data

  • Ladakh became a UT: October 31, 2019 (J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019)
  • Two districts: Leh (predominantly Buddhist) and Kargil (predominantly Muslim)
  • LAB: Leh Apex Body — represents Leh district civil society
  • KDA: Kargil Democratic Alliance — represents Kargil district civil society
  • Article 371 sub-articles: 371A (Nagaland), 371B (Assam), 371C (Manipur), 371D/E (Andhra Pradesh/Telangana), 371F (Sikkim), 371G (Mizoram), 371H (Arunachal Pradesh), 371I (Goa), 371J (Karnataka) — 12 states covered in total
  • Models cited for Ladakh: Articles 371A (land and customary law protections), 371F (post-merger comprehensive arrangements), 371G (land and social practice protections)
  • Sixth Schedule: Not applicable to Ladakh — originally demanded but replaced by Article 371 approach
  • Article 368: Constitutional amendment procedure (special majority — majority of total membership + two-thirds of members present and voting in each House)
  • Article 239A: Allows Parliament to create legislatures for UTs by law
  • Article 239AA: Delhi's special constitutional arrangement (69th Amendment, 1991)
  • Revenue criterion: Centre's stated condition for eventual Ladakh statehood
  • Constitutional novelty: No sub-article of Article 371 currently applies to any UT — Ladakh's model would be the first
On this page
  1. What Happened
  2. Static Topic Bridges
  3. The Constitutional Architecture of Article 371 and its Sub-Articles
  4. Constitutional Amendment Process — Adding a New Sub-Article
  5. Sixth Schedule vs. Article 371 — Two Paths for Tribal/Regional Protection
  6. Sui Generis Constitutional Models in India
  7. Key Facts & Data
Display