THE CONTEXT: Recently (Sept–Oct 2025) protests and clashes have brought statehood and Sixth Schedule inclusion back to the foreground. The violent protest also resulted into arrest of the main leader-Sonam Wangchuk.
Ladakh became the Union Territory (UT) of India on 31st October 2019 after the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 bifurcated the erstwhile state of Jammu & Kashmir into two UTs — J&K (with legislature) and Ladakh (without legislature). This marked a historic shift in its governance, administrative setup, and political representation.
WHAT ARE THE DEMANDS OF LADAKH?
1. Full statehood like any other state
2. Constitutional protection under 6th schedule
3. State Public service commission
4. Separate Lok Sabha seats for Leh and Kargil
5. Greater representation, development and employment
6. Protection of land, culture and ecology
Whether such demands are feasible or should they be fulfilled? Before we address these demands feasibility, let’s look at the existing administrative and political set for Ladakh.
ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE
| Status as a Union Territory without Legislature | • Article 239 of the Constitution applies to Ladakh. • It is administered by the President of India through a Lieutenant Governor (LG). • Unlike Delhi and Puducherry, Ladakh does not have a Legislative Assembly; thus, law-making powers lie with Parliament, and executive functions are exercised by the LG. |
| Lieutenant Governor (LG) | • Appointed by the President under Article 239. • Functions as the administrative head and represents the Union Government. • Assisted by advisors appointed by the Centre (often senior IAS officers). • Exercises powers over subjects in the State List and Concurrent List, except where the President directs otherwise. |
| Divisional & District Administration | Ladakh comprises two districts: • Leh District (majority Buddhist population) • Kargil District (majority Shia Muslim population) Key features: • Each district is headed by a Deputy Commissioner / District Magistrate (IAS). • Administrative functions include revenue collection, law and order, implementation of Central and UT schemes, and coordination with local bodies. |
| Autonomous Hill Development Councils | • Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council (LAHDC) Act was enacted by J&K State Legislature in 1995. • After UT formation, both Leh and Kargil continue to have their respective councils: o LAHDC–Leh (est. 1995) o LAHDC–Kargil (est. 2003) |
| Composition & Powers: • 30 members (26 elected; 4 nominated by the LG). • Five-year term. • Powers over subjects like local taxation, land use, health, education, rural development, forests, culture, etc. • Councils prepare development plans and implement schemes in coordination with UT administration. • The Chief Executive Councillor (CEC) heads the Council. |
These councils reflect Ladakh’s demand for decentralized governance suited to its unique geographical, cultural, and ethnic context.
POLITICAL STRUCTURE
| Parliamentary Representation | • Ladakh has one seat in the Lok Sabha. • The Ladakh Parliamentary Constituency covers both Leh and Kargil districts. • There is no Rajya Sabha representation, as it is a UT without a legislature. |
| Panchayati Raj Institutions | • 73rd Constitutional Amendment applies. • Village panchayats and block development councils function under UT control, with elections held regularly. • However, their role is relatively limited compared to Hill Councils. |
POLITICAL PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS
-
- National parties like BJP and Congress are active.
- Local parties and religious organizations (e.g., Ladakh Buddhist Association, Islamia School Kargil) also influence politics.
- Post-2019, civil society groups (e.g., Leh Apex Body & Kargil Democratic Alliance) have demanded statehood for Ladakh and Sixth Schedule tribal protections.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
How a state can be given statehood? The Constitution gives Parliament the power to form new States or alter territories (Article 3). Article 3 does not require a constitutional amendment; it requires Parliamentary legislation, though political consensus is typically necessary.
What is the Sixth Schedule?
-
- 244(2)– Application of Sixth Schedule to tribal areas.
- Provides forAutonomous District Councils (ADCs) with legislative, administrative, and judicial powers in certain tribal areas.
- Currently applicable toAssam, Meghalaya, Mizoram, and Tripura.
Criteria for 6th Schedule
The Constitution does not lay out explicit criteria. Past extensions to NE states, three main factors are looked at:
| Factor | How it Applies to Ladakh |
|---|---|
| Demography – Predominantly Tribal | Sixth Schedule aims to protect distinct tribal culture. Ladakh is over 97% Scheduled Tribe (Ladakh’s ST population includes Buddhists, Shia Muslims, Balti, Brokpa, Changpa etc.). |
| Distinct Cultural / Ethnic / Linguistic Identity | Isolated, high-altitude region with Tibetan-Buddhist and Shia-Islamic heritage; own socio-religious institutions. |
| Vulnerability to Land Alienation / Economic Exploitation | Fear of influx of outsiders after abrogation of Art. 370; risk of loss of land and jobs. |
| Existing Institutions | Ladakh already has LAHDCs (Leh & Kargil) similar to ADCs; these could be upgraded under Sixth Schedule. |
PROS AND CONS OF STATEHOOD DEMAND
| PROS | CONS |
|---|---|
| • Democratic representation & local control • Protection of land, culture, ecology • Local development & employment • Political legitimacy & grievance redressal | • Strategic & security sensitivities • Fiscal & administrative viability • Internal heterogeneity: Leh vs Kargil • Political risk / centre–state friction |
| The justification is given on the basis of ignorance of Ladakh since 2019 and some border states enjoy statehood like Uttarakhand, Punjab, Sikkim, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Mizoram | Justification is given on the ground of population, geostrategic and security factors like LoC, lAC, Galwan valley, etc. There was recent stand-off with China in the region. |
THE SECURITY & BORDER FACTORS
-
- India–China Dispute: Line of Actual Control (LAC) not demarcated; standoffs at Galwan
- Siachen & Pakistan: Close to Saltoro Ridge; Pakistani claims over Gilgit-Baltistan.
- LoC: The military control line between India and Pakistan in the region
| Term | Meaning |
|---|---|
| LoC (Line of Control) | The military control line between India and Pakistan in the region. It was drawn after the 1971 war and the 1972 Simla Agreement. Not an internationally recognised boundary but a de-facto one. About 740 km long. |
| LAC (Line of Actual Control) | The military control line between India and China. Originated after the 1962 war, length about 3,488 km as per Indian estimate (China says 2,000 km). It runs through eastern Ladakh. |
THE DEVELOPMENTS SO FAR
1. As per the meeting minutes(119th)of NCST in September, 2019,
-
-
-
- Ministry of home affairs,
- Ministry of law and justice and
- Ministry of tribal affairs
-
-
2. The three ministries expressed support for 6th schedule and based on that NCST Report (Sept 2019)– Recommends Sixth Schedule for Ladakh citing its overwhelming tribal population and fragile ecology.
3. Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs (2021)– Noted local demand for Sixth Schedule status. citing its overwhelming tribal population and fragile ecology.
4. BJP in Ladakh elections, 2020, promised for 6th Schedule
It shows that granting 6th Schedule status may not be as challenging as granting the full statehood.
THE FEASIBLE OPTIONS TO ADDRESS LADAKH’S GRIEVANCES
| STAGES | STEPS TO BE TAKEN |
|---|---|
| Step1: | • Go for a dialogue for consensus building and normalising the situation in the region |
| Step2: | • Strengthen LAHDCs- the two Hill Councils with statutory legislative and financial powers • Special Category / Development package — a comprehensive, statutory development & employment package plus protected land-use laws and environmental regulations. • Create a Ladakh Public Service Commission and quota for local jobs |
| Step4: | • Grant the 6th Schedule status as already been recommended by the NCST in 2019 |
| Step5: | • Consider UT + Legislature if full statehood appears impractical but democratic voice is essential. |
| Step6: | • If the feasibility study shows economic and administrative viability and broad local consensus (both Leh & Kargil), Parliament may legislate statehood under Article 3 with explicit safeguards for land rights, minority protections, and security coordination mechanisms. |
THE RIDERS
1. Demands fulfilment not panacea for all problems: Merely granting any status doesn’t improve the governance standards as four states-Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Tripura have 6th Schedule status but their TDCs are necessarily effectively governed.
2. Strategic factor: Ladakh borders both China and Pakistan. Central control enables swift defence decisions, a concern noted in national security reviews.
3. Fiscal non-viability:A small population and low revenue base may strain state finances — a key factor the Balakrishnan Committee (2001) considered in UT–State transitions.
4. Leh–Kargil diversity:Risk of political imbalance requires careful institutional design.
5. Administrative overhead:Statehood entails setting up a full bureaucracy, legislature, PSC, judiciary, etc.
Nevertheless, development and governance demand true spirit of principle of subsidiarity as remarked by ARC-II. A legislature would restore participatory governance, aligning with Sarkaria’s emphasis on responsive federalism.
CONCLUSION
Granting statehood to Ladakh should not be immediate but conditional and staged. As B.R. Ambedkar noted, “Democracy is not merely a form of government; it is primarily a mode of associated living.” Granting Ladakh statehood must be conditional, consultative, and constitutionally designed — ensuring federal accommodation without compromising national security.
Spread the Word
