Calling for dialogue and discussion over a recent proposal by the Union Home Ministry, Ladakh Chief Secretary Ashish Kundra on Saturday (October 17, 2026) said the Union government was committed to the process of shaping the constitutional structure to provide a customised sui generis model to meet the demands of the region.
Mr. Kundra’s assurances came a day after key civil society bodies, the Leh Apex Body (LAB) and the Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA), rejected the Ministry’s 32-page proposal, saying it was “a significant departure from the assurances and commitments made during previous meetings” by the Centre.
The Ministry’s document proposed a “two-stage approach involving a constitutional amendment and a subsequent regulation under Article 240 of the Constitution, with provisions envisaged for a directly elected Union Territory-level body and safeguards concerning land, natural resources, culture, and other issues raised by the representatives,” said Mr. Kundra. He underscored that meaningful negotiations require mutual trust and an open mind and patience.
Commenting on the ongoing dialogue between the Centre and local groups, the Chief Secretary said, “Ladakh political movement is for deepening democracy. This year tangible gains were made progressively in May, July, and September on demands of people like employment, land, religion, culture, environment, natural resources and how constitutional protection and safeguards could be put in place.”
He said the Centre was pushing a sui generis model to meet the demands of the local people under the special provision of “K” under Article 371. “Ladakh needs a creative solution, and Article 371 has enough flexibility to provide constitutional protection,” he said.
Besides, Mr. Kundra said, the Ministry had put forward several names for the proposed legislature, like U.T.-level frontier. “We sought the suggestions [from the LAB and KDA] too. The draft proposal needs dialogue and discussion. In coming months, we are hopeful to give it a formal shape,” said Mr. Kundra.
He expressed surprise over the document being dismissed outrightly “within just two hours of being received.” “Officials had spent three to four weeks preparing the proposal in good faith. The Home Ministry had shared a detailed document outlining a possible constitutional framework for Ladakh, following discussions with the region’s leaders on October 15,” he added.
Addressing the concerns raised by Ladakh’s civil society bodies, Mr. Kundra said the Ministry’s document was intended to facilitate further discussion and was not the outcome of a concluded legislative process.
“The proposed constitutional provisions and the subsequent regulatory framework would require detailed examination and deliberation before being finalised,” he added.
He said several institutional questions remained open for consideration and examination, including the nomenclature and composition of the proposed body, the method of election, representation of women and underrepresented communities, nominated and ex-officio members, the authority responsible for conducting elections, delimitation of constituencies, electoral rolls, tenure, and the relationship of the proposed body with existing institutions such as the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Councils, Panchayats, and municipalities.
Reaffirming the Centre’s commitment to dialogue, the Chief Secretary said, “The objective was to arrive at a balanced and workable framework that reflects the democratic aspirations of the people while ensuring institutional clarity and taking into account its distinctive geographical, cultural, and administrative circumstances through sustained dialogue and mutual understanding.”
He said these issues “could not be settled unilaterally and required broad-based consensus” among the leadership and stakeholders of Ladakh. “All stakeholders should approach the process constructively and expressed hope that the remaining issues would be resolved through continued consultation in the coming weeks and months,” said Mr. Kundra.
On the key demands of Statehood and inclusion in the Sixth Schedule, Mr. Kundra explained that these demands can me met only in a specific context. “The Sixth Schedule in vogue in the Northeastern States was put in place because a minority community needs safeguards against discrimination from the majority community. It has specific geographical and historical context,” he said.
On the demand of Statehood with legislature, Mr. Kundra said, “Ladakh as a U.T. depends 100% on the Centre for funding to meet salaries and pension of the employees. Like J&K and Delhi, which have separate public accounts, it has to generate its own revenue to give salaries”.