Srinagar, Sept. 29 -- Jammu and Kashmir legislative assembly on Monday passed a resolution seeking restoration of statehood amid protests and a walkout by BJP legislators. Asserting that statehood was the right of the J&K people and not a charity or favour from the Centre, chief minister Omar Abdullah highlighted governance challenges, stating that officials were not under his government's control and that even law and chief secretaries wrote to the speaker against the statehood resolution. "Two years have passed since elections. The Supreme Court has said in the Article 370 judgment that statehood be restored as soon as possible after elections. Which dictionary says 'as soon as possible' means two years?" he asked. On December 11, 2023, the Supreme Court upheld the abrogation of Article 370, which granted special status to the erstwhile state of J&K, while directing that assembly elections be held by September 2024 and statehood restored "at the earliest". The resolution was passed by voice vote after some NC and opposition members moved amendments seeking restoration of greater autonomy and Articles 370 and 35A. The amendments were withdrawn after Omar said they would give the BJP a pretext to oppose the resolution. Omar also questioned whether the Centre was linking restoration of statehood to an end to militancy."If you say the statehood will not be restored till militancy ends in J&K, then (it means) the decision on statehood will not be taken in New Delhi but in Islamabad because the Centre always says that militancy is promoted by Pakistan," he said. "Pakistan has supported militancy for 35 years. It was behind Pahalgam, Uri and Pulwama attacks. Are you leaving statehood decision to Pakistan?" he asked Highlighting governance challenges, Omar said even the law secretary and chief secretary had opposed the statehood resolution. He said the law department had told the speaker wrote to the speaker that the resolution should not be discussed as the matter was sub judice. "The chief secretary also wrote a letter. Would you ask them on whose directions these letters were written? I am the law minister and this opinion has reached you without me knowing," he said. "Imagine it happening in a state where the CM introduces a resolution and the law secretary gives an opinion against it. This can happen only in a UT," he said. Omar cited difficulties in regularising daily-wage employees, resolving reservation issues and exercising control over institutions and departments, including revenue officers, the cultural academy, SKIMS and universities. He also flagged the delay in appointing an advocate general. "Name any other state or a UT where an advocate general has not been appointed for two years. Despite sending a name, the proposal is still pending," he said. Referring to the cabinet sub-committee's report on reservation, Omar said the cabinet had approved it and sent it to the lieutenant governor, who forwarded it to the Centre. "After responding to the central government queries, there has been no forward movement," he said. He also said the chief minister had no role in universities where he was earlier ex-officio pro-chancellor. "Today, there is no role of the CM. LG is the chancellor and CM is put outside the decision-making process," he said. Omar added that even after two years of the elected government, the business rules had not been approved by the Centre. Amid sloganeering and protests in the well of the House, BJP legislators walked out as the resolution was put to vote. "We want to bring statehood, but the language used in this resolution is unacceptable. This is unconstitutional to talk about the so-called autonomy or pre-1953 scenario that has already been rejected by Parliament," leader of opposition Sunil Sharma said. Earlier, BJP legislators submitted a motion seeking the removal of speaker Abdul Rahim Rather. Rather said the motion would be listed for business and taken up after the mandatory 14-day notice period. The ruling failed to quell the uproar, with BJP members accusing the assembly of exceeding its constitutional jurisdiction by discussing resolutions concerning special status and greater autonomy....