Srinagar, Oct. 18 -- A day after Ladakh bodies rejected the draft proposed by the Union ministry of home affairs (MHA), Ladakh chief secretary Ashish Kundra on Saturday termed it "unfortunate" that the Ladakh leadership rejected the draft proposal within two hours. The Leh Apex Body (LAB) and Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA) have held several rounds of talks with the MHA. The Ladakh leadership has been demanding statehood and Sixth Schedule, but talks have remained inconclusive. "During negotiations on the Sixth Schedule, it was explained that this provision applies to states, particularly in the northeastern region, where a minority tribe needs protection against any discriminatory action by a majority tribe. Therefore, the Sixth Schedule has a different geographical, historical and cultural context, and its relevance in the case of Ladakh is not particularly significant in the same way," Kundra said at a press conference in Leh. He said that when the meeting was held on October 15, the people of Ladakh wanted to see the documents and understand what kind of structure would be created. "After considerable deliberation, the MHA provided a 32-page document to the leaders of Ladakh on the morning of October 16. I want to make one thing very clear through you: the constitutional amendment and the kind of democratic structure the people of Ladakh want will emerge through discussion and deliberation. We do not want to submit a draft unilaterally. We want a framework that has the broad agreement of Ladakh's leadership. Naturally, nobody can read a 32-page document immediately and provide a response. We suggested that the leaders study it and that another meeting be convened after a week or 10 to 15 days," he said. Kundra said the Ladakh leadership suggested holding the meeting the very next day. "We conveyed to them (Ladakh leaders) to take some time to discuss the document in detail among themselves and consult the people they represent. They should find out what the people of Ladakh want. We had provided them with the draft. The expectation was that they would study it. Unfortunately, that is not what happened," Kundra said. He said that a separate three-page document was also provided to them. "It was not a draft document but an MoU setting out the matters on which the negotiating sides were agreeing. The MoU contained several provisions." Kundra said that anything like Article 370 has already been abrogated, so there is no point in bringing that provision back in this manner. "Unfortunately, I was deeply disturbed by what happened. I was surprised to see that within two hours of receiving the papers, they were 'rubbished'. It was said that nothing had been offered and that there were no provisions for constitutional safeguards," Kundra said....