Further, the Court highlighted Article 4 (2) which clarifies that no law made by Article 3 would be considered an amendment to the Constitution for the purposes of Article 368.
Thus, even if laws made by parliament, creating a body of legislature for Union territories of Puducherry and J&K has the effect of amending certain parts of the Constitution, it would not be considered an amendment to the Constitution for purposes of Article 368.
The top court also rejected the argument of the petitioners regarding violation of provisions contained in Article 170 (3), while clarifying that it does not deal with the legislatures of UTs at all.
“Articles 239A and 239AA which are included in Part VIII of the Constitution are the Articles that deal with the creation of a body to function as legislature and Council of Ministers for certain Union Territories.“
Source: Barandbench
