The Supreme Court on Friday refrained from examining the legal challenges posed to the changes made in the constitutional status of Jammu and Kashmir, saying that the petitions filed on the 'serious issue' of abrogation of special provisions suffered from defects.

The apex court, which was dealing with the first petition, filed on August 6, a day after the decision to scrap Article 370 was announced, said all six petitions on the issue were filed with defects.

It pulled up advocate M.L. Sharma, the first petitioner, and said his petition had 'no meaning'.

Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi said he spent 30 minutes reading the petition but could not make out anything and also could not understand what was the prayer.

'What kind of petition is this? It could have been dismissed but there are five other pleas with the registry which are under defect,' the bench also comprising Justices S.A. Bobde and S.A. Nazeer said.

'You are not praying for setting aside the Presidential order. What is the prayer it is not clear. It can be dismissed on technical grounds. In a matter of this nature if this is the petition, there is no meaning,' the bench said.

The apex court asked the lawyers to cure defects in their six petitions on Article 370 and adjourned the hearing.

'The petitioner, who is appearing in person prays for leave to amend the writ petition. The leave as prayed for is granted. The matter be listed along with other connected matters, some of which are lying with defects.... The Registry is directed to place the matter before the Chief Justice on the administrative side no sooner the defects are removed,' the bench said in the order.

The bench also noted that it was hearing the petition on Article 370 by breaking the combination of judges which was hearing the sensitive Ayodhya matter.

During the hearing, advocate Shakil Sabeer said he was a resident of Jammu and Kashmir and had filed the petition against the scrapping of Article 370 and the creation of Union territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh.

He said he had cured the defects but the petition was not listed.

The bench asked the registry and found that the defects were cured only on Wednesday evening and Thursday was a holiday.

'Why did you file a defective petition in a matter of this importance,' an anguished bench asked the lawyer. 'You file a defective petition and trouble my officers,' the CJI said.