Delimitation Dilemma: Balancing Constitutional Text with Political Promises
The Union government appears keen to proceed with a contentious delimitation exercise, though no official announcement has been made. In April, it introduced the 131st Constitutional Amendment Bill and the Delimitation Bill, proposing to increase Lok Sabha strength to 850 seats, allocate seats among states based on the 2011 Census, and reserve one-third of seats for women. However, the text of these bills conflicted with oral assurances by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah that existing state-wise seat proportions would not be altered. This contradiction prevented consensus, and the Amendment Bill was defeated in the Lok Sabha; the Delimitation Bill was not put to vote.
The core issue lies in Articles 81 and 82 of the Constitution, which guarantee each state's current share of Lok Sabha seats based on the 1971 Census. This guarantee expires after the first Census post-2026. The government's bills sought to use the 'latest Census' (2011) for allocation, which would disturb the existing proportions. To fulfill its verbal promise, the government must extend the freeze on proportional representation, currently ending in 2026, to a future date—say, 2051. Alternatively, it could retain the 1971 Census reference for state shares while updating the basis for constituency delimitation from the 2001 Census to the 2011 Census. Such a move would preserve state proportions while allowing for redrawing of constituency boundaries.
As Parliament reconvenes, the challenge is to amend the constitutional text to reflect the government's assurances. Any solution must navigate the complex framework of census references and ensure fair representation without altering the relative strength of states. The outcome will have significant implications for India's democratic structure and federal balance.
