BRS slams Revanth Reddy on ‘hybrid delimitation’ proposal

Hyderabad: Telangana chief minister A Revanth Reddy’s suggestion of hybrid delimitation has led to a political controversy, with BRS questioning the attempt to trade democracy for Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP).

In an aggressive remark directed at the CM, BRS leader Dasoju Sravan accused Revanth Reddy of trying to link parliamentary representation to economic performance rather than the population, adding it is “unconstitutional and absurd.”

The Congress leader asked Revanth Reddy if the proposal has the backing of the Congress Working Committee (CWC), stating that the move is an “illogical stunt”.

“Why should the proposal first not get approval of your party’s highest policy making body, CW Committee? Only after getting their approval, make a public statement,” Sravan told Reddy.

“Mapping seats to money instead of people is unconstitutional and absurd,” he said, accusing the chief minister of indulging in “senseless sensationalism” and attempting to convert India’s “people-centric democracy into capital-centric elitism”, thereby demeaning the spirit of the Constitution.

‘Hybrid delimitation’ pitch

Revanth Reddy proposed a hybrid delimitation model, where the proposed increase in Lok Sabha seats would be divided between population-based allocation and economic contribution measured through Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP).

Reddy has argued that relying solely on population could disadvantage southern states like Telangana, which have effectively controlled population growth while contributing significantly to the economy.

The issue forms part of a broader national debate expected ahead of the next delimitation exercise, which could increase the number of Lok Sabha seats.

The Union government has proposed increasing the strength of the Lok Sabha from 543 to 850 members through The Constitution (One Hundred and Thirty First Amendment) Bill, 2026, to be taken up during a special session of Parliament on April 16 and 17.

Southern states have raised concerns that a purely population-based approach may shift political power towards northern states with higher population growth.