Parliament is preparing to vote on the Delimitation Bill, with a debate in full swing over whether it would tilt the balance of political power away from India’s southern states.
But what really is delimitation, and why are southern states fighting it?
Delimitation, in simple terms, is readjusting the borders of voting areas to ensure that each representative speaks for roughly the same number of people. As populations shift, grow, or shrink, constituency maps need to be updated so that political representation stays proportional. Demlimitation redraws the boundaries of Assembly constituencies to reflect the population numbers in Parliament.
The boundaries of India’s Lok Sabha constituencies were last redrawn using data from the 2001 Census. But the number of seats allocated to each state has been frozen at an even older baseline, the 1971 population figures, for more than five decades.
The 1976 freeze
The Constitution originally required that constituencies be redrawn after every census. But in 1976, through the 42nd Amendment, the government froze seat allocation at 1971 levels. The main reason was straightforward – states that had successfully implemented population control programmes should not be “punished” for doing so.
Since the population number impacts the reallocation of seats in Parliament, if a state effectively brought down its population growth, it would have fewer seats. That results in fewer votes in comparison to the states that grew over time and did not bring down their population count.
Such states – which, according to data, are mostly from the northern and central region of India – will have more seats, more votes and more political power, while states that successfully lowered their birth rates would lose representation.
The 84th Constitutional Amendment in 2001 extended the freeze until the first census after 2026, to motivate governments to pursue population stabilisation.
What the numbers look like
If Parliament were to move away from the 1971 baseline and use 2011 Census data instead, the effects would be stark.
Based on the 1971 census, Uttar Pradesh had 80 seats. The 2011 estimated data would increase their seats to 89. Similarly, in Rajasthan, the projected seat count after delimitation would be 30 from 25.
For states like Tamil Nadu and Kerala that represent a smaller percentage of the total population, it would go down significantly. According to the 2011 Census, Tamil Nadu would lose seven seats – from 39 to 32 – and Kerala would lose five – from 20 to 15.
For southern states, this is not an abstraction. It is a direct reduction in their share of parliamentary voice, and they argue it amounts to a structural penalty for having succeeded at precisely the policy the Centre once championed.
How is Women’s Reservation Bill affecting delimitation?
The 106th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2023, known as the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam, reserved one-third of Lok Sabha and state Assembly seats for women. The catch was that it could only come into force after the next census and a fresh delimitation exercise.
However, the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill eliminates the above requirement and allows Parliament to pass a Bill determining when delimitation would take place and which census would be used. If the government implements the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam (2023), of the women’s reservation within the current 543 seats, roughly 181 male MPs would have to give up their seats. It would potentially create a major internal resistance within every political party.
What the 2026 Bill proposes
The original Women’s Reservation Act, 2023, said the quota would only start after the next census. The Delimitation Bill, 2026, introduced in Parliament on April 16, removes that wait time and allows the delimitation to be based on the already published data, implying the use of the 2011 census.
Currently, the Lok Sabha has 543 members, with 524 members from states and 19 members from Union Territories (UTs). The 2026 Bill proposes an increase in the maximum strength of the Lok Sabha from 543 to 850, with 815 seats from states and 35 seats from UTs.
The Bill empowers the central government to create a Delimitation Commission comprising a chairperson, who is or has been a Supreme Court judge, the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) or an Election Commissioner appointed by the CEC, and the State Election Commissioner of the respective states. The central government will have the power to appoint the chairperson.
A different method more beneficial
According to political science professor Eashwaraiah, although beneficial, the delimitation process should go about through another methodology.
Speaking to Siasat.com, Prof Eashwaraiah said, “The result is permanent. It should have been a discussion first. If properly discussed, all parties involved would get an alternative. The opinion of the Opposition was not taken before proposing the Bill.”
He said that instead of using the fiscal population, another methodology “which will not degrade the southern states” should be taken. “A methodology should be used that is equal for all states. That will be justice.”
In the United States, for example, whether the state is small or big, the representatives from a state are only two, Prof Eashwaraiah explained. “The same should be applied to India as well. There should be an equal increase in seats.”
On the Women’s Reservation Act, the professor said that the Centre’s decision to propose such a Bill at the same time was to balance the opinions. “Any party will do that.”
Hyderabad-based advocate Lubna Sarwath called the Delimitation Bill “undemocratic and a conspiracy” where there is an increase in seats only in the Lok Sabha and not in the Rajya Sabha.
“The point here is, why did they make a sudden U-turn on the Women’s Reservation Bill from 2023? They didn’t approve the delimitation of the census then? What is the rush to pass the delimitation now?” Sarwath questioned.
“They are making a big mistake by doing this. It is just a diversion,” she added.
Follow on Twitter | Posted by Khadija Irfan Rahim | 
