Delimitation Bill 2026: Equal justice should be the real imperative

New Delhi: The Narendra Modi government does not act without intent. When the Lok Sabha chambers in the new Parliament building featured a seating capacity of 888, its intentions were already clear, though the Opposition remained uncertain about how it would ultimately be implemented. Even when it was decided in 2023 that women’s reservation would not be implemented immediately, questions persisted over whether it would be linked to the proposed increase in Lok Sabha seats. 

There was no real obstacle to implementing 33 per cent reservation for women within the existing 543 seats in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. In fact, the Opposition itself had suggested this at the time. Today, it is likely to become clear whether the Opposition will support the immediate implementation of women’s reservation while opposing its linkage with delimitation. If such a situation arises, passing the constitutional amendment could become difficult, potentially putting the government in a tight spot. In that scenario, the government could argue that the Opposition is responsible for stalling the immediate implementation of women’s reservation. 

The freezing of delimitation for 25 years in 1976, and again in 2001, was justified on the grounds of population control. This, in turn, implied that population control measures must be effectively implemented across all states. Otherwise, increasing seats based on population growth would amount to injustice to southern states. According to the 1951 Census, Lok Sabha representation stood at one member for every 7.38 lakh people on average. By 1971, this had shifted to one representative for every 10.58 lakh people. 

Based on the 2011 Census, a calculation of one member per 10 lakh people would require at least 1,211 Lok Sabha seats. If current population estimates are taken into account, this figure could exceed 1,400 seats. 

When viewed through the lens of state-wise population, the picture changes significantly. Those advocating an increase in seats for northern states argue that Kerala currently has the highest level of `over representation' in the Lok Sabha, with other southern states also falling into this category. In contrast, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Gujarat are viewed as having `insufficient representation.' 

Although women’s reservation is, for the time being, being used as a façade, the broader objective of the government is seen as ensuring adequate representation for northern states. If this is implemented through seat expansion based on population, it could significantly alter the balance of political influence, including its impact on legislation. 

In this context, the concerns raised by southern states appear entirely valid. The concern voiced five decades ago, that delimitation should not become an injustice to states that successfully implemented population control measures, still remains relevant today. At the same time, the argument that proportional representation based on population is the only viable approach in the Lok Sabha, along with the question of how representation can otherwise be ensured without increasing seats, are equally important too. 

A proposal suggesting a 50 per cent increase in seats in both the Lok Sabha and state assemblies across all states can be seen not as a concrete policy recommendation, but as an idea intended to spark a broader debate beyond the current discussion. It is clear that even if Lok Sabha seats are increased by 50 per cent, the issue of proportional representation faced by northern states, including Gujarat, would not be resolved. 

As of now, the proposed upper limit for the Lok Sabha is 850 seats. The responsibility of working out the detailed calculations to arrive at this figure lies with the Delimitation Commission. 

Delimitation a setback for Kerala?
Meanwhile, an increase in Lok Sabha seats from 543 to 850 could significantly reduce Kerala’s share in Parliament. If a uniform 50 per cent increase is applied across states, Kerala would gain only about 10 additional seats. In contrast, Uttar Pradesh could see its representation rise from 80 to around 120 seats, while Bihar may increase from 40 to over 60. As a result, Kerala’s share in the Lok Sabha could drop from 3.7 per cent to nearly 2.2 per cent, diminishing its overall influence in national politics. 

If delimitation is carried out strictly on the basis of population while retaining the current 543-seat structure, Kerala’s seat count could even fall below its present level. More broadly, southern states, despite contributing nearly 30 per cent of India’s GDP while accounting for only about 20 per cent of the population, could see their political influence shrink. It is in this context that states in south India, which have performed better in population control, are strongly opposing the proposed delimitation exercise. 

The inclusion of population as a criterion in determining states’ tax share, as recommended by the Finance Commission, has already dealt a significant blow to the state. It was only through the Revenue Deficit Grant provided by the Central government that the state has been able to maintain financial stability over the past six years. The state government continues to firmly demand a constitutional guarantee to protect the representation of states that have successfully controlled population growth.