Delimitation in India aims to ensure fair representation in Parliament by adjusting constituency boundaries in line with population changes. (Express Photo by Arul Horizon)
As India stands on the brink of the “Second Republic”, the proposed delimitation has reignited the debate over the persistent paradox of the imbalance between demography and democracy. Despite its central role in the democratic theory of political equality, the process of delimitation often grapples with a lingering democratic paradox in large republics, which face the challenge of balancing conflicting territorial, demographic, ethnic, and factional political considerations.
Delimitation in India aims to ensure fair representation in Parliament by adjusting constituency boundaries in line with population changes. However, since 1976, the process has been frozen to avoid penalising states that have successfully controlled population growth, particularly in the south. As a result, states like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, with much larger populations, remain underrepresented compared to southern states like Tamil Nadu and Kerala, which have smaller populations but more parliamentary seats. This imbalance, referred to as malapportionment, has fuelled political tensions, with concerns that the upcoming delimitation exercise in 2029 will shift power toward the politically hegemonic North.
Story continues below this ad
The Indian Constitution mandates delimitation under Article 82, with an independent Delimitation Commission implementing it. Delimitation was conducted in 1952, 1962, and 1972, but was frozen in 1976 through the 42nd constitutional amendment and further postponed in 2001, extending the freeze until 2026. This delay has created a peculiar situation where states that have successfully controlled population growth may lose seats, while states with higher birth rates will gain more representation.
Opponents of the proposed delimitation argue that the South consistently surpasses the North across various indicators, such as per capita income, contributions to the central treasury, infrastructure, healthcare, and education. Furthermore, the South has higher urbanisation rates, lower infant mortality, and longer life expectancies. These disparities have led to claims that the South is subsidising the North, shouldering the burden of population growth, unemployment, poverty, inadequate infrastructure, and social underdevelopment. The concern is that without addressing these inequalities, delimitation could create distorted forms of intra-state inequalities in India. In this sense, if population growth in the North is not controlled or economic growth in the South matched, the delimitation process could produce a Red Queen effect.
Globally, different countries handle delimitation in various ways. For example, New Zealand and South Africa have clear constitutional provisions, while countries like India and Japan manage the process through ordinary legislation. The role of the courts in reviewing delimitation decisions has been an ongoing debate. In the landmark Meghraj Kothari v Delimitation Commission (1966) ruling, the Supreme Court upheld the finality of delimitation orders, arguing that judicial intervention could lead to indefinite election delays. More recently, the Court dismissed a petition challenging the Jammu & Kashmir delimitation, despite claims that it marginalised minority communities.
Story continues below this ad
Another pressing issue is the question of women’s representation. The Women’s Reservation Bill (2023), which aims to reserve one-third of seats in Parliament and state assemblies for women, is directly tied to delimitation. The bill will only take effect after the next delimitation exercise, delaying meaningful gender representation until at least 2029.
Delimitation also affects Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs), migrants, and other socio-religious minorities. According to Article 330(2) of the Constitution, reserved seats for SCs and STs should be proportional to their population in each state. However, since the seat allocation still relies on the 2001 Census, communities that have grown significantly since then remain underrepresented. For example, the Bihar Caste-Based Survey (2023) found that the SC population increased from 15.9 per cent to 19.65 per cent and the ST population from 1.2 per cent to 1.68 per cent. Yet, the seat allocation does not reflect these demographic shifts, leaving many SC/ST communities underrepresented.
Notably, a purely population-based seat allocation could drastically shift power toward the Hindi heartland, diminishing representation for southern states. Political scientist Alistair McMillan proposes expanding the Lok Sabha to accommodate demographic shifts without reducing representation for any state. Another proposal, by political scientist Milan Vaishnav, suggests reforming the Rajya Sabha to provide a counterbalance to northern dominance in the Lok Sabha.
most read
The process of delimitation often raises concerns about gerrymandering and the potential establishment of permanent electoral or political majorities. However, we prefer a more optimistic perspective on expanding the seats in Parliament through delimitation. We propose linking this process to the devolution of power to subnational units, which would enhance the representational and participatory aspects of democracy. Our focus should be on empowering women and lower castes. This approach aligns with Alexis de Tocqueville’s vision of the gradual development of “equality of conditions” in India.
Ultimately, the delimitation exercise in India is a complex interplay of demographic data, constitutional law, and political interests, all of which must be navigated carefully to ensure fair and equitable representation in the electoral system. For India to remain a vibrant and robust democracy, a broad consensus must be built across political parties — both national and regional — regarding the updating of the nation’s electoral infrastructure. The unprecedented political consensus surrounding the Constitution 127th Amendment Bill suggests that India is rapidly evolving into what Dutch political scientist Arend Lijphart described as a consociational or power-sharing democracy within a majoritarian polity. Delimitation has the potential to enhance the quality of India’s electoral democracy and rejuvenate its democratic longevity in the long term.
The writers teach at Centre of Electoral Studies, TISS, Mumbai. The views and opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect the official position of affiliated institutions
