Judicial Review of Delimitation
The Supreme Court has affirmed its authority to intervene if the delimitation process is "manifestly arbitrary and irreconcilable to constitutional values." This ruling ensures the preservation of the constitutional framework in electoral matters.
Context and Background
- The court addressed a plea from the K. Purushottam Reddy case concerning delimitation and seat adjustment in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana.
- The plea argued that delimitation in Jammu and Kashmir in 2022 was discriminatory against these states.
Constitutional Provisions
- Articles 82 and 170 stipulate that no readjustment of seats can occur until the census data post-2026 is published.
- Article 14 ensures equality, preventing isolated deviations in delimitation for specific states.
Upcoming Legislative Changes
The Parliament is set to debate the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill and the Delimitation Bill, which propose expanding the Lok Sabha to 850 seats and using census data for seat allocation.
Concerns and Government Position
- Southern States fear gerrymandering due to compliant population control measures.
- The government assures equitable seat distribution.
Judicial Precedents
- The court's 1975 ruling highlighted Parliament's role in ensuring free and fair elections, including delimitation, under Articles 327 and 328.
- Article 329 limits court interference in electoral matters but allows judicial review if constitutional values are breached.
Recent Court Decision
- The 2024 Kishorchandra Chhanganlal Rathod case reaffirmed judicial intervention if delimitation is arbitrary.
- The court emphasized checking delimitation orders against constitutional standards.
