Hari Sri Vidya Lalithambica is a 4th-year BA.LLB student at Padala Rama Reddi Law College, Hyderabad, Read More
ABSTRACT
Delimitation—the redrawing of parliamentary and assembly constituencies—is one of India’s most crucial but least understood democratic processes. Guided by constitutional provisions like Articles 81, 82, and 170, it ensures equal representation by aligning constituencies with population shifts. However, the upcoming post-2026 delimitation has triggered heated debates over fairness and federalism. Southern states, which have controlled population growth and contribute significantly to the national economy, fear losing political representation, while populous northern states are set to gain more seats. This article examines the legal framework, historical evolution, and political controversies around delimitation. It also explores key questions of equity: Should representation depend solely on population, or should states be rewarded for development and good governance? Offering a normative perspective, it proposes hybrid solutions to balance democracy, federal principles, and inclusive representation for all Indians.
KEYWORDS: Delimitation in India, North-South divide in Indian Politics, Delimitation Act 2002, Delimitation Controversy 2025, Economic contribution vs political representation in India, Articles 81 and 82 of the Indian ConstitutionINTRODUCTION
Once in a few decades, India carries out an important but rarely discussed democratic exercise known as Delimitation. In essence, it involves revising the boundaries of constituencies for the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies, using updated population figures. Its main goal is to ensure that each elected representative speaks for roughly the same number of people, so that every citizen’s vote carries equal weight—whether they live in a small town in Kerala or a bustling city in Uttar Pradesh.
The scope of delimitation is vast: it directly impacts how many seats each state gets in the Lok Sabha (India’s lower house of Parliament), and how those seats are distributed within the state. It also affects the representation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, and plays a big role in shaping the federal balance of power between different regions of the country.
The next delimitation, expected after the 2026 Census, has sparked serious debate. Southern states, which have succeeded in controlling population growth, worry about losing representation, while populous northern states may gain more seats.
In this article, we break down what delimitation is, why it matters, how it has evolved over time, the current political debates surrounding it, and what a fair way forward might look like for all Indians.
LEGAL FRAMEWORK OF REPRESENTATION AND DELIMITATION IN INDIA
The basis for delimitation in India lies mainly in Parts V and VI of the Constitution of India, which governs the Union and State Legislatures respectively
While Part V, particularly Chapter II, details the structure and powers of the Union Parliament, Patt VI, through Chapter III, provides similar provisions for State Legislatures.
- Article 81: Allows a maximum of 530 elected representatives from states and 20 from Union Territories, with seats allocated roughly in proportion to population.
- Article 82: Requires Parliament to re-adjust constituencies and seat allocations after each census, however, this exercise has been frozen until after the post-2026 census.
- Article 170: Deals with how seats in State Legislative Assemblies are allocated and how their boundaries are determined, ensuring that representation is proportionate to the population.
- Article 171: Specifies the composition and functioning of State Legislative Councils in states that follow a bicameral system.
These constitutional directives are implemented through specific legislation, most notably the Delimitation Act, which authorizes the Delimitation Commission to carry out this process.
Additionally, Part XVI of the Constitution safeguards the political participation of historically marginalized communities. Article 330 provides for the reservation of Lok Sabha seats for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) in proportion to their population, ensuring their adequate representation in the law-making process during delimitation and seat distribution.
Article 81: Composition of the House of the People
Article 81 determines how seats in the House of the People (Lok Sabha) are apportioned among the states. The distribution is population-based, ensuring that larger states receive proportionately more seats. However, there is also a ceiling on the total number of members to maintain a manageable size for effective functioning.
Article 82: Readjustment After each Census
Under Article 82, the boundaries of parliamentary and assembly constituencies are revised after each national Census. Parliament passes a Delimitation Act following every Census, after which an independent Delimitation Commission is established to conduct the exercise. This ensures that each constituency represents a roughly equal population, thus upholding the principle of electoral equality.
Article 170: Composition of Legislative Assemblies
This Article prescribes how seats in the State Legislative Assemblies are allocated among territorial constituencies. The allocation is population-driven, with the aim of maintaining uniform representation across different regions of the state. Like parliamentary constituencies, state constituencies are subject to periodic boundary adjustments after every Census.
Article 171: Composition of Legislative Councils
Article 171 sets out the structure of Legislative Councils in states with a bicameral legislature, such as Maharashtra, Karnataka, and Uttar Pradesh. It specifies the size of the Council and details the manner of selection of its members. Members are partly elected by Legislative Assembly members and local authorities, while the Governor nominates individuals with notable expertise in fields like literature, science, education, or social service.
Article 330 – Reservation for SCs and STs in the Lok Sabha
Article 330 guarantees representation for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) by reserving seats in the Lok Sabha in proportion to their population in each state. This provision ensures the inclusion of historically marginalized communities in the country’s legislative decision-making.
Delimitation Act, 2002 and Delimitation Commission
The Delimitation Act, 2002, enacted by the Indian Parliament, was designed to implement the provisions of Articles 82 and 170 of the Constitution, which mandate the redrawing of parliamentary and state assembly constituencies following each Census. Under this law, the Delimitation Commission of India was established to revise the boundaries of Lok Sabha and State Assembly constituencies based on the 2001 Census data. The Commission typically consists of three members, headed by a retired Supreme Court judge.
The Act also upholds the seat allocations determined by the earlier Delimitation Act of 1972, which relied on the 1971 Census. Consequently, while constituency boundaries can be modified, the total number of seats allotted to each state in the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies will remain unchanged until after the first Census conducted post-2026. This freeze, introduced through the 42nd and later reinforced by the 84th Constitutional Amendments, aimed to incentivize population control efforts.
In summary, Articles 81, 82, 170, 171 and 330, along with the Delimitation Act, 2002, provide the legal and institutional framework for ensuring fair representation in India’s democratic system. These provisions uphold key principles such as population-based representation, equal weight of votes and guaranteed inclusion of socially disadvantaged groups like SCs and STs. Delimitation, implemented by an independent commission, ensures that constituency boundaries reflect demographic realities, though the use of historical census data, 1971 for seat allocation and 2001 for constituency boundaries, will continue until the first census conducted after 2026.
EVOLUTION OF DELIMITATION IN INDIA
Delimitation ensures that each elected representative represents to roughly equal number of people, so that everyone’s vote has equal value. Over the years, the approach to delimitation has evolved based on changing population trends, political priorities and legal developments.
First Delimitation Commission (1952)
Following India’s first post-independence Census in 1951, the country carried out its first major delimitation exercise. In 1952, the Delimitation Commission was set up, and by 1953, under the leadership of retired Supreme Court judge Justice N. Chandrasekhara Aiyar, it recommended increasing the number of Lok Sabha seats from 489 to 494. This marked the beginning of India’s effort to align parliamentary representation with its changing population.
Subsequent Delimitation Commissions (1963 and 1973)
A second Delimitation Commission was formed in 1963 to reflect changes from the latest Census. It proposed raising the number of Lok Sabha seats from 494 to 522.
The third Commission, established in 1973 and chaired by Justice J. L. Kapur, took into account the 1971 Census and further expanded Lok Sabha seats to 542. One additional seat was later added for Sikkim, bringing the total to 543. It also recommended increasing the number of seats in State Assemblies and Union Territories from 3,771 to 3,997, including Sikkim’s new Legislative Assembly.
Freeze on Delimitation
In 1976, the 42nd Constitutional Amendment introduced a freeze on changing the number of seats based on population data. This was done to prevent penalizing states that had successfully implemented family planning and reduced population growth.
Later, the 84th Amendment in 2001 allowed the boundaries within states to be redrawn based on the 1991 Census—but without altering the total number of seats per state.
The 87th Amendment in 2003 updated the population figures to reflect the 2001 Census for internal adjustments, again keeping the overall seat allocation intact.
Delimitation Commission, 2002
Following the 2001 Census, the latest Delimitation Commission was set up in 2002, chaired by Justice Kuldip Singh. It redrew constituency boundaries based on new population data but did not change the number of seats per state.
Its work was completed in 2008 and implemented in subsequent elections.
Jammu and Kashmir had a different legal status until 2019, but after the abrogation of Article 370, a separate Delimitation Commission was set up in 2020 to redraw its constituencies. This was done under new rules applicable after the reorganization of the state into Union Territories.
The evolution of delimitation in India reflects how the country has tried to maintain equal and fair representation in the face of changing demographics. While early commissions increased the number of seats and redrew boundaries, later efforts focused more on adjusting constituency borders without changing seat allocations, largely due to a freeze aimed at encouraging population control. The 2002 Commission marked the latest nationwide update, and a separate process is now underway for Jammu and Kashmir. With the 2026 Census approaching, India may soon see the beginning of a new chapter in this ongoing process.
CURRENT DEBATES AND CHALLENGES
As India approaches the next delimitation exercise post-2026 Census, a number of significant political and constitutional debates have come to the forefront. At the heart of these debates lies a fundamental tension between demographic reality and political fairness.
Population Control vs Representation
A key debate is States that adopted strict family planning, such as Kerala and Tamil Nadu, now fear losing seats, whereas the states with high fertility rates might gain.
This raises an ethical and political dilemma: should states be punished for succeeding in population control by losing political power? Or should representation strictly follow population numbers, even if it means rewarding states that have not reduced fertility rates?
North-South Divide and Federal Concerns
The proposed population-based redistribution of Lok Sabha seats has raised fears of a North-South imbalance. Southern leaders warn it could weaken cooperative federalism and punish states that successfully curbed population growth. Their share of Lok Sabha seats may fall from 23.7% (129 of 543 seats) to around 19%, boosting northern dominance. On March 22, 2025, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin chaired a meeting of the Delimitation Joint Action Committee in Chennai with leaders from seven states, urging the Centre to extend the seat-freeze to protect federal balance and equitable representation.
Representation of Marginalised Communities
The upcoming delimitation and reshuffling of seats not only mean that the southern states could lose some of their representation in Parliament but will also impact how seats are set aside for scheduled castes and scheduled tribes in each state, as guaranteed by the Constitution (Article 330). That means the voices of these communities could be affected depending on how the boundaries are redrawn.
Economic Contribution vs Representation
Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Maharashtra are among the highest tax contributing states but receive only 30% of their contributions in return. In contrast, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh receive 250-350% more than what they contribute. This growing imbalance fuels a deep sense of injustice, especially as these very southern states, now facing a potential loss of political voice through delimitation, have long carried the economic weight of the nation.
Government’s Response
In response to rising concerns, Union Home Minister Amit Shah recently assured that no state will be unfairly treated in the upcoming delimitation exercise. He emphasised that the process would be done transparently and fairly, taking into account the interests of all states. He also clarified that the allocation of Lok Sabha seats would be done on a pro rata basis, meaning it will be in proportion to each state’s population. For example, if a state holds 10% of India’s total population, it would get around 10% of the seats. While this sounds mathematically fair, many southern states fear that this could reduce their representation despite better performance in controlling population growth. They worry that their success in development and population management may end up costing them political influence.
Even with Home Minister Amit Shah’s assurance that seats will be allocated on a pro rata (population-based) basis, many feel this doesn’t reflect the bigger picture of fairness and federal balance.
This raises a larger question: should representation be based only on numbers, or also on how much states contribute and how well they govern? In the next section, we explore what a fair, inclusive approach to delimitation might look like.
NORMATIVE ANALYSIS: WHAT SHOULD BE DONE?
As India approached the next delimitation, the question isn’t how to redraw the boundaries, but what kind of democracy we want to shape for the future. The challenge goes beyond numbers and maps. It is about safeguarding fairness, federalism and the dignity of each citizen’s vote, no matter where they live.
Rethinking Fairness Beyond Population Alone: A Hybrid Model
While population is an important factor in ensuring equal representation, relying solely on it ignores other crucial dimensions like governance, economic contribution, social indicators and historical efforts at population control. States that have succeeded in population control should not be penalized with fewer seats.
Instead, India needs a more balanced formula that rewards development efforts while still respecting demographic realities. This could involve a hybrid model where a baseline of representation is maintained for all states, with additional seats proportionally distributed.
Introduce a Minimum Seat Guarantee for Each Region or Linguistic Zone
To strengthen the federal character of Indian democracy and ensure inclusive representation, a framework could be introduced guaranteeing every region—particularly southern and smaller states—a minimum number of seats in the Lok Sabha, irrespective of population fluctuations. Such a baseline allocation would act as a safeguard against the political marginalisation of states with slower population growth. Moreover, this approach would uphold the federal principles enshrined in the Constitution by recognising India’s diversity beyond mere demographic considerations. It would also encourage states to persist with effective governance and population-control measures without the apprehension of losing legislative representation at the national level.
Institutional Transparency and Dialogue
The Delimitation Commission must function transparently and with public accountability. Extensive consultation with all stakeholders—including state governments, civil society, and constitutional experts—is essential. Trust can only be built if the process is inclusive, data-driven, and open to scrutiny. The government must also clearly communicate the rationale and implications of decisions, rather than imposing them unilaterally.
Exploring Constitutional Amendments, if needed
If the current framework no longer reflects the spirit of the Constitution or the needs of a changing India, it may be time to debate reforms. This could mean re-evaluating the role of population in seat allocation, strengthening institutions like the Finance and Inter-State Councils, or even amending the Constitution to embed new fairness principles that reflect today’s federal challenges.
At its heart, delimitation is about representation- and representation is about voice. As India steps into this crucial phase, we must ask: how do we ensure that no region feels silenced, no community left behind, and no effort toward progress goes unrewarded?
What’s needed is not just a technical fix, but a principled vision, one that reaffirms India’s commitment to unity in diversity and to a democracy where every citizen counts.
CONCLUSION
Delimitation is not merely a cartographic exercise; it is pivotal for shaping India’s democratic future. As India prepares for this next major exercise after the 2026 Census, we are faced with tough but important questions: How do we balance the principle of “one person, one vote” with the need to protect the interests of states that have governed well? How do we ensure fairness—not just in numbers, but in outcomes?
The concerns raised by southern and smaller states are not just about political power—they’re about preserving a spirit of cooperative federalism that has long been at the heart of India’s unity in diversity. At the same time, the need for proportional representation and democratic parity cannot be ignored.
The challenge before us is to find a solution that respects population realities while also safeguarding equity, inclusiveness, and the contributions of every region. Through thoughtful reform, transparency, and open dialogue, India has the opportunity to set a global example in managing diversity within a democratic framework.
If handled wisely, delimitation can strengthen India’s federal balance, ensuring fair representation for every citizen while honouring the country’s diversity.
REFERENCES
https://www.eci.gov.in/delimitation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delimitation_Commission_of_India
https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-updates/daily-news-analysis/delimitation-12
