New Delhi, India – Days after both Houses of Parliament were adjourned sine die on August 13, the monsoon session has yet to be formally prorogued, sparking speculation that Parliament could be reconvened for another attempt at the constitutional amendment linked to delimitation and women’s reservation. This development has given urgency to a question Parliament must confront: must delimitation necessarily mean an enlargement of the Lok Sabha?
At first glance, the issue looks like arithmetic. India’s population has grown enormously since Lok Sabha seats were frozen half a century ago, so it seems natural to argue that representation must now expand correspondingly. However, as the op-ed argues, constitutional design is not arithmetic alone. The author contends that the number of Lok Sabha seats, currently fixed at 543, need not increase to achieve the goals of federal fairness and women’s reservation.
The piece argues that the existing 543 seats can be redistributed among states based on the latest population data, ensuring equitable representation without enlarging the House. This approach would address the imbalance created by the 1976 freeze on seats, which was extended through various amendments, while preserving the current size of the Lok Sabha.
Must Read: Subhash Chandra Gets Relief in Personal Guarantee Case as Banks Face 99% Haircut
Additionally, the op-ed suggests that women’s reservation, a key component of the proposed constitutional amendment, can be implemented within the existing 543-seat framework by reserving seats for women in the current constituencies. The argument is that a larger Lok Sabha is not a prerequisite for either delimitation or women’s reservation, and that the government should focus on these reforms without expanding the size of the House.
