The inauguration of the new parliament building with 888 Lok Sabha seats and 384 Rajya Sabha seats combined with the freeze on delimitation expiring in 2026 has stirred up the debate on the infirmities of parliamentary democracy in a complex, diverse and stratified Indian Republic.
The notion of ‘one man, one vote, one value’ forms the basis of democracy. The current delimitation of parliamentary constituencies has been done on the basis of the 1971 census. However, governments under Indira Gandhi in 1976 and Atal Bihari Vajpayee in 2001 paused further delimitation to ensure states’ representation irrespective of population. Thus, the Constitution of India was specifically amended (84th Amendment) in 2002, freezing further delimitation until the first census to be conducted after 2026.
The political idea of ‘India’ is one of the most complex. While drafting the Constitution, BR Ambedkar emphasised that India should be a Union with federal characters as it was created by uniting 565 princely states ruled by various kings and the three British presidencies (Madras, Calcutta, and Bombay), each with its distinct social, economic and cultural diversities. Thus, to unite them without compromising their diversity, a unitary structure was created with strong federal features. The Australian Commonwealth Constitutional expert KC Wheare called it ‘quasi federal’.
The Constitution of India is thus a multilateral contract, outlining the minimum rights, guarantees and responsibilities of citizens accommodating their diverse interests. Indian quasi-federalism is a kind of holding together federalism unlike that of the United States, where states voluntarily came together to form a federation with minimum powers to the Union while reserving maximum subjects for the states.
Language was identified as the medium to further bridge the diversity and strengthen the unity of India. States were reorganised on linguistic lines through the States Reorganisation Act 1956. It gave each state a specified number of parliamentary constituencies and state legislators on the basis of the 1951 census. The identity of Indian citizens was shaped by the creation of states, as defined by language, while they represented themselves to the Union. This representation ensured that each state’s voice in the Indian parliamentary federal democracy was equally valued, not falling short of the principle of ‘one man, one vote, one value’.
Also Read: Delimitation is the last thing India needs now. It will widen the north-south divide
Lower population, better development
Further, the performance of the states have not been uniform in Independent India. Some states fared better in terms of economy, governance and human development. States like Tamil Nadu and Kerala aggressively implemented family planning to contain the growing population, resulting in equitable access to goods and services and lower rates of poverty. According to the National Multidimensional Poverty Index baseline report 2022, Kerala has the lowest poverty rate (0.7 per cent) followed by Tamil Nadu (4.9 per cent). Uttar Pradesh scored as high as 37.8 per cent and Bihar is the highest with 51.9 per cent. Maharashtra has the highest Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP) with $366 billion. Tamil Nadu ($266 billion) scored higher than populated states like Uttar Pradesh ($234 billion) and Bihar ($97 billion).
Kerala has a literacy rate of 94 per cent, Maharashtra stands at 82.34 per cent and Tamilnadu at 82.9 per cent whereas Uttar Pradesh is at 67.68 per cent and Bihar scores as low as 61.80 per cent. In terms of industrial development, Tamil Nadu tops the list with almost 40,000 factories followed by Gujarat with a little over 28,000. Again, despite its higher population, Uttar Pradesh is much lower on the list with 16,184 factories and Bihar’s number is as low as 3,429. This means these states have a lower employable workforce when compared to states like Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, and Gujarat. Even healthcare is not an exception, a report by NITI Aayog puts Kerala on the top with a score of 77.53 followed by Tamil Nadu at 64.05 while populated states like Uttar Pradesh clock in at 34.44 and Bihar at 39.10.
Also Read: How census-based delimitation for Lok Sabha seats could shake up politics & disadvantage south
Incentivising underperformance?
The proposed delimitation, if carried out based on the post-2026 census, will result in an increased number of parliamentary seats to underperforming populated states like Uttar Pradesh (143 from 80), Bihar (79 from 40), and Madhya Pradesh (52 from 29). On the other hand, Tamil Nadu’s strength will only go up to 49 (from 39) while Kerala will remain at 20. Thus, the sole reliance on ‘one man, one vote, one value’ will empower underperforming states and penalise performing states. The latter will lose their bargaining power with the Union and will be compelled to accept policies devised and implemented by representatives from underperforming states.
Developed states like Tamil Nadu and Kerala contribute the most to the Centre. For every Re 1 paid to the Union, Tamil Nadu receives 29 paise back and Kerala receives 25 paise back. Underdeveloped states receive more than what they pay — UP gets Rs 2.73 and Bihar Rs 7.06 for every one rupee. They get compensated with the contributions of the developed states. In spite of this, developed states will be dependent on the underperforming states for their rightful share. This will further exacerbate the already existing mistrust states have with the Union.
Further, states’ powers are constantly reduced by transferring ‘subjects’ from List II (State list) to List III (Concurrent). The Union also indirectly encroaches upon the State list — National Investigation Agency (NIA) and Enforcement Directorate (ED) were created directly under the Union government, while ‘law and order’ is a state subject.
Article 1 of the Constitution declares India as a union of states. The Supreme Court has held, in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala 1976 and Minerva Mills v. Union of India 1980, that federalism is the basic structure of the Constitution and even Parliament cannot amend it. Thus, democracy in the diverse Indian context does not solely depend on population. It also rests on the collective representation of the people through the states, as states represent the identity, culture and diversity of their respective populace.
Delimitation based on the census will not only incentivise underperforming states while penalising the performing states, it will also lead to the colonisation of the South by the North. Further, it will make south Indians secondary citizens, subservient and dependent upon ‘underperforming populated states’. This will create stress on India’s unity, making it the watershed moment for the political idea of ‘India’.
Puhazh Gandhi P is an advocate and spokesperson, Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK). Views are personal.
(Edited by Theres Sudeep)