Context

• Delimitation, the redrawing of boundaries of electoral constituencies based on census data, is a constitutional mandate in India, enshrined in Articles 82 and 170.
• While the exercise is rooted in democratic principles, it has sparked widespread debate, ranging from scholarly concerns about constitutional fidelity to more sensational calls for demographic mobilisation.
• Amid these debates, it is important to analyse historical trends, political challenges, and the need for a more nuanced approach to representation in a federal democracy.

Historical Context and Electoral Trends

• An analysis of past data reveals a dynamic yet non-linear approach to delimitation.
• Between 1951 and 2004, Lok Sabha seats increased from 489 to 543, with significant redistribution among states based on changing demographics.
• Yet, no standardised formula has ever determined the ideal population per representative.
• In 1951, each MP represented about 7.32 lakh people, which rose to 10.10 lakh in 1977. By 2024, the figure stood at a staggering 27 lakh.
• Similarly, Vidhan Sabha seats increased from 3,283 to 4,123 over the same period, meaning state legislators now serve triple the number of constituents as they did in 1951.
• Despite the overarching reliance on population as the criterion, past delimitations have also considered geographical contiguity and administrative boundaries.
• This flexibility highlights that population-based representation, while foundational, is not inviolable and can be tempered by other considerations to preserve the representative and federal character of the Indian polity.

Multifaceted Challenges of Delimitation

• Constitutional Foundations and Contemporary Ironies
  • The Constitution mandates that after every census, the number and boundaries of constituencies in both Parliament and State Assemblies must be readjusted to reflect population changes.
  • However, through the 42nd Constitutional Amendment in 1976 and subsequent extensions, the implementation of this provision has been deferred until after the first census conducted post-2026.
  • Ironically, some of the strongest critics of the government’s alleged disregard for constitutional norms are now advocating for further postponement of delimitation, raising questions about the selective invocation of constitutional values.
• Demographic Anxiety and Regional Disparities
  • Delimitation based strictly on population figures could advantage states with higher population growth, predominantly in the north, while penalising states in the south that have successfully implemented population control policies.
  • Although fears of marginalisation among southern states may lack empirical justification, they cannot be dismissed outright.
  • The debate thus centres on whether representation should be purely a function of population, or if federal balance and performance in governance should also factor into electoral design.

Necessary Approach to Address these Challenges

• Rethinking Representation and Governance
  • The current debate forces a re-examination of what it means to represent a constituency.
  • In a first-past-the-post electoral system, the numerical size of a constituency does not necessarily correlate with the effectiveness of its representation.
  • There is little evidence to suggest that smaller constituencies are better governed.
  • Instead, strengthening local self-governance and devolving more power to municipal and panchayati raj institutions may be more effective in enhancing democratic accountability and governance.
• Need for Deeper Structural Reforms
  • The burden on MPs and MLAs as representatives in overpopulated constituencies has increased disproportionately.
  • Yet, their core functions, law-making, committee participation, and oversight, are not inherently affected by constituency size.
  • This calls into question whether merely increasing the number of representatives will resolve governance challenges or whether deeper structural reforms are needed.
• Towards a More Equitable Framework
  • The primacy of population as the sole criterion for representation must be moderated, especially since population control has been a deliberate policy goal of the central government.
  • Penalising states for succeeding in this objective creates a paradox.
  • As a corrective, scholars have proposed the use of a deflator, akin to inflation adjustments in economic statistics, that could neutralise the advantage gained by states with high population growth.
  • For instance, adjusting seat allocation using Total Fertility Rate (TFR) data could offer a more equitable distribution.
  • A hypothetical application of such a model suggests that instead of ballooning the Lok Sabha to 1,440 seats based on raw population, using TFR as a divisor could limit the number to around 680, striking a balance between democratic representation and federal equity.

Conclusion

• Delimitation is not merely a technical exercise but a deeply political one, with profound implications for national unity, federal balance, and democratic representation.
• While population must remain a cornerstone of representation, it cannot be the sole determinant.
• A nuanced approach that incorporates demographic trends, governance performance, and regional equity is
• India must engage in a robust, inclusive debate to ensure that the next round of delimitation strengthens the democratic fabric rather than frays it.