The Supreme Court said that the two Telugu states cannot be treated at par with Jammu and Kashmir where delimitation was undertaken in 2022 and the number of assembly seats were increased.
Published Jul 25, 2025 | 12:02 PM ⚊ Updated Jul 25, 2025 | 12:02 PM
Supreme Court. (iStock)
Synopsis: On July 25, the Supreme Court dismissed a plea seeking delimitation in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. The petitioner argued that excluding these states while allowing it in Jammu & Kashmir was unconstitutional. The Court ruled that UTs and states differ constitutionally, and delimitation in J&K doesn’t justify similar action elsewhere. It cited Article 170(3) as a legal barrier.
Supreme Court on Friday, 25 July, dismissed the plea seeking delimitation to be conducted by the Union government to increase the number of Assembly seats in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana.
According to Livelaw, the writ petition, filed by Professor K Purushottam Reddy, sought directions to the Union to operationalize Section 26 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act. It was contended that delimiting the assembly and parliamentary constituencies of only the newly minted Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, with the exclusion of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, created an unreasonable classification and was therefore unconstitutional.
However, a Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi said that the two Telugu states cannot be treated at par with Jammu and Kashmir where delimitation was undertaken in 2022 and the number of assembly seats were increased.
Rejecting the petition, the apex court said, according to Bar and Bench: “We have held that this will open floodgates for all states to approach seeking parity. We hold that constitutional mandate under 170(3) serves as a bar. Demand for the Delimitation is contrary to the same and thus fails.”
“Constitutional distinctions exist between UTs and states. J&K, having been reconstituted as UT, is not governed by the provisions of Chapter 3 of Part 7 of Constitution. UTs are regulated by parliamentary legislation. There is no merit in contention that exclusion of AP and Telangana is discriminatory or arbitrary,” Justice Surya Kant pronounced.
