The newly constructed Parliament building has a seating capacity for 888 MPs, suggesting that an increase in seats is being considered. The recent statement by Amit Shah that southern states will not lose seats could imply a shift to a two-million-per-constituency model.
Published Mar 02, 2025 | 9:00 AM ⚊ Updated Mar 02, 2025 | 9:00 AM
According to the Indian Constitution, constituency boundaries and the number of seats in legislative bodies are determined based on census data. However, during the Emergency, the then-prime minister Indira Gandhi halted the delimitation process through the 42nd Constitutional Amendment. (iStock)
Synopsis: South Indian states fear that the planned population-based delimitation of constituencies will affect their strength in Parliament, besides affecting the federal character of the country. Despite the Centre’s efforts to dispel fears, a clarity on the exercise planned for 2026 remains elusive.
The planned population-based delimitation of constituencies has sparked an intense debate, especially in South Indian states.
Concerns have been raised over states — that adopted population-control measures for the country’s overall development — getting adversely hit due to the proposed delimitation.
Southern state leaders argue that delimitation based solely on population figures would be unjust and detrimental to the spirit of federalism.
The key concern is that while the southern states have successfully controlled their population, their representation in the Lok Sabha will decrease with delimitation. Whereas, northern states, which lack strict population control measures, will see an increased representation in Parliament.
This fear of imbalance has led to strong opposition from southern leaders, including from Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin, Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, and Telangana Chief Minister Revanth Reddy.
Even TDP leader and Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu, despite being an NDA partner in power, indirectly expressed concerns. He opined that the state should encourage population growth to secure more representation.
The fear among southern states is not just about losing Lok Sabha seats but also about a reduction in central fund allocations. Leaders argue that if delimitation is purely population-based, it will be unfair to states that have contributed to national welfare by implementing family planning policies.
With fewer MPs, the influence of southern states in key policy decisions at the national level will diminish, leading to an imbalance in governance.
This concern raises a fundamental question: Should states be penalised for responsibly managing their population?
Population trends indicated a decline in birth rates in southern and northeastern states. According to the Registrar General of India, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal recorded the lowest fertility rates at 1.4 in 2019-21, followed by Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, Punjab, and Himachal Pradesh at 1.5.
In contrast, states like Bihar (3.0), Uttar Pradesh (2.7), and Madhya Pradesh (2.6) recorded significantly higher fertility rates. Given these disparities, the upcoming delimitation exercise in 2026 could lead to an increase in seats for states like Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, and Rajasthan, while southern states such as Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, and Telangana may see a reduction.
This has triggered widespread concern among southern states, prompting them to voice their dissent.
Union Home Minister Amit Shah recently stated that the number of seats in the southern states would not decrease.
Previously, Prime Minister Narendra Modi assured during a debate on the Women’s Reservation Bill in Parliament that no such issue would arise.
However, while the government assured that southern states will not face a reduction in seats, there is no clarity on whether northern states will see an increase in their representation. If the number of constituencies in the north rises, the overall representation of the south will inevitably decline, shifting the power balance further towards the northern states.
Despite widespread concerns, the central government has yet to provide a clear and transparent decision on the matter.
According to the Indian Constitution, constituency boundaries and the number of seats in legislative bodies are determined based on census data. Following this principle, Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, and state Assembly seats were adjusted based on population figures in the 1951, 1961, and 1971 censuses.
However, during the Emergency, the then-prime minister Indira Gandhi halted the delimitation process through the 42nd Constitutional Amendment in 1976.
When the process resumed in 2009, it only involved changes in constituency boundaries without altering the number of seats. This lack of balance in population growth has led to the current crisis.
For instance, Uttar Pradesh, India’s most populous state, has an average of three million people per MP, while Tamil Nadu has only 1.8 million per MP. This disparity has resulted in an imbalance in representation.
In 1977, each Lok Sabha MP represented an average of 1.1 million people. Due to the delay in conducting the latest census, estimates suggest that India’s population has now surpassed 1.4 billion. If constituencies were to be adjusted based on the 1977 formula—where each constituency represented one million people—the total number of Lok Sabha seats would need to increase to approximately 1,400.
Under this system, Uttar Pradesh would have 250 seats, Bihar 82, and Tamil Nadu 82. However, if the formula is adjusted to represent two million people per constituency, the total number of seats would be around 700, with Uttar Pradesh having 126 seats and Tamil Nadu retaining its current 39 seats.
The newly constructed Parliament building has a seating capacity for 888 MPs, suggesting that an increase in seats is being considered. Given this, the statement by Amit Shah that southern states will not lose seats could imply a shift to a two-million-per-constituency model.
The central government must recognise the contributions of southern states to national development and consider their efforts in population control. In 1951, southern states accounted for approximately 26% of India’s population, which fell to around 19% by 2022.
Conversely, northern states like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, which accounted for about 39% of the population in 1951, now make up for approximately 43%.
Under a population-based delimitation, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar alone could secure nearly 225 seats, while the entire southern region, comprising Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Karnataka, would have fewer than 170 seats. This disproportionate allocation would place southern states at a disadvantage.
The central government must explore alternative approaches to delimitation that ensure equitable representation for all states. Any perception of injustice in representation can lead to dissatisfaction and unnecessary political turmoil. Since the effects of delimitation are long-term, it is understandable that states facing potential losses are expressing their concerns.
The responsibility lies with the central government to address these concerns and eliminate the sense of insecurity among affected states. To maintain national harmony, it is crucial for the government to adopt a clear and transparent approach that upholds the spirit of federalism and ensures fairness for all regions.
(IV Murali Krishna Sarma is a journalist and researcher. Views are personal. Edited by Majnu Babu).
