EXPANDING LOK SABHA SEATS: CONSTITUTIONAL HURDLES & NORTH-SOUTH FEDERAL DIVIDE

Why In News?

The Union Government is discussing a constitutional amendment to increase the strength of the Lok Sabha to approximately 816 seats (up from the current 543). 

Why expand the Lok Sabha Seats?

The current strength of the Lok Sabha (543 seats) is based on the population figures of the 1971 Census. 

• To encourage population control, the 42nd Amendment Act (1976) froze the number of seats until 2000. 
• This freeze was extended for another 25 years (until 2026) by the 84th Amendment Act (2001).
• Fact: A MP currently represents approximately 2.5 million citizens, compared to roughly 0.7 million in 1951. (Source: PRS)

Key Proposal

Seat Increase: To expand the Lok Sabha by 50% to accommodate women's reservation without reducing the number of existing unreserved seats.

Census Basis: The proposal suggests using the 2011 Census data for this expansion, bypassing the delayed 2021 Census or a future census post-2026.

Uniform Expansion: To avoid political conflict, especially with Southern states, the plan involves a uniform 50% increase in seats for all states. For example, Uttar Pradesh would go from 80 to 120 seats, and Tamil Nadu from 39 to 59 seats.

Constitutional Framework Governing Delimitation

The process of allocating and redrawing Lok Sabha constituencies, known as delimitation, is governed by specific constitutional provisions. The core principle is ensuring equal representation based on population.

Core Debate: "One Vote, One Value" vs Federal Balance

Constitutional Violations

Violation of Proportionality

A uniform 50% seat increase based on the 2011 Census ignores the vast demographic changes since 1971. Northern states' populations grew much faster than Southern states', making a uniform hike a direct violation of Article 81's "one person, one vote, one value" principle.

Breach of Basic Structure

Any amendment that undermines democratic equality could be challenged under Article 14 (Right to Equality) and may be struck down by the Supreme Court for violating the "Basic Structure" of the Constitution, as established in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973).

North-South Political Friction

Demographic Divergence

Between 1971 and 2011, states like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar saw rapid population growth, while Southern states like Tamil Nadu and Kerala successfully implemented population control measures.

Penalty for Success

If delimitation occurs purely based on the latest population figures, Southern states would lose political representation and influence in Parliament. This is seen as penalizing them for successfully implementing a national policy.

• Between 1971 and 2011, the population share of the five southern states dropped from 25% to 21%, while the Hindi heartland's share rose significantly. (Source: Census of India Data)

Federal Tensions: This issue creates a deep trust deficit between the Centre and Southern states, straining the fabric of cooperative federalism.

Way Forward

Delink Women's Reservation from Delimitation

Amend the Women's Reservation Act to remove its link to the census and delimitation. The 33% quota could then be implemented within the existing 543 seats through a rotating lottery system.

Adopt a Compensatory Principle

If Parliament decides to freeze inter-state seat distribution, it should introduce a constitutionally protected "compensatory principle." This could provide legal immunity against challenges under Article 14 and reassure Southern states.

Reform the Rajya Sabha

Amend the Constitution to provide equal representation to all states in the Rajya Sabha, similar to the US Senate. This would act as a federal balancing mechanism against the population-based Lok Sabha.

Broaden the Delimitation Criteria

Future Delimitation Commissions should consider factors beyond just population, such as geography, terrain, population density, and the presence of marginalized communities, to achieve more equitable and substantive representation.

Proportional Protection

Increase the total number of seats (e.g., to 816) but maintain the current ratio of seats between states. Every state gets more seats, but their percentage share of the Lok Sabha remains the same as it was under the 1971 freeze.

• This ensures that Uttar Pradesh and Kerala both get more MPs (better citizen-representative ratio) without Kerala losing its voice in Parliament relative to UP.  

Conclusion

The expansion of the Lok Sabha is not just a logistical necessity but a test of Indian federalism. The ultimate solution will require a "Grand Bargain"—a constitutional amendment that protects the political voice of Southern states while upholding the democratic principle of equitable representation.

Source: INDIANEXPRESS