Supreme Court has asked the Centre for its response regarding the plea to implement the Women’s Reservation Act without delimitation
Introduction
The much-awaited implementation of the Women’s Reservation Act has been again put under judicial lens. In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India has sought the Central Government’s response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking the implementation of the Constitution (106th Amendment) Act, 2023, popularly known as the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam, without waiting for a fresh delimitation exercise.
The petition raises an important constitutional question as to whether the reservation for women in the Lok Sabha and the State Legislative Assemblies (SLA) of 33% can be put into effect immediately or the delimitation of seats as required by the Constitution.
Background
The Women’s reservation Act, 2023, provides for the reservation of 1/3rd of the seats in Lok Sabha, State Legislative Assemblies and Delhi Legislative Assembly in favour of women. The Act, however, states that the reservation will apply after the first Census after the Act comes into force and after the delimitation.
The reservation has not yet been put into operation, due to the lack of completion of the post-enactment Census and the delimitation process. The PIL alleges that this linkage has unnecessarily been preventing the political representation of women, and calls for it to be implemented in time for the 2029 General Elections on the current constituencies or the ones based on the 1991 Census. The Supreme Court takes trials on motion for previous.
Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice R. Mahadevan of the Bench issued the notice to the Centre, asking it to come up with its response on the plea.
Justice Nagarathna said that women are the largest minority in India and almost half the population of country comprise of minorities. The Court reminded that political equality is a constitutional promise worthy of meaningful implementation as per the Preamble of the Constitution.
Although it has not yet ruled on the merits of the petition, issuance of the notice shows that the Court thinks the constitutional issues raised are worthy of full consideration.
The Constitutional Debate
The key question is that can the implementation of women reservation be separated from delimitation.
The petitioners contend that giving the reservation an indefinite term is counterproductive to the aim of the constitutional amendment. They said that Parliament has already agreed that there is a need for women’s representation and now it should not be a hurdle to its implementation in administrative processes like Census and delimitation.
Conversely, the current constitutional system clearly incorporates the notion of reservation with these exercises. The main purpose of delimitation is to redraw constituency boundaries to ensure equitable representation in States due to population change. If there is no constitutional mechanism for implementing a reservation, then it may take judicial interpretation or another constitutional amendment.
Significance of the Case
The case goes beyond electoral procedure and touches upon the broader issue of substantive political equality.
In spite of their population strength of nearly 50% of India’s population, women continue to be underrepresented in the Parliament and State Legislatures. While there have been some successes in implementing quota systems for women at the local bodies level under 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendment, this is not the case at the national or State level.
The Supreme Court thinking on the issue may have an impact on the future of political participation of women and may clarify the interplay between reservation, Census and delimitation in the future.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court ordered the Centre to respond after another significant development in the issues plaguing the implementation of the Women’s Reservation Act. The Court has not yet ruled on the constitutionality of introducing reservation without delimitation, but the proceedings highlight the significance of meaningful political representation for women.
In either case, the case will make an important decision in the constitutional and electoral law of India, which will weigh the constitutional principles of procedure, democracy and gender justice.
