Supreme Court questions delimitation delay in Manipur, NE States
|
New Delhi, Nov 21
The Supreme Court on Tuesday questioned the Union Government over its inaction on the long-pending delimitation exercises in Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh and Manipur, even as the Government defended its position, citing the delicate socio-political environment of the North Eastern region as the primary reason for its inability to proceed.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar emphasised the statutory mandate for delimitation and expressed discontent over the delay despite a 2020 Presidential order that rescinded the deferment of the process citing improved security conditions.
It observed that once the deferment order was rescinded, the Election Commission of India (ECI) was obligated to begin the delimitation exercise under Section 8A of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
“Once the President rescinds the notification, the Election Commission cannot say it will not be done...As soon as the deferment is rescinded, the process must be initiated. What have you done in the past four years to set the ball rolling?” the Court asked additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, who appeared for the Centre.
The Court noted that delimitation had been completed in Assam under the same 2020 order but questioned why similar steps had not been taken for the other three States. The bench indicated that it is mindful of the continuing unrest in Manipur that has remained engulfed in violence, which first erupted in May 2023 and has shown no signs of abating.
“You do not have to club all States together in assessing conduciveness. While we understand Manipur may have challenges right now, what about Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland ?” the bench asked the law officer.
Defending the delay, ASG Nataraj pointed to the complexities of the North Eastern region. “The entire region is so sensitive that we do not want to aggravate the situation unnecessarily,” stated the ASG, adding that the Government is exercising caution to avoid potential unrest.
Addressing Arunachal Pradesh specifically, Nataraj noted opposition from local communities, while for Nagaland, he said that tribal groups are “agitated” over the proposed delimitation. He added that consultations are ongoing in Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh, and ground reports are awaited to assess whether conditions are suitable for delimitation.
But the bench retorted: “Mr Nataraj, it’s a statutory mandate and you will have to do it. Otherwise, you will be in difficulty.” It added that Section 8A was incorporated to pause delimitation in disturbed areas. “But now that the conditions have been declassified, the exercise becomes mandatory,” it highlighted.
The petitioners, represented by advocate G Gangmei, argued that the lack of action in these States violates their fundamental rights of equality under Article 14 of the Constitution. They pointed out that the same 2020 Presidential order that facilitated delimitation in Assam should have been uniformly applied to Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh and Manipur.
“The 2020 order rescinded the deferment across all four States. By selectively applying it, the Government has created an inequitable situation,” said Gangmei.
Adjourning the matter to January 2025, the Court directed the ASG to revert with detailed instructions on the Government’s course of action. “Take adequate instructions. This is a statutory mandate. If Section 8A is not re-notified, then you are in difficulty,” the Court warned.
The delimitation process, governed by the Delimitation Act, 2002, and Section 8A of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, is intended to redraw Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies based on population data. In 2020, the President rescinded an earlier deferment order for the North Eastern States, citing improved security conditions. While delimitation was carried out in Assam, no progress has been made in Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh and Manipur, prompting the current legal challenge by an organisation, “Delimitation Demand Committee for the State of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur and Nagaland in North East India”.
Hindustan Times
The Supreme Court on Tuesday questioned the Union Government over its inaction on the long-pending delimitation exercises in Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh and Manipur, even as the Government defended its position, citing the delicate socio-political environment of the North Eastern region as the primary reason for its inability to proceed.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar emphasised the statutory mandate for delimitation and expressed discontent over the delay despite a 2020 Presidential order that rescinded the deferment of the process citing improved security conditions.
It observed that once the deferment order was rescinded, the Election Commission of India (ECI) was obligated to begin the delimitation exercise under Section 8A of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
“Once the President rescinds the notification, the Election Commission cannot say it will not be done...As soon as the deferment is rescinded, the process must be initiated. What have you done in the past four years to set the ball rolling?” the Court asked additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, who appeared for the Centre.
The Court noted that delimitation had been completed in Assam under the same 2020 order but questioned why similar steps had not been taken for the other three States. The bench indicated that it is mindful of the continuing unrest in Manipur that has remained engulfed in violence, which first erupted in May 2023 and has shown no signs of abating.
“You do not have to club all States together in assessing conduciveness. While we understand Manipur may have challenges right now, what about Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland ?” the bench asked the law officer.
Defending the delay, ASG Nataraj pointed to the complexities of the North Eastern region. “The entire region is so sensitive that we do not want to aggravate the situation unnecessarily,” stated the ASG, adding that the Government is exercising caution to avoid potential unrest.
Addressing Arunachal Pradesh specifically, Nataraj noted opposition from local communities, while for Nagaland, he said that tribal groups are “agitated” over the proposed delimitation. He added that consultations are ongoing in Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh, and ground reports are awaited to assess whether conditions are suitable for delimitation.
But the bench retorted: “Mr Nataraj, it’s a statutory mandate and you will have to do it. Otherwise, you will be in difficulty.” It added that Section 8A was incorporated to pause delimitation in disturbed areas. “But now that the conditions have been declassified, the exercise becomes mandatory,” it highlighted.
The petitioners, represented by advocate G Gangmei, argued that the lack of action in these States violates their fundamental rights of equality under Article 14 of the Constitution. They pointed out that the same 2020 Presidential order that facilitated delimitation in Assam should have been uniformly applied to Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh and Manipur.
“The 2020 order rescinded the deferment across all four States. By selectively applying it, the Government has created an inequitable situation,” said Gangmei.
Adjourning the matter to January 2025, the Court directed the ASG to revert with detailed instructions on the Government’s course of action. “Take adequate instructions. This is a statutory mandate. If Section 8A is not re-notified, then you are in difficulty,” the Court warned.
The delimitation process, governed by the Delimitation Act, 2002, and Section 8A of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, is intended to redraw Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies based on population data. In 2020, the President rescinded an earlier deferment order for the North Eastern States, citing improved security conditions. While delimitation was carried out in Assam, no progress has been made in Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh and Manipur, prompting the current legal challenge by an organisation, “Delimitation Demand Committee for the State of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur and Nagaland in North East India”.
Hindustan Times