The issue of delimitation has erupted into a political storm in India. At the heart of the debate is the question: Should states that effectively controlled population be penalised with reduced parliamentary representation? Tamil Nadu has taken the issue head-on, with all its political parties uniting against the impending delimitation exercise.
The proponents of the delimitation freeze have valid points to be considered. The total fertility rate (TFR), a demographic indicator that estimates the average number of children a woman gives birth to during her reproductive years, is highly skewed. Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and West Bengal have TFRs between 1.6 and 1.8, far below the replacement level of 2.1. In contrast, states in the Hindi heartland, such as Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Rajasthan, have TFRs around 3.5 – well above the replacement level.
If delimitation is carried out under the current formula, southern states will see a sharp decline in their parliamentary representation – in the 2029 elections and beyond. As the population of these states continues to shrink while those of Hindi-speaking states rise, the share of Lok Sabha (LS) seats for southern India could fall from the current 25% to below 10%.
Delimitation exacerbated an underlying problem that has long plagued Indian democracy: the majority winner takes all first-past-the-post (FPTP) system, under which the candidate with the most votes in a constituency wins the seat, even if most voters supported other candidates. For instance, in the 2019 general elections, the ruling party won 303 seats (about 56% of the seat share) with just 37.4% of the vote share, while other parties that collectively received more than 60% of votes were left with disproportionately fewer seats. If delimitation happens based on population, it will be possible to form a govt with a 30% vote share concentrated in a handful of states (about seven) in north India and render the other states voiceless – undermining the federal structure of India.
FPTP is effective in small or medium-sized homogenous countries where ethnic rifts and sectarian rivalries are less apparent. A country as heterogeneous as India needs an electoral system that can proportionately represent the voices of all individuals, regardless of race and ethnicity, religion, or caste. A proportional representation (PR) system, where seats are allocated based on the percentage of votes polled by each party, would lead to a more balanced and inclusive Parliament. It would prevent one-party dominance by ensuring a consultative approach with all political parties receiving representation proportional to their vote share, which reflects the will of the people.
An electoral reform is not a sole solution. Even with a more representative system, the structural disparities in parliamentary representation caused by delimitation must be addressed. There are several solutions that could be considered. One is to amend the Constitution to permanently freeze the inter-state redistribution of parliamentary seats, preventing states that controlled their population from being penalised in the future. It would also prevent setting a dangerous agenda that population control would be disadvantageous. Another solution is a temporary freeze while a consultative process is initiated with states.
The consultative process could involve a federal restructuring such as abolishing the concurrent list in favour of an expanded state list, all residual powers vested to the states, and large-scale transfer of subjects made from Union list to state list, keeping external defence, external affairs, and currency in Delhi’s hands and balancing delimitation with decentralisation. Given India’s diversity, allowing states to frame policies tailored to their socio-economic and cultural contexts would ensure more effective governance than a one-size-fits-all approach dictated by the Centre.
In crucial areas such as education and agriculture, states have repeatedly struggled to fully exercise their autonomy, despite making 40% of the financial contribution. Shifting control to the states would prevent excessive centralisation, mitigate policy conflicts, and ensure tailoring policies suitable for the context of the states. The delimitation exercise should proceed only if there is consensus, ensuring no state is unfairly disadvantaged.
India is not just a collection of administrative units – it is a pluralistic ethno-linguistic union of states. Each state represents a unique history and culture, and it would not be an exaggeration to say India is the grandest political experiment in global history. A poorly executed delimitation exacerbates the disparities between states and regions. Most worryingly, it pits Indian citizens against one another across arbitrary, divisive cleavages – north vs south, Hindi vs non-Hindi.
(Salem Dharanidharan is State Deputy Secretary of DMK’s IT Wing; Dakshana Indumathi is a Political Consultant)
Email your feedback with name and address to southpole.toi@timesofindia.com