Let’s first establish what we can all agree upon, irrespective of our political inclinations. First, due to the vastly differing pace of economic development, population growth in the south has been slower than in the north. Second, any delimitation exercise undertaken to readjust seats in Parliament based on the latest population data will increase the north’s share of seats. Third, any prospective delimitation exercise must not punish the south for managing its population well.
The Narendra Modi-led NDA is aware of the sensitivities of southern states, which fear that delimitation based on the latest population data (2026 Census) will reduce their representation in Parliament. Union Home Minister Amit Shah has assured southern states that they need not fear the consequences, stating that “after delimitation, on pro rata basis, not a single seat will be reduced in any southern state”.
Despite the assurance, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin has rallied the leaders of the five southern states to come together on March 5 to blunt the NDA’s delimitation “sword” that he claims is “hanging over southern states”.
A close examination of the arguments being made by the DMK, however, reveals inconsistencies that expose its latent hypocrisy on delimitation.
First, the DMK is a big votary of the “jitni abaadi utna haq (the larger the population, the greater the share)” principle that Rahul Gandhi has championed, which has led it to support a caste census. But if the DMK believes in proportional representation for caste-based reservations, why does it oppose fair seat allocation based on population growth?
To argue that the south should be compensated for doing a better job at population management is, in effect, to support punishing northern states for the historical disadvantages and ongoing demographic disruptions that have prevented them from successfully implementing population-control measures. Since 1971, northern states have been underrepresented in the Lok Sabha. Tamil Nadu’s population growth rate (2011 Census) is 15.6%, much lower than Bihar’s 25.4% and Uttar Pradesh’s 20.2%. Despite this, Tamil Nadu still holds 39 Lok Sabha seats, while Bihar (with almost twice the population) has only 40 seats and UP, 80 seats. Continuing to deny the people of the north an equal say in Parliament only ends up undermining their aspirations.
Not A Zero-Sum Game
Research has shown that giving voters greater power to hold representatives accountable boosts economic prospects and improves social outcomes. So, in the long-term interest of southern states, a little generosity towards their northern compatriots could be beneficial.
Moreover, one could compellingly argue that freezing delimitation since the 1970s has benefited Tamil Nadu at the cost of UP and Bihar. That’s a significant advantage that has persisted over an extended period.
But does this mean that the south should be unfairly penalised? No. The legitimate concerns of the southern states must also be addressed. Southern states contribute significantly to the nation’s GDP, provide a large share of the country’s tax revenues, and have excelled in various human development indices. Any delimitation exercise must ensure that states that have performed well in governance are not disadvantaged in national decision-making.
One possible solution is a hybrid approach to delimitation that increases representation for northern states without decreasing seats for the south. The total number of Lok Sabha seats could be expanded to accommodate the growing population while ensuring fair representation. Such a move would require a constitutional amendment, but it would balance the needs of both the north and south.
Additionally, the principle of asymmetric federalism could be explored. If southern states feel that their economic and social contributions are not adequately recognised, the Centre could explore additional fiscal incentives, greater financial devolution, and more autonomy in policymaking.
The debate on delimitation should not be framed as a zero-sum game where one region’s gain is another’s loss. Instead, it should be viewed as an opportunity to create a more representative and effective parliamentary system that truly reflects the aspirations of all Indians. Both the north and the south have their valid concerns, and the challenge lies in finding a solution that upholds fairness and national unity while addressing regional apprehensions.
Ultimately, the goal should be to foster national cohesion rather than deepen regional divides. Political parties, rather than exploiting the issue for electoral gains, should work towards a consensus that ensures democratic fairness while respecting the contributions of every region. Only then can India move forward as a truly united and representative democracy.
The writer is a technocrat, political analyst, and author.
[Disclaimer: The opinions, beliefs, and views expressed by the various authors and forum participants on this website are personal and do not reflect the opinions, beliefs, and views of ABP Network Pvt. Ltd.]