Why No Steps For Delimitation In Nagaland, Arunachal? Supreme Court Asks Centre

The court was hearing a petition seeking delimitation in Manipur, Assam, Nagaland, and Arunachal Pradesh in wake of the February 2020 Presidential order

The top court today questioned the Centre on what measures were taken for delimitation in Manipur, Nagaland, and Arunachal Pradesh.

Source : ANI

The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Centre about the steps taken to carry out the delimitation exercise in the Northeastern states after a Presidential order of 2020 rescinded the deferment of their delimitation.

A bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar asked the Centre why the delimitation excercise was not carried out in Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, and Manipur.

The court was hearing a petition seeking delimitation in Manipur, Assam, Nagaland, and Arunachal Pradesh in wake of the February 2020 Presidential order which had rescinded an earlier order to defer the delimitation exercise in Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur and Assam. The Presidential order came after the security conditions in these States improved.

Following the order steps for delimitation were taken in Assam but not in other states. The top court today questioned the Centre on why similar measures were not taken for Manipur, Nagaland, and Arunachal Pradesh.

While hearing the plea, Justice Kumar remarked that once the President rescinds the notification, it is enough to carry out delimitation.

Additional Solicitor General of India KM Nataraj appearing for Centre stated in court that the situation in the northeastern states is still sensitive. He further added that locals in Arunachal Pradesh were opposing delimitation.

The bench however questioned what the Election Commission has done since 2020 when the order to defer delimitation was rescinded by the then President Ram Nath Kovind.

CJI Khanna also said that once the deferment order was recinded by the President the ECI could not do nothing. He further added that the situation in Manipur is still understandable, but why no action was taken for delimitation in other states.

According to the Section 8A of the Representation of the People Act, (RPA) 1950, the President, if satisfied that the conditions prevailing in the northeastern states are conducive for the delimitation exercise, can rescind the deferment order issued under the provisions of Section 10A of the Delimitation Act, 2002. It further states that the President can provide for the conduct of delimitation exercise in the State by the Election Commission. After such deferment order, the ECI can carry out delimitation in the State .

Section10A of the 2002 Act allows the President to order a deferment of the delimitation exercise he is satisfied that a situation has arisen whereby the unity and integrity of India is threatened.