SC to examine J&K delimitation process
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to examine the validity of the delimitation commission’s proposed move of redrawing poll constituencies in Jammu & Kashmir, and increasing the tally of assembly seats from 83 to 90, and sought responses from the Centre, the Jammu & Kashmir administration and the Election Commission of India.
A bench of justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh admitted a writ petition by a J&K resident seeking a detailed hearing on the points of legality of the delimitation exercise conducted in terms of the notifications issued in 2020, 2021 and 2022.
“To examine the issue, it is necessary to have the stand of the respondents filed on affidavit,” said the bench giving six weeks to the Centre, the J&K administration and ECI to submit their written replies to the petition by Haji Abdul Gani Khan.
In its brief order, the court clarified that although Khan’s petition mentions abrogation of Articles 370 and 35A, the petitioner wants a limited scrutiny of his averments pertaining to the validity of the delimitation exercise and the proposed recommendation of increasing the assembly seats. The challenge to Article 370’s abrogation is pending before a constitution bench in the top court.
“On our specific query, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not assailing abrogation of Articles 370 and 35A of Constitution of India. Thus, the allegations in that behalf are irrelevant and to be ignored,” recorded the bench, fixing August 30 as the next date of hearing.
On May 5, the three-member delimitation commission finalised the UT’S new electoral map, marking the first step for elections in the region since its special status was scrapped in August 2019. In its final order, the commission earmarked 43 seats to the Hindu-majority Jammu region and 47 to Muslim-majority Kashmir – making up a total of 90 seats for the Union territory’s assembly, up from the current strength of 83.
Out of the seven new seats added, six were allotted to Jammu and one to Kashmir. Earlier, Jammu had 37 seats and Kashmir 46. This brings the Kashmir representation down to 52.2% from 55.4% of the total seats, and takes the Jammu representation up to 47.8% from 44.6%. The exercise was carried out on the basis of 2011 Census, which put the population of J&K at 12.5 million, with 56.2% in Kashmir and 43.8% in Jammu.
During the hearing on Friday, senior advocate Ravi Shankar Jandhyala, appearing for Khan, submitted that a constitutional provision required that the Centre and ECI await till 2026 to conduct any delimitation or re-adjustment of assembly seats in a state or UT. He pointed out that any delimitation on the basis of the 2011 population census is unconstitutional as no population census was carried out for J&K in that year. Under Article 170 (3), the senior counsel argued, a redrawing of constituency can be done only upon the completion of the census, which is now proposed to be conducted in 2026.
At this, the bench asked Jandhyala why the petitioner came to the court so late when the commission was constituted in 2020. The senior counsel responded that he is not disputing the constitution of the panel but is challenging the exercise undertaken by them.
Jandhyala replied that the commission was wound up in 2007 after which the Delimitation of Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies Order was issued in 2008. “Since the delimitation has been completed and the delimitation commission has become inappropriate, they cannot carry out the exercise now,” he added.
Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, said: “I want to clarify that there are two kinds of delimitation. One is geographical delimitation. And then another one is undertaken by the EC for reservation of seats. I will show two provisions from the State Reorganisation Act.”
To this, the bench said that it is better for the Centre and other parties to bring their stand on record through counter affidavits in six weeks.
People’s Alliance for Gupkar Declaration spokesman Mohammad Yusuf Tarigami said: “So far there is no date fixed for their hearing...let’ s wait and see how the government responds.”