SC upholds freeze on delimitation in J&K till 2026

Rejecting J&K Panther's Party chief Bhim Singh's argument that it deprived SC and STs the right to represent the Valley, the apex court in a judgement said courts cannot interefere in matters of delimitation as there was an express Constitutional bar on such intereference.

By an amendment to Jammu and Kashmir Representation of the People Act 1957 and Section 47(3) of the Constitution of J & K made in 2002, the state decided to freeze the delimitation exercise till 2026. The last census operation in the state was completed in 2001 but the delimitation was done in 1995.

The state High Court had upheld the validity of the amendment, following which the party appealed in the apex court. The main plea of the petitioner was that the freeze would result in strong imbalances without the demographical changes being properly reflected and the essence of democracy will be defeated.

Singh said that of the 37 constituencies in Jammu, some are reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes whereas of the 46 constituencies in Kashmir Valley, not a single is reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

Dismissing the plea, a Bench of Justices G S Singhvi and Asok Kumar Ganguly said "we are of the opinion that a right to caste vote is a valuable right but to demand any uniform value of one’s voting right through the process of delimitation, disregarding the statutory and constitutional dispensation based on historical reasons is not a justiciable right.

"In the context of this question, we must keep in mind the constitutional scheme in Part XV relating to election. Article 327 of the Constitution empowers Parliament to make a law relating to delimitation of constituencies.

"The mandate of Article 329A is that any law relating to the delimitation of constituencies or the allotment of seats to such constituencies shall not be called in question in any court. Identical provisions have been made in Section 142 of the Constitution of J & K. Section 142(a)."

The apex court also rejected the plea that the amendment violated the basic structure of the Constituiton. "The other aspect of the question is that the amendment to Section 47(3) of the Constitution of J & K violates basic structure of the Constitution. This challenge is also not based on a sound principle.

"We must have a clear perception of what the basic structure is. It is hazardous to define what is the basic structure of the Constitution as what is basic does not remain static for all time to come," Justice Ganguly writing the judgement said.

Comments (+)