By ending the two-child rule, Rajasthan shifts focus from control to rights

Rajasthan recently scrapped its three-decade-old two-child policy for candidates contesting local body elections, triggering political debate and some disapproval.

But the move has largely found support from those who argue that political and democratic rights should not be linked to reproductive choices, as this violates basic principles of equality and individual autonomy.

The Rajasthan Assembly passed the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Amendment) Bill, 2026, clearing the way for candidates with more than two children to contest the upcoming panchayat elections. The Bill was cleared by a voice vote in the 200-member House.

The two-child policy was introduced by the Bhairon Singh Shekhawat-led BJP government, barring candidates with more than two children from contesting the panchayati raj and urban local body elections. The rule was intended to stem population growth at the time.

According to the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, the total fertility rate (TFR) in 1996 was 4.2, with the urban fertility rate at 3 and the rural rate at 4.5. A need was therefore felt to foreground family planning, especially in rural areas where a preference for a male child persisted, leading to population rise.

In 2001, the Congress government extended the two-child policy to government jobs through the Rajasthan Various Service (Amendment), 2001.

The policy was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2024, which held that it was non-discriminatory and did not violate the Constitution, given its objective of promoting family planning.

The government now cites scientific evidence to justify the reversal. It notes that the state’s TFR has dropped to around 2, below the replacement level of 2.1, rendering the rule outdated. The replacement rate refers to the rate at which children must be born for the population to maintain itself across generations; falling below it implies a gradual ageing of the population.

Greater awareness and the spread of education, particularly among women, who have begun adopting modern contraceptive methods – marking a 62.1% rise as per the NFHS-5 data – also prompted the government to bring forth this amendment.

The government argues that the amendment will also enable more capable individuals – previously excluded by the two-child norm – to enter local governance.

While the opposition Congress also stands to gain from the change, it has questioned the timing. State Congress chief Govind Singh Dotasara has asked whether Rajasthan has truly stabilised its population. He has also raised a policy inconsistency: “Why should the government retain restrictions for government employees while removing them for electoral candidates? Why the dichotomy?

Moreover, the population of Rajasthan is now over eight crore; have we been able to stabilise our population? It is a political move and a decision purely influenced by RSS’ ideology.”

Rajasthan’s population in 1991 stood at 4,40,05,990. In 2001 it went up to 5,65,07,188 and in 2026 it is recorded at 8,38,79,000. Its population is projected to cross nine crore in 2036, according to a technical group report of the National Commission.

During a celebration to mark 100 years of RSS last year, its chief Mohan Bhagwat had urged Indian parents to have more than two children, asserting that it was necessary to stabilise the population and prevent a decline.

According to UNFPA’s 2025 State of World Population (SOWP) demographic report released in June 2025, India’s TFR had declined to 1.9 births per woman, falling below the replacement level of 2.1.

Women’s rights activist and general secretary of the National Federation of Indian Women, Nisha Sidhu, told DH, “We had opposed the move when it was introduced because in Rajasthan, the decision to have children is not a woman’s prerogative but largely a family affair.

Then a large number of women were kept out of local body elections. And now if they have scrapped it, it should be done for government employees as well. Moreover, the timing is suspect, as it has been done just before local body elections. And also perhaps in response to a call for Hindus to give birth to more children.”

However, many activists have welcomed the decision, arguing that the rule not only curbed individual liberties but also created arbitrary distinctions between rules for Parliament and Assembly candidates and disproportionately affected women.

They maintain that the two-child norm functioned as a coercive population control measure, undermining reproductive rights rather than serving as a rational public health strategy.

Tara Krishnaswamy, co-founder of Shakti, which works towards increasing women’s electoral representation, told DH, “It needs to be scrapped. Unless we have a serious problem, we should not curb individual liberties, especially outside constitutional provisions. Linking any conditionalities beyond constitutional mandates as criteria to contest violates fundamental rights.”

Calling the policy unfair, Nikhil Dey, activist of Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan, says, “Scrapping it has been a good move. The two child norm (like many other norms only for local bodies) is arbitrary: different standards for local bodies and Assembly and Parliament; and very unfair on women.”

Health activist Chaaya Pachauli, convenor of Jan Swasthaya Abhiyaan, told DH, “I think the rule should have been scrapped long back. The two-child norm is a coercive population control tool undermining reproductive rights and women are forced to bear its brunt. It can never be considered a rational public health measure. Also, political and democratic rights should never be linked to reproductive choices as it is fundamentally unjust and violates basic principles of equality and individual autonomy. What is crucial is that the government invests more on reproductive health services, create awareness on the range of methods of contraception, make them easily accessible and address social norms such as early marriages and son preference.”

Poonam Mutreja, executive director of the Population Foundation of India, told DH, “Rajasthan’s fertility transition is already well underway. The state’s TFR has declined from around 3.7 in the mid-2000s to near replacement level today.

Importantly, this decline has been driven by improvements in education, access to health services, and changing aspirations, even as the state experimented with coercive measures such as the two-child norm in the past.

The evidence on what does not work is equally clear. Studies show that the two-child norm has had no sustained impact on fertility while producing serious unintended consequences, particularly for women and poorer households.

In that sense, declining TFR in Rajasthan should not be seen through the lens of a ‘low fertility’ concern but as an opportunity to strengthen women’s agency.”

Overall, Rajasthan’s decision to scrap the two-child norm marks a welcome course correction.

(Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.)