The Women’s Reservation Law was introduced through a series of Constitutional amendments made in 2023, culminating in the Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Act, 2023. The law reserves one-third of the seats in both Parliament and State Assemblies for women.
NEW DELHI: On Wednesday, the Delhi High Court issued a notice to the Central Government regarding a plea that challenges the validity of Article 334A of the Indian Constitution. This article relates to the reservation of seats for women in Parliament and State Assemblies, under the 2023 Women’s Reservation Law.
ALSO READ: [Nagaland Reservation Policy] 33% Reservation for Women in Nagaland Finally Approved
According to the law, the reservation will only be implemented after a process known as “delimitation” is completed.
Delimitation is the process of defining or altering the boundaries of electoral constituencies across the country or in any state based on the population data from a census.
The Bench, which included Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, sought responses from the Central Government and the Attorney General for India, R Venkataramani. They requested answers to why the women’s reservation should be delayed until the delimitation process is finished.
The Court said, “Since the vires of Article 334A is challenged, let notice to Attorney General be also issued notice.”
Women’s Reservation Law:
The Women’s Reservation Law was introduced through a series of Constitutional amendments made in 2023, culminating in the Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Act, 2023. The law reserves one-third of the seats in both Parliament and State Assemblies for women.
However, Article 334A states that the reservation will only come into effect after a delimitation exercise is conducted, which can only happen once the population data from the first census after the law is passed becomes available. Though the law received the President’s approval in September 2023, no census has been conducted yet, and thus, the reservation for women has not yet been implemented.
This delay in implementing the reservation has now been challenged by the National Federation of India Women, which filed the present petition. Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing the petitioners, argued,
“Article 334A is a device aimed at frustrating women’s reservation.”
He further clarified, “We are challenging only one part that women reservation will come into effect after delimitation and census is conducted. It is an arbitrary provision. There is no rational nexus. It is only a device to frustrate women’s reservation.”
Bhushan stressed, “Neither delimitation nor census has any connection with the reservation of women. We are saying this is manifestly arbitrary. Reservation is contingent upon first going census, then doing delimitation.”
During the hearing, the Court pointed out that the prayer part of the petition needed to be amended. The Constitutional Amendment Act was wrongly referred to as the “Women’s Reservation Act” in the petition.
The Bench observed, “You are challenging Article 334. It is not known as ‘Women Reservation Act.’ It is a Constitutional amendment. Please, your prayer should be properly worded.”
The petitioners acknowledged this and assured the Court that the necessary changes would be made to the prayer.
The Delhi High Court issued a notice to the Central Government and other respondents, and the case has been scheduled for further consideration on April 9.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
