Admissions Open for the 2026 Self-Study Plan. Enroll Now!
+91 - 7893910103 support@upscguide.in

A Case for Fair Seat Allocation in the Lok Sabha: Equity vs Population Politics

img

India is set to revisit the long-frozen formula for Lok Sabha seat allocation after 2026, as mandated by the Constitution. The current number of seats—based on 1971 Census data—was frozen to give all states time to stabilize their populations. However, this freeze has led to rising tensions as northern states (with high population growth) may gain significantly more seats, while southern states, which successfully implemented population control, could lose political influence.

This raises a fundamental debate between population-based representation and equity-based federalism. The issue goes beyond numbers—it’s about protecting the balance of power, rewarding good governance, and ensuring that India’s democratic structure remains fair and inclusive.

 

Table of Contents:

  1. Introduction: The Debate Resurfaces

  2. Understanding the Constitutional Framework

  3. Population Growth and Lok Sabha Representation: A Tale of Two Indias

  4. Delimitation vs Readjustment: Key Differences

  5. Formulae for Seat Allocation: What Options Exist?

  6. Equity vs Uniformity: Constitutional and Moral Dilemmas

  7. Southern States’ Concerns: The Political and Policy Backdrop

  8. Political Implications and Federal Bargaining Power

  9. Towards a Rational Formula: The Kerala Benchmark Model

  10. Challenges in Reforming Article 81

  11. Conclusion: A Call for Equity in the Union 

 

 

1. Introduction: The Debate Resurfaces:

India is heading toward a demographic and political reckoning as the constitutional freeze on the readjustment of Lok Sabha seats nears its 2026 expiry. At the heart of this debate is the question of whether representation should be based solely on population, or whether equity, federal balance, and performance in governance should also play a role. The issue, often mischaracterized as delimitation, is actually about readjusting seats according to the latest Census data.

 

2. Understanding the Constitutional Framework:

  • Article 1 of the Constitution declares India a "Union of States," implying mutual respect and equity in representation.

  • Article 81: Mandates that the ratio of population to Lok Sabha seats be the same across states.

  • Article 82: Calls for the readjustment of seats after every Census via the Delimitation Commission.

  • Constitutional Amendments (42nd and 84th): Froze the number of seats until 2026, to encourage population stabilization.

 

3. Population Growth and Lok Sabha Representation: A Tale of Two Indias:

  • In 1971, India’s population was 54.79 crore; in 2025, it is estimated at 141 crore.

  • Southern states (Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka) have successfully implemented population control programs.

  • Northern states (UP, Bihar) have seen exponential growth:

    • Uttar Pradesh: 8.38 cr (1971) → 24.1 cr (2025)

    • Bihar: 4.21 cr (1971) → 13.1 cr (2025)

  • Without a fair formula, northern states stand to gain massively in seat allocation — potentially at the cost of the south’s political voice.

 
4. Delimitation vs Readjustment: Key Differences

  • Delimitation refers to redrawing constituency boundaries.

  • Readjustment refers to changing the number of seats per state, based on population.

  • Confusing these two processes derails public understanding of the real issue — equity in representation, not mere redistricting.

 

5. Formulae for Seat Allocation: What Options Exist?

 

  • Status Quo (10 lakh population per seat):

    • UP: ~240 seats; Kerala: ~36

  • Higher Ratio (15 lakh per seat):

    • UP: ~160; Kerala: ~24

  • Fixed Increment Model (Kerala benchmark: 68% increase):

    • UP: 80 → 134; Kerala: 20 → 34

    • Total seats: ~912 (new Parliament chamber capacity: 800+)

  • Proportional Increase Based on 1971 Base:

    • Protects states that stabilized their population while recognizing overall growth.

 

6. Equity vs Uniformity: Constitutional and Moral Dilemmas:

 

  • Article 81(2)(a) requires equal ratio across states — but is this still just?

  • Uniformity rewards population growth, punishes population control — creating perverse incentives.

  • Equity calls for a nuanced model that respects governance outcomes and federal balance.

  • A 1950s formula can't serve a 21st-century, post-liberalization, decentralized India.

 

7. Southern States’ Concerns: The Political and Policy Backdrop

  • States like Tamil Nadu and Kerala fear political marginalization.

  • Successful implementation of health, education, and population programs now translates into reduced influence.

  • Recent conclave in Chennai, attended by southern Chief Ministers and Punjab CM, signals a growing regional bloc.

  • Silence from the Union Government has amplified apprehensions.

 

8. Political Implications and Federal Bargaining Power:

  • Lok Sabha strength affects:

    • Cabinet formation and portfolio distribution

    • Resource allocation

    • Legislative power over Concurrent List subjects

  • An increase in northern seats could skew the federal balance and tilt policy-making disproportionately.

  • Southern states already contribute more to GDP but receive lesser per capita transfers.

 

9. Towards a Rational Formula: The Kerala Benchmark Model:

  • Kerala's population grew from 2.14 cr (1971) to 3.6 cr (2025) → 68% increase.

  • Using 68% as a standard increment:

    • All states can be awarded seats proportionately.

    • Maintains existing interstate balance.

    • Avoids penalizing states that controlled fertility rates.

    • Upholds equity without disproportionately enlarging Lok Sabha.

 

10. Challenges in Reforming Article 81:

  • Amending Article 81 would require:

    • A constitutional amendment (special majority in Parliament).

    • Political consensus — difficult with conflicting regional interests.

  • Any deviation from population-centric allocation could be legally challenged.

  • Yet, a rigid adherence to outdated ratios could fracture federal trust.

 

11. Conclusion: A Call for Equity in the Union:

A truly federal Union must account for performance, effort, and justice. As India gears up for a new census and the end of the seat freeze in 2026, it must rethink the formula for representation in a way that rewards good governance and preserves national unity.

The road ahead involves constitutional reinterpretation, political maturity, and above all, a renewed commitment to equity. If India is a Union of States, as Article 1 declares, then no component unit should be punished for its efficiency, nor rewarded for its negligence.

The question isn’t just how many seats a state gets. It’s about what kind of federalism we believe in—and whether equity or entropy will guide our democratic future.

 

Also Read about India's response to Death row Abroad - Click to Read