Lokesh to Tharoor on delimitation: ‘Expanding Lok Sabha a democratic necessity’
Replying to Congress MP Shashi Tharoor’s comments on the delimitation of constituencies, TDP national working president and IT Minister Nara Lokesh said on X that
Replying to Congress MP Shashi Tharoor’s comments on the delimitation of constituencies, TDP national working president and IT Minister Nara Lokesh said on X that Article 81 envisaged the allocation of Lok Sabha seats on the basis of population, and that the constitutional freeze linked to the 1971 Census was temporary and due to expire in 2026. He said that, without any intervention, a fresh delimitation based on the 2026 Census would see several southern States face a sizeable reduction in their share, and that the Congress party, through its opposition to the Bill, was responsible for it.
Dear Dr. Tharoor, a few points here. First, Article 81 envisages that seats in the Lok Sabha be allocated on the basis of population. The constitutional freeze linked to the 1971 Census was always temporary and was due to expire in 2026. In the absence of any intervention, a… — Lokesh Nara (@naralokesh) June 17, 2026 “India in 2026 is not India in 1971 as the population has grown from about 55 crore to nearly 146 crore,” he said. Lok Sabha membership had remained virtually unchanged, and the average MP now represented nearly 2.5 times as many citizens as an MP did when the freeze was imposed, he said.
Expanding the House was a democratic necessity, not a political choice, Mr. Lokesh said. He said that if seats were increased to better reflect today’s population, retaining each State’s proportional share was a reasonable and balanced approach, as it protected States that had carried out population stabilisation while improving representation for all Indians. Lokesh said it was worth remembering that no State had a constitutional right to greater representation per voter than another. The Constitution’s objective was the opposite, he said: that every citizen’s vote should carry, as nearly as practicable, equal weight. “The continuation of the present proportional balance is not a constitutional entitlement, it is NDA’s way of ensuring that States that acted responsibly are not disadvantaged.
As for your thought experiment, parliamentary influence ultimately flows from votes on the Floor of the House. Whether a simple or a two-thirds majority is required, a proportionate increase for all States leaves those equations unchanged. If everyone receives the same proportional increase, nobody gains an advantage over anyone else,” Mr. Lokesh added.
The BriefWire