Delhi High Court seeks response from Centre, AG on plea against putting Women's Reservation on hold

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday issued notice to the Central government on a plea challenging the validity of Article 334A of the Constitution, which stipulates that reservation for women in parliament and State assemblies under the 2023 women's reservation law will take effect only after a delimitation exercise. .Delimitation is the process of fixing or altering limits or boundaries of electoral constituencies in the country or any State based on population figures from a census. A Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela sought the response of the Central government as well as Attorney General for India R Venkataramani to the plea questioning why women's reservation has been put on hold until this process is done. "Since the vires of Article 334A is challenged, let notice to Attorney General be also issued notice," the Court said..The proposal to have reservations for women in legislative bodies was introduced through a series of Constitutional amendments made in 2023, which culminated in a law known as the Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Act, 2023.This law inserted many new Articles in the Constitution of India, thereby reserving one-third of the seats in parliament and State legislative assemblies for women.However, as per one of the new Articles, Article 334A, such reservation will take effect only after a delimitation exercise which is to be conducted only after the publication of figures from the first census held after the 2023 Act comes into force. Though the Act received presidential assent in September 2023, no census has been conducted yet. Thus, the reservation for women is yet to be implemented. .Women's Reservation Bill: One-third quota for women in Lok Sabha, state assemblies to cease after 15 years.This has now been challenged by the National Federation Of India Women by way of the present petition.During the hearing today, advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioner, said that Article 334A is a device aimed at frustrating women's reservation."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," he stated.He said there is no connection between delimitation and reservation."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," he argued..The Court noted that the prayer part of the petition would need amendment since the Constitutional Amendment Act was incorrectly referred to as the Women's Reservation Act."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 Court said.The petitioner stated that necessary changes would be made to the prayer.The Court then issued notice to the respondents and posted the case for further consideration on April 9..Read more about the women's reservation law here.