After the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2026 collapsed in the Lok Sabha on Friday – the first defeat of a bill in PM Narendra Modi’s 12-year-old government – one question cuts the noise of the political battle: Why can’t the 33% reservation for women be implemented in the existing 543-seat Lok Sabha now?
The plan, which failed, was to increase the Lok Sabha seats by 50% from the current 816, to a maximum of 850 at some point; And thus women should be given one-third reservation extra seats are made. The opposition was angry against this process of seat-growth and delimitation being expedited using old census data while larger questions remained unanswered.
Legal status of 2023 law
33% reservation for women in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies is already law. The Nari Shakti Vandan Act was passed unanimously by the Parliament in September 2023 notified in the gazette Exactly this week, on April 16, 2026, the timeline for its implementation through an amendment bill was being debated. This amendment bill failed to pass the two-thirds majority test in the Lok Sabha, hence could never even reach the Rajya Sabha. The related Bill regarding delimitation and application to Union Territories was never introduced after the original Bill failed.
Yet, the fact is that the quota for women has already been legislated three years ago. This is Article 334A of the Constitution of India.
But that law, as written, cannot yet be enforced. It is linked to a specific sequence – first a fresh census must be completed, followed by a delimitation exercise to reallocate and redraw constituencies; And only after that reservation is implemented.
Under this original timeline, implementation would not be possible before 2034 because the first phase, the latest census, has just begun.
The Congress Parliamentary Party President said that the situation of census, then delimitation, then quota was not something sought by the opposition. Sonia Gandhi wrote In a newspaper article on April 13th.
He wrote, “In fact, Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha Mallikarjun Kharge had strongly demanded that the reservation provision be implemented from the 2024 Lok Sabha elections itself. The government itself did not agree to this for well-known reasons.”
The hurdle in implementing reservation on the existing 543 seats, at least superficially, is a condition that the government has included in the 2023 law. Thirty months later, she wants to remove that condition, but instead uses old census data to change the Lok Sabha composition.
When the 2023 law was passed, Amit Shah told Parliament that the census would be conducted right after the 2024 elections, and the next government would do delimitations soon after. The 2021 census had already taken place, which had been delayed due to Covid and other, mostly unexplained, reasons.
The government now backtracked in 2026 and proposed using the 2011 census instead. But the opposition did not agree on two fronts – the question of regional inequality needed to be addressed in the long term first, and also the question of a stipulated share for Other Backward Classes.
The latest census actually began earlier this month. A big part of this is also the caste census, which is being conducted for all participants for the first time in almost 100 years.
Till now only Scheduled Castes and Tribes (SC, ST) are counted on the basis of caste, but for decades there was a demand that Also count Other Backward Classes (OBC). That is being done now.
Government’s latest argument
Now during the three-day special session, the government did not give any clear, constitutional argument on why reservation cannot be implemented on the existing 543 seats.
Instead it provided an arithmetic explanation. Amit Shah’s argument in Lok Sabha was that if 33% reservation implemented Suppose, out of the existing 39 seats in Tamil Nadu, only 13 seats will be reserved for women, 26 seats will be open for all. If these seats are increased to a total of 59, then 20 will be reserved for women and 39 will remain open. The government’s case essentially means more open seats for all, also more reserved seats for women.
The government has not argued that it is constitutionally impossible to implement reservation on 543 seats. The only legal hurdle is the text of the original women’s quota law of 2023, which Parliament can amend.
What the opposition offered, and what remained unheard
This is exactly what some opposition members claimed to present.
Congress leader KC Venugopal said in the Lok Sabha, “You (the government) only made the provision that there will be a census, then there will be delimitation, then there will be reservation. We never said this. We had said at that time itself that we want women’s reservation till 2024 elections.”
Leader of the opposition Rahul Gandhi also put the counter offer quite simply, “bring that old bill back now And we will help you pass it for implementation from this very moment.”
Kalyan Banerjee from the electoral state of West Bengal – where her party Trinamool Congress is led Mamata Banerjee Fighting the challenge of BJP – further said, “If women’s reservation is to be given then implement it immediately. There is no need to link it with delimitation. You can bring 50% reservation now! But you do not want to do that.”
Congress’s Priyanka Gandhi Vadra asked the government to “be brave”, and said some male leaders would have to give up their seats if reservation comes in. “Indian women can take responsibility,” she said smilingly.
OBC question beneath all this
There is a constitutional lacuna behind the entire debate which has not been addressed by any government yet. That Other Backward Classes (OBCs) have no political reservation in Parliament or State Assemblies. SC and ST seats exist in proportion to their population, which is mandated by Articles 330 and 332 of the Constitution.
The demand for OBC quota – even within the Chhatra reservation for women – is not new. In fact, this is one of the primary reasons why women’s reservation remained blocked in Parliament for years. The 81st Constitutional Amendment Bill for 33% women’s reservation was first introduced in 1996; And again in 1997 and 1998, but missed each time. A 2008 bill passed the Rajya Sabha examination in 2010 during the Congress-led UPA regime, but was never voted on in the Lok Sabha. Political consensus could not be reached.
The Women’s Reservation Bill 2023 passed unanimously, and it provides for reservation within the existing SC and ST quotas – meaning SC and ST women get reserved seats within the seats already reserved for their communities.
OBC women do not get anything equivalent, because there is no OBC political reservation to begin with. The Constitution does not provide for this.
The demand of SP, RJD, Congress and others for sub-quota for OBC women within women’s reservation is constitutionally impossible without a prior amendment creating OBC political reservation.
Here’s how it could play out:
- Any revision to the OBC quota first requires data – specifically, caste census data establishing the demographic basis for it. Or even for minority representation such as Muslims.
- The 2026 census, currently underway, includes caste enumeration for the first time since 1931. Its results are likely to come in two years.
- And then can related questions like political reservation and delimitation be debated.
So far, surveys from Bihar and Telangana suggest that OBCs in India may constitute more than 50%, and they get about 27% quota in jobs.
Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav said in Parliament, “They (the government) are running away from the (latest ongoing) census because the demand for reservation will increase. What if they do not count OBCs and Muslims in half the population who are women? We want Muslims and OBC women to get reservation – this is our demand.”
Rahul Gandhi said that by carrying forward the delimitations based on the 2011 census – before caste data from the 2026 census is available – the government will lock down constituency boundaries for “10-15 years” without resolving the OBC representation gap.
Where do things stand now on women’s quota?
For now, three bills have fallen through – one to remodel the Lok Sabha using the 2011 census and the quota for women accordingly.
The 2023 women’s quota law remains on the books but cannot be implemented without delimitation.
And the question of delimitation itself has remained unresolved for 50 years. This was last done in the 1970s and then extended twice by 25 years. Apart from the demand for OBC quota, there is another fundamental question which remains unresolved.
Southern states fear that they will lose proportionate share in the long run If only population is used as the basis for delimitation. For example, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin of DMK was the first to burn copies of the latest bills. The fear is that states that have actually done a good job on the national policy of population control and family planning will be punished for it, while the states in the Hindi belt where poverty and population are high will get an even greater say in Parliament.
Amit Shah said the straight increase of 50% would not change the state-wise share, and at the last minute he even promised to write it into law.
Obviously by that time it was too late.
The opposition has demanded that before introducing any bill, the delimitation method, population-based and demand for OBC quota, all these should be debated in detail.
Congress MP Shashi Tharoor said in the Lok Sabha on Friday that the delimitation proposal was made in haste, “the same haste that you showed on demonetisation.”
“And unfortunately, we all know how much damage it (demonetisation) caused to the country. Delimitation will become political demonetisation,” the Kerala MP said. demonetization of high denomination notes by PM Narendra Modi’s government in November 2016.
