The BJP-led Union government’s proposed Delimitation Bill (2026) has triggered sharp reactions from opposition parties. Many, including the DMK, have pointed out how delimitation may significantly reduce representation for the southern states.
To amend the constitutional provisions governing the allocation of seats in the Lok Sabha and state Assemblies, the Union government has also proposed the Constitution (One Hundred and Thirty-First Amendment) Bill (2026) and the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill (2026).
The three Bills are expected to be presented in Parliament on April 16.
Former Finance Minister and senior Congress leader P Chidambaram described the move as “a mischievous, diabolical move to radically alter the federal balance.”
While BJP supporters welcomed the increase of seats from 543 to 815, Chidambaram called it an “illusion”.
“When the strength of the Lok Sabha is increased by 50% from 543 to 815, the strength of TN will seemingly increase from 39 to 58. But this is an illusion. When delimitation takes place, it will reduce to 46.”
For instance, Uttar Pradesh, the most populous state, stands to first increase its seats from 80 to 120 and, after delimitation, further increase to roughly 140, Chidambaram said.
“All the southern states that currently have a representation of 24.3% will find their representation reduced to 20.7%,” he warned, urging everyone to oppose it.
Similarly, political analyst Yogendra Yadav said that the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill is “worse than what everyone feared”. According to him, the proposed changes open the “floodgates for complete reallocation of seats for states and for gerrymandering”.
Yogendra Yadav added that the Union government is pushing early delimitation under the guise of advancing women’s representation.
According to critics, linking women’s reservation with delimitation of constituencies is meant to advance the political prospects of the ruling party. While women’s reservation could have been implemented in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, the government had added a clause saying that the reservation could be provided only after the delimitation, post the redrawing of constituency boundaries after the next Census. Yogendra Yadav argues that women’s reservation is being used as a “trojan horse”. The move is aimed at “tilting the institutional architecture of electoral democracy to favour the ruling party,” he argues.
“Contrary to the assurance of the PM and ministers, there is nothing in this bill to ensure that the present proportion of seats for each state would be maintained. It lifts the existing freeze completely without any safeguard the government was promising.”
“The decision about which Census would be the basis for reallocation is taken away from the constitution and placed in the domain of law,” he added.
He also said, “Actual reallocation and determination of boundaries would be done by the Delimitation Commission, on which the constitution is silent. And this cannot be challenged in a court of law.”
Bharat Rashtra Samithi working president KT Rama Rao reposted his previous tweet on the issue, saying that their stand remains unchanged.
In 2023, KTR had warned against delimitation, saying, “We are all proud Indians & representatives of the best-performing states of India. We will not remain mute spectators if the voices and representation of our people in the country’s highest democratic forum are suppressed.”
‘Will take to streets’
Former MP Kalvakuntla Kavitha, who is soon launching her own party, said,
“The voice of the people of Telangana cannot be diluted under the guise of delimitation. Our position is non-negotiable: the proportional representation of Telangana and, by extension, south Indian states must be protected.”
She added: “For decades, the south has led the nation in economic growth and family planning; we should be rewarded for this progress, not punished with political disenfranchisement. Currently, Telangana holds a 3.13% share in Parliament. While we already find this representation to be at the bare minimum, our way forward is centred on one core demand: this 3.13% must be the floor, not the ceiling.”
Accusing the BJP of attempting to weaken democracy, she warned that delimitation would lead to a movement of the same scale and intensity as the Telangana Agitation.
“We will take this fight from the halls of Parliament to every street in our state. We will fight this demographic injustice tooth and nail, and we will not retreat until the political sovereignty of Telangana is fully secured,” she said.
A day earlier, MK Stalin had issued a similar warning. He said the attempt to carry out delimitation in such a “frantic hurry” is “a blatant anti-democratic act by the BJP government”. He also warned that “Tamil Nadu will come to a standstill” if delimitation weakens representation for the south while granting unfair political strength to the northern states.
“India will have to see the old DMK of the 50s and 60s again. Do not think, ‘Is this man threatening us?’ I am warning you. Even if you consider it a threat, we do not care. Yes, this is a warning being sent from Tamil Nadu,” Stalin said on April 14. The Tamil Nadu CM was referring to the state-wide anti-Hindi agitations of the 1950s and 1960s.
Telangana CM proposes ‘hybrid model’
Telangana’s Chief Minister Revanth Reddy has called delimitation an “onslaught” on the political rights of the southern states. He appealed to the chief ministers of Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, and Andhra Pradesh to support his proposed ‘hybrid model’.
As per the hybrid model pitched by Revanth, the southern states should demand that only half of the increased new seats can be done using Pro Rata model. The remaining half must be distributed based on economic contribution (GSDP), and other performance criteria, he said.
“This is just one suggestion, a possible approach. With consultations and Parliamentary debates, democratic forces and process will find us the best solutions, just and acceptable to everyone,” he wrote.
He added that this ‘hybrid model’ would ensure no state is penalised for progress while maintaining the democratic principle of representation.
“Given the magnitude of this issue, it is clear that a fragmented response will not suffice. There is a growing need for collective engagement among southern states, and indeed all like-minded states, to ensure that our concerns are articulated effectively at the national level.”
Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah also proposed delimitation on the pro rata basis. He added that only northern states would benefit from delimitation. “States like Karnataka, which have prioritised and achieved population control, will face injustice because of this. Our demand is that the voice of the southern states in Parliament should not weaken due to delimitation,” he argued in his article, published in the Kannada Prabha newspaper.