The extended three-day special sitting of Parliament’s Budget Session, beginning April 16, resulted in a major setback for the government, as the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2026, which aimed to link 33% women’s reservation with a new delimitation exercise by 2029, was defeated in the Lok Sabha. The Bill failed to secure the required two-thirds majority in the Lok Sabha. Only 298 members voted in favor, while 230 opposed it.

Shelving of linked Bills

Following the defeat, the government did not move forward with two related Bills — the Delimitation Bill and the Union Territory Laws Amendment Bill. Both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha were adjourned sine die on April 18, concluding the Budget Session.

The main objections against this Bill raised by the opposition were: 

Linkage to delimitation

The primary objection was linking the 33% reservation to a new, rushed delimitation exercise (redrawing constituency boundaries) based on the 2011 Census.  This was a "backdoor" attempt to change political representation rather than a genuine move for women's empowerment.

Threat to federal structure 

The opposition parties argued that the Delimitation Bill would unfairly benefit larger states in the Hindi heartland, while reducing the relative representation of southern, northeastern, and smaller states that managed their population better.

Unnecessary delay

The opposition argued that the 33% quota could be implemented immediately using the current strength of the Lok Sabha (543 seats) instead of waiting for a complex, multi-year, and expanded structure (850+ seats).

Procedural concerns

Several opposition members challenged the introduction of the Constitutional Amendment Bill, citing a “lack of transparency” and questioning the urgency of passing a complex, new, and contentious Bill in a short session. 

When this controversial Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha, CPI(M) member K Radhakrishnan strongly opposed it and said that the introduction of the Constitution (One Hundred and Thirty-First Amendment) Bill or any constitutional amendment must uphold federalism, democracy, and social justice. However, this Bill raises serious concerns, having been introduced without adequate consultation with state governments and stakeholders, thereby undermining cooperative federalism. It is important to recall that the Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Act, 2023, namely the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam, was passed on 28th September 2023 with the assurance of implementation after the Census and delimitation. Till date, the Census has not been conducted, and the promise remains unfulfilled. In this context, introducing another amendment raises doubts about the government’s intent, especially amid state elections, suggesting political motives rather than democratic commitment. Such significant amendments cannot be rushed. This Bill risks centralising powers and weakening States.

The Lok Sabha subsequently took up discussion on the Bill. Participating in the discussion, S Venkatesan said that on behalf of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), he would urge that this fundamental right of providing reservation for women — already passed — must be implemented immediately, based on the existing number of seats. However, we strongly oppose in this House the BJP’s conspiracy to link this measure with two complicated issues: the Census and delimitation. So far, you have taken away financial resources from South Indians, particularly from Tamil Nadu; now you are planning to take away our rights. You are conspiring to dilute our share in governing the country. I am duty-bound to state in this House that this is not a “Nari Shakti Bill,” but a “deceptive Bill” of the BJP. Elections are currently underway in two major states, including Tamil Nadu. What was the urgency in convening this House at such a time? Forty members of Parliament have left the election field and are standing here. You do not face that problem, because neither the BJP nor its ally AIADMK has even a single MP elected by the people of Tamil Nadu. Therefore, you have nothing to lose. But we, who have been elected, are here. That is because, for us, the victory of Tamil Nadu is more important than electoral victory or defeat. The Prime Minister spoke here for a long 40 minutes. He asked the opposition to “listen, listen” to his speech. That is fine — we 40 members are present here. But where is the Minister of State for Parliamentary Affairs? Where is Mr L Murugan, who did not even listen to the Prime Minister’s speech? He is canvassing for votes in Avinashi and attending a public meeting with the AIADMK chief in Mettupalayam. Friends, you need the votes of the people of Tamil Nadu; we need the dignified victory of the people of Tamil Nadu!

This delimitation issue did not arise today or yesterday. Delimitation based on the Census was conducted in 1952, 1962, and 1972. However, delimitation was frozen over 50 years ago, in 1971, and we continue to function based on that Census. This is because the issue is extremely important. In a diverse nation, an unequal nation, a nation of multiple cultures, this is a matter that must be handled with great care. You have taken an issue that has been pending for 50 years, introduced a Bill just 50 hours ago, and are rushing to debate it. Your intention is not national unity; your fundamental intention is division and discord.  If the current number of 543 MPs increases to 850, Tamil Nadu should get, on average, about 60 MPs. But the delimitation commission has not clarified which Census this Bill will be based on. Home Minister Amit Shah presented many figures using a slip of paper. Fine, but did you not have time to type it out? Could you not include it in the Bill? What the minister says and what is written in the Bill do not match. Why are you refusing to state which Census the delimitation commission will use? The simple truth is this: if the 2011 Census is used, Tamil Nadu will not get 60 seats — it will get only 51. If the 2026 Census is used, it will not get 60 — it will get only 47. Friends, understand this: Tamil Nadu’s share in this House is currently 7.18%; it will drop to just 5.7%. You are doing everything possible to reduce our representation.

The home minister cited many statistics. We ask only one question. In 1971, Tamil Nadu and Bihar had similar populations — 4.1 crore and 4.2 crore, respectively. That is why Tamil Nadu was given 39 MPs and Bihar 40 MPs. What is the situation today? Tamil Nadu’s population is 7.6 crore, while Bihar’s is 12.3 crore — almost double. Which Census will you use to determine representation? What reward are you giving to southern states like Tamil Nadu and Kerala for successfully controlling population growth? Across the world, population control is not achieved through government orders alone — it is linked to social awareness, education, and healthcare. In particular, in Tamil Nadu, population control succeeded because of higher female education.

The total fertility rate (TFR) in Tamil Nadu is 1.7%, which is lower than the national average. That is why, although Tamil Nadu accounts for only 7% of India’s population, it contributes 44% of India’s women entrepreneurs. From 1971 to 2011, Tamil Nadu’s population grew by only 75%, whereas Rajasthan grew by 166%, Bihar by 146%, and Uttar Pradesh by 138%. Population control is our achievement; this Bill reflects your hostility towards that achievement. This Bill reflects your discrimination against us for sending our children to school! The Prime Minister repeatedly said, “I will not betray,” even in Tamil. We ask openly: Census has always been conducted — even during wars in the 1960s and 1970s after Independence. Why has the Census, which was halted during Covid, not been conducted for the past four years? Without conducting a Census, why did you construct the new Parliament building with 888 seats? Now you bring this Bill. After secretly preparing everything to increase the Lok Sabha strength to 850, you ask us to “trust you.” We, who have rational thinking, will never trust you. I state here that we will put an end to your hidden agenda.

I wish to submit two documents to this House. A few years ago, a two-judge bench of the Madras High Court delivered an important judgment. In 1962, Tamil Nadu had 41 MPs; in 1967, it was reduced to 39. Over the past 15 elections, we have lost 30 MPs. Therefore, the judges suggested that delimitation should be based on the 1962 Census figures. Second, the report of the High-Level Committee on Centre-State Relations constituted by the Tamil Nadu government. This report states that the Union government should not make any changes in delimitation for the next 100 years — no changes until 2126. This is not a mere assumption, but based on scientific analysis. According to UN estimates, India’s population will peak only by 2061, after which fertility rates in northern states will reach national targets. Based on such data, this recommendation has been made. Finally, using women as a pretext for politics has long been a practice of right-wing forces. Even now, you are bringing this through the name of the women’s reservation Bill. We cannot and will not allow your malicious intentions to succeed.